LINCOLN ROOM 
 
 UNIVERSITY OF ILLINOIS 
 LIBRARY 
 
 MEMORIAL 
 
 the Class of 1901 
 
 founded by 
 
 HARLAN HOYT HORNER 
 
 and 
 
 HENRIETTA CALHOUN HORNER 
 
ABRAHAM LINCOLN: His Speeches and Writings 
 
Digitized by the Internet Archive 
 
 in 2012 with funding from 
 
 University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign 
 
 http://www.archive.org/details/abrahamlincolnhiOOillinc 
 
This first edition of Abraham Lincoln: his speeches 
 and writings is limited to 650 numbered copies, signed 
 by the editor. Composition, printing, and binding by 
 The Haddon Craftsmen. Typography and design by 
 Robert Josephy. no. jrG 
 
 
Vfkjujrv &e*>u!~r^ nocrr/U*/' 
 
 {£%zcuVmt illannon, 
 
 '////^///W/.//,_ JOAlMj>^ <£/£ • f Wv f 
 
 *&< 
 
 ^yt^rw s»r£*zr eJU^L*^ & (&&. £*. &, ^jf&^j:^M\A*^^<n^, ^4*~&v 
 
 N^Z7 J p£j^A tX £*J0 /f Ar~ A t**~ ^^' £^*> &** ' 
 
 ^ irfx^Z) fan* a- w /*}&?. fy^ ^-^ . ^o^=L~<fe^ 
 *u<^2 £U~ t ftu*+^u<J, (^-h^H^^^ of^-^y, ^^ 
 
 
ABRAHAM LINCOLN: 
 His Speeches and Writings 
 
 EDITED WITH CRITICAL AND ANALYTICAL NOTES 
 
 by Roy P. Basler, author of "the Lincoln legend' 
 
 preface by Carl Sandburg 
 
 <S*^ 
 
 THE WORLD PUBLISHING COMPANY 
 Cleveland and New York 
 
&UJC l^ii^n^o e^tA^i r^j uriCo <ptu^j 
 
 /&**>! ' /t/umT is Chun** $L>%/!\J <?■% y^r^/ /-? fiKc^t^C^ / ^*v<^ A ^^ 41^^^ 
 
 /itfrL \OUJ /■o .fcfCo t~ji~**ur& grjT'iJL} 4 l i^&i.:£<:X f-J ~n-«~<L*>& *-7 h~*UJ^Lu^>> 
 
 tissue*. ^/ A> Ak^,-m3 i*^Jiv <5f\jO K^Ty>^y, f ifjj C^^-cc^l^s. ^ t-^fui^y * *^>w^ 
 
 &&**>>-g_ 0LJ?jz*t^ f <£j£Lum Q^t^U 4 L ^ ) ^y 4 far&~**s' <T>~4s. effi ^--*-<- Cd^-y-^y 
 
 A.re^U> 
 
published by The World Publishing Company 
 2231 West 110th Street • Cleveland 2 • Ohio 
 
 First Published September 1946 
 
 HC 
 COPYRIGHT 1946 BY THE WORLD PUBLISHING COMPANY 
 
 All rights reserved. The copyrighted portions of this book 
 may not be reproduced in any form without permission in 
 writing from the publisher, except by a reviewer who may 
 quote brief passages in a review to be printed in a magazine 
 or newspaper. 
 
 MANUFACTURED IN THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA 
 
f\ 
 
 To my Father 
 
CONTENTS 
 
 PREFACE by Carl Sandburg xvii 
 
 INTRODUCTION by Roy P. Basler xxiii 
 
 LINCOLN'S DEVELOPMENT AS A WRITER 1 
 
 SELECTIONS, WITH NOTES: 
 
 To the People of Sangamo County: Political Announcement, 
 
 March 9, 1832 53 
 Announcement of Political Views in Sangamo Journal, June 13, 
 
 1836 58 
 
 Letter to Colonel Robert Allen, June 21, 1836 59 
 
 Letter to Miss Mary Owens, December 13, 1836 60 
 
 Speech in the Illinois Legislature, January 11, 1837 63 
 
 Letter to Miss Mary Owens, May 7, 1837 73 
 
 Letter to Miss Mary Owens, August 16, 1837 75 
 The Perpetuation of Our Political Institutions: Address Before 
 the Young Men's Lyceum of Springfield, Illinois, 
 
 January 27, 1838 76 
 
 Letter to Mrs. O. H. Browning, April 1, 1838 85 
 The Sub-Treasury: Speech at a Political Discussion in the Hall 
 of the House of Representatives at Springfield, Illinois, 
 
 December [26], 1839 90 
 
 Letter to John T. Stuart, January 20, 1841 113 
 
 Letter to John T. Stuart, January 23, 1841 115 
 
 Letter to Joshua F. Speed, June 19, 1841 116 
 
 Letter to Miss Mary Speed, September 27, 1841 121 
 
 Letter to Joshua F. Speed, January 3, 1842 124 
 
 Letter to Joshua F. Speed, February 3, 1842 127 
 
 Eulogy on Benjamin Ferguson, February 8, 1842 128 
 
 Letter to Joshua F. Speed, February 13, 1842 130 
 Temperance Address Delivered Before the Springfield Washington 
 
 Temperance Society, February 22, 1842 131 
 
 Letter to Joshua F. Speed, February 25, 1842 141 
 
Vlll CONTENTS 
 
 Letter to Joshua F. Speed, February 25, 1842 143 
 
 Letter to Joshua F. Speed, March 27, 1842 144 
 
 Letter to Joshua F. Speed, July 4, 1842 146 
 
 A Letter from the Lost Townships, August 27, 1842 148 
 Correspondence About the Lincoln-Shields Duel, September 17, 
 
 1842 156 
 Memorandum of Instructions to E. H. Merryman, Lincoln's Sec- 
 ond, September 19, 1842 159 
 Letter to Joshua F. Speed, October 5, 1842 161 
 Letter to James S. Irwin, November 2, 1842 163 
 Letter to Samuel D. Marshall, November 11, 1842 164 
 Letter to Joshua F. Speed, March 24, 1843 165 
 Letter to Joshua F. Speed, May 18, 1843 167 
 Letter to Williamson Durley, October 3, 1845 169 
 Letter to Henry E. Dummer, November 18, 1845 171 
 Letter to B. F. James, February 9, 1846 173 
 Remarkable Case of Arrest for Murder, April 15, 1846 175 
 Letter to Andrew Johnston, April 18, 1846 184 
 Religious Views: Letter to the Editor of the Illinois Gazette, 
 
 August 11, 1846 186 
 Letter to Andrew Johnston, September 6, 1846 189 
 My Childhood Home I See Again, 1846 190 
 The Bear Hunt, [1846] 193 
 Letter to Joshua F. Speed, October 22, 1846 196 
 Letter to William H. Herndon, December 12, 1847 199 
 Resolutions in the United States House of Representatives, De- 
 cember 22, 1847 199 
 The War with Mexico: Speech in the United States House of 
 
 Representatives, January 12, 1848 202 
 
 Letter to William H. Herndon, February 1, 1848 217 
 
 Letter to William H. Herndon, February 2, 1848 219 
 
 Letter to William H. Herndon, February 15, 1848 220 
 
 Letter to Usher F. Linder, March 22, 1848 221 
 
 Letter to David Lincoln, March 24, 1848 224 
 
 Letter to David Lincoln, April 2, 1848 224 
 
 Letter to Mary Todd Lincoln, April 16, 1848 226 
 
 Letter to Mary Todd Lincoln, June 12, 1848 228 
 
 Letter to Mary Todd Lincoln, July 2, 1848 229 
 
 Letter to William H. Herndon, July 11, 1848 232 
 
CONTENTS IX 
 
 The Presidential Question: Speech in the United States House 
 
 of Representatives, July 27, 1848 233 
 Letters to Thomas Lincoln and John D. Johnston, December 24, 
 
 1848 250 
 Letter to William H. Herndon, January 5, 1849 252 
 Letter to C. U. Schlater, January 5, 1849 254 
 Letter to C. R. Welles, February 20, 1849 254 
 Letter to Joshua F. Speed, February 20, 1849 256 
 Letter to Abram Bale, February 22, 1850 258 
 Letter to John D. Johnston, January 12, 1851 259 
 Letter to Andrew McCallen, July 4, 1851 260 
 Letter to John D. Johnston, November 4, 1851 261 
 Letter to John D. Johnston, November 9, 1851 263 
 Letter to John D. Johnston, November 25, 1851 263 
 Eulogy on Henry Clay Delivered in the State House at Spring- 
 field, Illinois, July 6, 1852 264 
 Fragments: On Slavery, [July 1, 1854?] 278 
 Letter to J. M. Palmer, September 7, 1854 279 
 The 14th Section: An Editorial in the Illinois Journal, September 
 
 11, 1854 281 
 The Repeal of the Missouri Compromise and the Propriety of Its 
 Restoration: Speech at Peoria, Illinois, in Reply to Senator 
 
 Douglas, October 16, 1854 283 
 
 Letter to E. B. Washburne, December 14, 1854 325 
 Letter to E. B. Washburne, February 9, 1855 326 
 Letter to Owen Lovejoy, August 11, 1855 328 
 Letter to George Robertson, August 15, 1855 330 
 Letter to Joshua F. Speed, August 24, 1855 332 
 Letter to Isham Reavis, November 5, 1855 337 
 Letter to R. P. Morgan, February 13, 1856 338 
 Fremont, Buchanan, and the Extension of Slavery: Speech De- 
 livered at Kalamazoo, Michigan, August 27, 1856 339 
 Letter to Julian M. Sturtevant, September 27, 1856 346 
 Sectionalism, [October 1?], 1856 347 
 The Dred Scott Decision: Speech at Springfield, Illinois, June 26, 
 
 1857 352 
 
 Letter to E. B. Washburne, April 26, 1858 366 
 
X CONTENTS 
 
 Letter to E. B. Washburne, May 15, 1858 368 
 
 Letter to Jediah F. Alexander, May 15, 1858 369 
 
 Letter to E. B. Washburne, May 27, 1858 370 
 
 Letter to Samuel Wilkinson, June 10, 1858 371 
 A House Divided: Speech Delivered at Springfield, Illinois, at the 
 
 Close of the Republican State Convention, June 16, 1858 372 
 
 Letter to Joseph Medill, June 25, 1858 382 
 
 Letter to James W. Somers, June 25, 1858 384 
 
 Speech in Reply to Douglas at Chicago, Illinois, July 10, 1858 385 
 
 Speech in Reply to Douglas at Springfield, Illinois, July 17, 1858 405 
 
 Letter to John Mathers, July 20, 1858 424 
 
 Letter to Henry Asbury, July 31, 1858 425 
 
 Fragment: On Slavery, [August 1, 1858?] 427 
 
 Letter to Henry E. Dummer, August 5, 1858 427 
 
 First Debate, at Ottawa, Illinois, August 21, 1858 428 
 
 Fragment: Speech at Edwardsville, Illinois, September 11, 1858 469 
 
 Letter to M. P. Sweet, September 16, 1858 475 
 
 Verses: To Rosa, September 28, 1858 476 
 
 Verses: To Linnie, September 30, 1858 477 
 
 Fragment: On Slavery, [October 1, 1858?] 477 
 
 Letter to J. N. Brown, October 18, 1858 478 
 Last Speech in Springfield, Illinois, in the Campaign of 1858, 
 
 [October 30, 1858] 480 
 
 Letter to Henry Asbury, November 19, 1858 482 
 
 Letter to Doctor C. H. Ray, November 20, 1858 482 
 
 Notes of An Argument, [December ?], 1858 483 
 
 Letter to James T. Thornton, December 2, 1858 485 
 
 Letter to Lyman Trumbull, December 11, 1858 486 
 
 Letter to H. L. Pierce and Others, April 6, 1859 488 
 
 Letter to T. J. Pickett, April 16, 1859 490 
 
 Letter to Salmon Portland Chase, June 9, 1859 491 
 
 Letter to Salmon Portland Chase, June 20, 1859 492 
 Agriculture: Annual Address Before the Wisconsin State Agri- 
 cultural Society at Milwaukee, Wisconsin, September 30, 
 
 1859 493 
 Written by Lincoln in the Autograph Album of Mary Delahay, 
 
 December 7, 1859 505 
 
CONTENTS XI 
 Letter to William Kellogg, December 11, 1859 506 
 Letter to G. W. Dole, G. S. Hubbard, and W. H. Brown, Decem- 
 ber 14, 1859 507 
 Letter to J. W. Fell Inclosing Autobiography, December 20, 
 
 1859 510 
 Fragment: The Constitution and the Union, [I860?] 513 
 Letter to M. W. Packard, February 10, 1860 514 
 Letter to O. P. Hall, J. R. Fullinwider, and U. F. Correll, Feb- 
 ruary 14, 1860 515 
 Address at Cooper Institute, New York, February 27, 1860 517 
 Letter to Mark W. Delahay, March 16, 1860 539 
 Letter to F. C. Herburger, April 7, 1860 541 
 Letter to Lyman Trumbull, April 29, 1860 542 
 Letter to George Ashmun, May 23, 1860 543 
 Letter to Samuel Haycraft and Autobiography, May 28, 1860 544 
 Letter to Charles C. Nott, May 31, 1860 545 
 Short Autobiography Written for the Campaign of 1860, June 
 
 [1?], I860 547 
 
 Letter to Samuel Galloway, June 19, 1860 555 
 
 Letter to Abraham Jonas, July 21, 1860 557 
 
 Letter to George Latham, July 22, 1860 559 
 
 Letter to Charles C. Nott, September 22, 1860 560 
 
 Letter to Mrs. M. J. Green, September 22, 1860 561 
 
 Letter to Miss Grace Bedell, October 19, 1860 561 
 
 Letter to George T. M. Davis, October 27, 1860 563 
 
 Letter to H. J. Raymond, November 28, 1860 564 
 
 Letter to William Kellogg, December 11, 1860 565 
 
 Letter to John D. Defrees, December 18, 1860 566 
 
 Letter to A. H. Stephens, December 22, 1860 567 
 
 Farewell Address at Springfield, Illinois, February 11, 1861 568 
 
 Speech at Indianapolis, Indiana, February 11, 1861 571 
 
 Address to Germans at Cincinnati, Ohio, February 12, 1861 572 
 
 Address to the Senate of New Jersey, February 21, 1861 574 
 
 Address to the Assembly of New Jersey, February 21, 1861 575 
 
 Address in Independence Hall, Philadelphia, February 22, 1861 577 
 
 First Inaugural Address, March 4, 1861 579 
 
 Reply to Secretary Seward's Memorandum, April 1, 1861 590 
 
Xll CONTENTS 
 
 Letter to Colonel E. E. Ellsworth, April 15, 1861 592 
 
 Letter to Colonel E. E. Ellsworth's Parents, May 25, 1861 593 
 
 Message to Congress in Special Session, July 4, 1861 594 
 
 Proclamation of a National Fast-Day, August 12, 1861 610 
 
 Letter to Governor Beriah Magoffin, August 24, 1861 611 
 
 Letter to O. H. Browning, September 22, 1861 613 
 
 Letter to Major [G. D.?] Ramsay, October 17, 1861 615 
 
 Annual Message to Congress, December 3, 1861 616 
 
 Letter to Mrs. Susannah Weathers, December 4, 1861 635 
 
 Telegram to General D. C. Buell, January 4, 1862 636 
 
 Letter to General D. C. Buell, January 6, 1862 636 
 
 Letter to General A. E. Burnside, January 28, 1862 637 
 
 Letter to General G. B. McClellan, April 9, 1862 638 
 Letter to the Senate and House of Representatives, April 16, 1862 640 
 
 Letter to General G. B. McClellan, May 9, 1862 641 
 
 Telegram to General G. B. McClellan, May 28, 1862 643 
 
 Telegram to General G. B. McClellan, June 28, 1862 644 
 
 Telegram to General G. B. McClellan, July 1, 1862 645 
 
 Letter to General G. B. McClellan, July 2, 1862 645 
 
 Telegram to General G. B. McClellan, July 3, 1862 646 
 
 Telegram to General G. B. McClellan, July 5, 1862 647 
 
 Letter to General G. B. McClellan, July 13, 1862 647 
 
 Letter to Cuthbert Bullitt, July 28, 1862 648 
 
 Letter to John M. Clay, August 9, 1862 651 
 
 Letter to Horace Greeley, August 22, 1862 651 
 
 Telegram to General G. B. McClellan, September 15, 1862 653 
 
 Testimonial for Doctor Isachar Zacharie, September 22, 1862 654 
 
 Letter to John Ross, September 25, 1862 654 
 
 Meditation on the Divine Will, September [30?], 1862 655 
 Remarks to the Army of the Potomac at Frederick, Maryland, 
 
 October 4, 1862 656 
 
 Letter to General G. B. McClellan, October 13, 1862 657 
 
 Telegram to General G. B. McClellan, October 24, 1862 659 
 
 Telegram to General G. B. McClellan, October 27, 1862 660 
 
 Letter to General Carl Schurz, November 10, 1862 660 
 
 Letter to Samuel Treat, November 19, 1862 663 
 
CONTENTS Xiii 
 
 Letter to General Carl Schurz, November 24, 1862 664 
 
 Annual Message to Congress, December 1, 1862 666 
 
 Letter to Miss Fanny McCullough, December 23, 1862 688 
 
 Final Emancipation Proclamation, January 1, 1863 689 
 
 Letter to General J. A. McClernand, January 22, 1863 692 
 
 Letter to General Joseph Hooker, January 26, 1863 693 
 
 Letter to Governor Andrew Johnson, March 26, 1863 694 
 
 Letter to General Joseph Hooker, May 7, 1863 695 
 
 Letter to Isaac N. Arnold, May 26, 1863 696 
 
 Telegram to General Joseph Hooker, June 5, 1863 698 
 
 Letter to Erastus Corning and Others, June 12, 1863 699 
 
 Telegram to General Joseph Hooker, June 14, 1863 708 
 
 Response to a Serenade, July 7, 1863 709 
 
 Letter to General U. S. Grant, July 13, 1863 710 
 
 Draft of Letter to General G. G. Meade, July 14, 1863 711 
 
 Letter to General H. W. Halleck, July 29, 1863 713 
 
 Letter to General N. P. Banks, August 5, 1863 714 
 
 Letter to Mary Todd Lincoln, August 8, 1863 716 
 
 Letter to General J. A. McClernand, August 12, 1863 717 
 
 Letter to J. H. Hackett, August 17, 1863 718 
 
 Letter to James C. Conkling, August 26, 1863 720 
 
 Letter to James C. Conkling, August 27, 1863 725 
 
 Letter to General H. W. Halleck, September 19, 1863 726 
 
 Proclamation for Thanksgiving, October 3, 1863 727 
 
 Telegram to General G. G. Meade, October 8, 1863 731 
 
 Letter to General H. W. Halleck, October 16, 1863 731 
 
 Letter to J. H. Hackett, November 2, 1863 732 
 Letter to E. M. Stanton, Secretary of War, November 11, 1863 733 
 
 Address Delivered at the Dedication of the Cemetery at Gettys- 
 burg, November 19, 1863 734 
 Letter to Edward Everett, November 20, 1863 737 
 Proclamation of Amnesty and Reconstruction, December 8, 1863 738 
 Letter to Crafts J. Wright and C. K. Hawkes, January 7, 1864 742 
 Letter to General N. P. Banks, January 31, 1864 743 
 Letter to E. M. Stanton, Secretary of War, March 1, 1864 744 
 Letter to Governor Michael Hahn, March 13, 1864 745 
 
XIV CONTENTS 
 Letter to E. M. Stanton, Secretary of War, March 15, 1864 745 
 Memorandum for Mrs. S. W. Hunt, April 11, 1864 747 
 Address at a Sanitary Fair in Baltimore, April 18, 1864 748 
 Letter to General U. S. Grant, April 30, 1864 750 
 Speech at a Sanitary Fair in Philadelphia, June 16, 1864 751 
 Letter to William Dennison & Others, a Committee of the Na- 
 tional Union Convention, June 27, 1864 753 
 Letter to Horace Greeley, July 15, 1864 754 
 Address to the 164th Ohio Regiment, August 18, 1864 755 
 Address to the 166th Ohio Regiment, August 22, 1864 756 
 Letter to Mrs. Eliza P. Gurney, September 4, 1864 757 
 Letter to General U. S. Grant, September 22, 1864 758 
 Letter to Henry W. Hoffman, October 10, 1864 759 
 Response to a Serenade, October 19, 1864 760 
 Proclamation of Thanksgiving, October 20, 1864 761 
 Telegram to General P. H. Sheridan, October 22, 1864 763 
 Response to a Serenade, November 10, 1864 763 
 Letter to General W. S. Rosecrans, November 19, 1864 765 
 Letter to Mrs. Bixby, November 21, 1864 766 
 Story Written for Noah Brooks, December [6?], 1864 772 
 Annual Message to Congress, December 6, 1864 773 
 Letter to General W. T. Sherman, December 26, 1864 789 
 Letter to General U. S. Grant, January 19, 1865 790 
 Terms for General R. E. Lee's Capitulation, March 3, 1865 791 
 Second Inaugural Address, March 4, 1865 792 
 Letter to Thurlow Weed, March 15, 1865 794 
 Address to the 140th Indiana Regiment, March 17, 1865 794 
 Telegram to General U. S. Grant, April 2, 1865 796 
 Last Public Address, April 11, 1865 796 
 Telegram to General Godfrey Weitzel, April 12, 1865 802 
 
 SOURCES AND BIBLIOGRAPHY: 
 
 Sources of Text 805 
 
 Works Cited in the Notes 818 
 
 INDEX 821 
 
ILLUSTRATIONS 
 
 Facsimile of the Hooker Letter Frontispiece 
 
 Cooper Institute Portrait of Lincoln, by Mathew B. Brady, 
 
 February 27, 1860. Meserve Collection, No. 20 94 
 
 Photograph of Lincoln, by Alexander Hessler, June 3, 1860. 
 
 Meserve Collection, No. 26 126 
 
 Inaugural Photograph of Lincoln, by Mathew B. Brady, Feb- 
 ruary 23, 1861. Meserve Collection, No. 68 414 
 
 Brady Profile of Lincoln, February 9, 1864. Meserve Collection, 
 
 No. 82 446 
 
 Photograph of Lincoln, by Mathew B. Brady, Februaiy 9, 1864. 
 
 Meserve Collection, No. 85 670 
 
 Last Photograph of Lincoln Made in Life, by Alexander Gardner, 
 
 April 10, 1865. Meserve Collection, No. 100 702 
 
 THE PHOTOGRAPHS of Lincoln which illustrate this book are from the 
 Collection of Frederick Hill Meserve. Mr. Meserve, whose prodigious 
 research in Lincoln likenesses dates back to the turn of the century, is 
 regarded as the leading authority on the subject. Arranged chronologically, 
 these photographs record Abraham Lincoln, the man, during the momen- 
 tous last five years of his life. 
 
 There has been no touching-up or removing of blemishes in order to 
 make more perfect pictures. The original photographs in the Meserve Col- 
 lection have been copied with absolute fidelity. 
 
 THE FACSIMILE of Lincoln's letter to General Hooker, which appears 
 as the frontispiece, is used by permission of the owner of the original letter, 
 Mr. Alfred Whital Stern of Chicago. It was made from a half-tone repro- 
 duction issued by R. R. Donnelley & Sons Company for the Chicago Caxton 
 Club. 
 
PREFA CE 
 
 He has a style his own," has often been the comment on a 
 writer or speaker. When it was said of Walt Whitman it 
 meant that any imitation of his style, so distinctive was it, 
 could at once be seen as mimicry. One result of this was many 
 parodies. 
 
 And though we sometimes meet the expression, "a Lincolnian 
 style," it has no strict meaning as in the case of Whitman. Lincoln 
 had many styles. It has been computed that his printed speeches 
 and writings number 1,078,365 words. One may range through 
 this record of utterance and find a wider variety of styles than in 
 any other American statesman or orator. And perhaps no author 
 of books has written and vocalized in such a diversity of speech 
 tones directed at all manners and conditions of men. 
 
 This may be saying, in effect, that the range of the personality 
 of Abraham Lincoln ran far, identifying itself with the tumults 
 and follies of mankind, keeping touch with multitudes and soli- 
 tudes. The freegoing and friendly companion is there and the 
 man of the cloister, of the lonely corner of thought, prayer, and 
 speculation. The man of public affairs, before a living audience 
 announcing decisions is there, and the solitary inquirer weaving 
 his abstractions related to human freedom and responsibility. 
 
 Perhaps no other American held so definitely in himself both 
 those elements — the genius of the Tragic — the spirit of the Comic. 
 The fate of man, his burdens and crosses, the pity of circumstance, 
 the extent of tragedy in human life, these stood forth in word 
 shadows of the Lincoln utterance, as testamentary as the utter 
 melancholy of his face in repose. And in contrast he came to be 
 known nevertheless as the first authentic humorist to occupy the 
 
 xvii 
 
XV111 PREFACE 
 
 Executive Mansion in Washington, his gift of laughter and his 
 flair for the funny being taken as a national belonging. 
 
 Thus Lincoln, by plain reasoning, would overcome, or by a 
 story of pointed humor would reduce the opponent's position to 
 absurdity, and this was often his aim and method as a writer and 
 speaker. 
 
 How he moved and spoke as a part of the human comedy be- 
 came vivid mouth-to-mouth folklore while he was alive, and his 
 quips and drolleries went beyond his own country to lighten 
 the brooding and speaking figure of Lincoln in the human tragedy. 
 And so began the process by which he was internationally adopted 
 by the family of Man. 
 
 Not yet has there been compiled and annotated a complete 
 collection of the speeches and writings of Abraham Lincoln. 
 No definitive work in this field has as yet come into exist- 
 ence. If there were such a work it would be heavy to use, it 
 would be loaded with repetitious material, it would be cumber- 
 some, definitely lack convenience, certainly not a handy volume. 
 Of course such a complete and definitive collection of Lincoln 
 utterances is wanted and needed. There are those students of 
 Lincoln who give themselves the assignment of reading every last 
 available word written or spoken by Lincoln. The statesman and 
 politician, the executive, the humorist, the literary artist, the great 
 spokesman of democracy, the simple though complicated human 
 being Abraham Lincoln, is best to be known by an acquaintance 
 with all that he wrote and said. For large masses of people how- 
 ever this won't do. They must live and work and time counts and 
 in small houses room, just plain cubic space wherein to keep 
 things, has to be considered. Therefore, says Mr. Roy P. Basler, 
 why not one book, a single volume, holding the best and the most 
 indispensable of Lincoln utterance? In having read this book, 
 who is to stop you from going farther, if you are interested? 
 
 Basler is out of Missouri, the Show-Me State, born in St. Louis 
 November 19, 1906, a graduate of Central College, Missouri, a 
 high school English teacher ( 1926-28 ) in Caruthersville, Missouri, 
 in the southeastern heel of that state, often designated as "Swamp- 
 East Missouri." A terrain it is where during the War of the 1860's 
 
PREFACE XIX 
 
 nobody could always be sure just who to shoot. Should you some- 
 time visit the battle area around Vicksburg they can show you 
 a hill held by Missouri Confederate troops attacked by Missouri 
 Federals. Roy Basler as boy and youth grew where he heard and 
 saw many sides of the argument and elemental passions that 
 brought on the war. The vernacular and slang of Lincoln's south- 
 ern Illinois and Kentucky soil are native and familiar to Basler. 
 
 It didn't hinder him any to go down to North Carolina and 
 work for a Ph.D. at Duke University, there meeting Jay B. Hub- 
 bell, Professor of American Literature, a scholar and seeker. Their 
 conversation one hot summer evening in 1930 "drifted around," 
 says Basler, "to Lincoln's literary style and the numerous treat- 
 ments of Lincoln in fiction, poetry, drama, letters, diaries." From 
 this talk burgeoned and developed Basler's doctoral dissertation, 
 Abraham Lincoln in Literature: the Growth of an American 
 Legend. Also at Duke, Basler married a South Carolina girl of 
 whom he says, "Without her help and sympathetic understanding 
 of my aims and endeavors, I couldn't have gone through with the 
 labors required." As a family the Baslers have arithmetical balance 
 — two boys, two girls; and a handsome, vital group they are 
 singing "The Arkansas Traveler" and "Whoa Mule Whoa." 
 
 In colleges at Sarasota, Florida, and Florence, Alabama, Basler 
 taught English and American literature, twelve months in the year 
 for the most part, largely to Southern students though his classes 
 always had young folk from Northern and Western states. His 
 years of final painstaking labors on this present book have been 
 at the University of Arkansas at Fayetteville, from which place 
 he wrote to his loyal and indefatigable Chicago friend Ralph 
 Newman of the Abraham Lincoln Book Shop: "I suppose that it 
 would be a pleasure to teach Lincoln, Emerson, Melville, Walt 
 Whitman and Mark Twain, to college students anywhere; but 
 I doubt that it could be any more fun than it is in the South, 
 where although we still have our Bilboes we have also our Lister 
 Hills and our J. W. Fulbrights ( "Bill" Fulbright is a hometown boy 
 here in Fayetteville ) . The America that means most to me is less 
 her rocks and rills, etc., than her Jeffersons and Lincolns. I use 
 the plural advisedly in speaking of those nonpareils, for when 
 
XX PREFACE 
 
 a Southerner can go to Chicago and meet an Oliver R. Barrett, or 
 a Middlewesterner can go to Durham, N. C, and meet a Jay B. 
 Hubbell he learns that what was Jefferson, and what was Lincoln, 
 still is and will be." 
 
 Throughout Basler kept asking, "Where is the original?" as to 
 this speech or letter of Lincoln's. From the Library of Congress 
 and the National Archives in Washington, D. C, from the Maine 
 Historical Society, from the Huntington Library in Pasadena, 
 California, from coast to coast in their various repositories, Basler 
 got photostatic copies of Lincoln's manuscripts. To Springfield, 
 Illinois, he journeyed for consultation with Paul M. Angle, then 
 Librarian of the Illinois State Historical Library and Secretary 
 of the Abraham Lincoln Association. Then to Chicago for sessions 
 with Oliver R. Barrett, an attorney-at-law and antiquarian, who 
 since a boy in the 1880's has been gathering Lincoln manuscripts 
 and now owns an immense collection that includes every type 
 and period of Lincoln document and handwriting. Having seen 
 Angle and Barrett, it might be further said that Angle and Bar- 
 rett probably know more about the characteristics, quirks, oddi- 
 ties and quiddities of Lincoln's handwriting than did Lincoln 
 himself when alive. Lincoln was an exact man, careful, scrupulous, 
 but he was independent and quizzical at times with dashes and 
 commas, with spellings, with the shapings of certain letters. The 
 troubles and manifold chores of Basler in this field will interest 
 the reader of the "Introduction." His list of titles and source of 
 texts in the "Bibliography and Sources" indicate Basler's persistent 
 labors in following up his question, "Where is the original?" 
 Each letter, speech or state paper of Lincoln herein printed exists 
 now in some place where you can see it, if you like. From these 
 originals Basler makes his book. What slight or minor changes he 
 has made in the text he consulted and copied, he tells you. Those 
 slight changes are for your convenience. What we have herein is 
 more than another compilation for it is also a new and interesting 
 study of Lincoln as writer and speaker. 
 
 Basler's book, The Lincoln Legend, published in 1935, is one 
 of the most able studies we have of the man and myth, the beliefs 
 and the make-believes, that give Lincoln a place among the fore- 
 most voices of our modern world. We have become a global 
 
PREFACE XXI 
 
 humanity. Lincoln used the phrase, "The Family of Man." He 
 saw the Family as a unity. He hoped to see it move toward closer 
 unity and wider freedom — everywhere. 
 
 Basler has gone through the body of Lincoln utterance and his 
 selections from it in a very peculiar time, a global war time and 
 that war interwoven with many civil wars, a war in which the 
 American Union of States issued as a colossal and decisive force 
 among world powers. What have we to learn from Lincoln in 
 this time when unprecedented and incalculable forces are to 
 operate on our future, when the mind of man and his will and 
 vision must meet the challenge of what is termed AA1, the Year 
 One of the Atomic Age, when we hear the oft-recurring question, 
 "What would Lincoln do now?." 
 
 And now comes Mr. Basler to lay before you the best writings 
 and speeches of Lincoln for you to find what of Lincoln is usable 
 for these terrific history-shaping years. 
 
 As a writer and speaker Lincoln had several styles and used 
 them according to what events and occasions demanded. Plain 
 talk, blunt and utterly lucid statements, these are to be found in 
 plenty throughout his writings and speeches. Then again you 
 may find him employing a prose that is cadenced, sonorous, mas- 
 terly and having its relation to certain masterpieces of literature 
 that had become part of him. 
 
 You will find Basler's "Lincoln's Development as a Writer" a 
 scholarly treatise worth careful reading. You will find you can 
 come back to it with renewed interest after you have read his 
 selections from Lincoln. He tells us how Lincoln developed, how 
 he changed and grew as a speaker and writer. 
 
 His book is honest and able. It is meant for human service in 
 these our years of tumult and change. It can challenge your hope 
 and imagination about America and the wide flung Family of 
 Man around this new small global world of ours. Yes, truly it can 
 challenge you unless it should be that you are dead from the neck 
 up and heart wooden. 
 
 CARL SANDBURG 
 Flat Rock, North Carolina 
 
IJVTR OD UCTIOJV 
 
 The editor has attempted in this volume to give readers a 
 full and accurate text of Abraham Lincoln's most important 
 works. Three considerations have guided his choice of 
 selections: literary significance, historical importance, and human 
 interest. In few instances, it is believed, will the reader fail to 
 find any authentic piece which merits inclusion for all of these 
 considerations, although numerous items of an interest chiefly 
 historical, and perhaps a few of some slight literary significance, 
 may be missed by the Lincoln specialist. Since the editor believes 
 that the reader can best do his own abridging and extracting, all 
 selections are complete. 
 
 The text of more than three-fourths of the selections has been 
 edited from the original manuscripts or from photostatic copies 
 of the originals. The text of other selections, for which no manu- 
 script is available, has been edited from the original printed 
 version or from a later printing which Lincoln corrected or 
 authorized. In a few instances two or more printed texts, each 
 having its own particular significance, have been collated. The 
 editor regrets that he has been unable to obtain access to the 
 original or to a photostatic copy of thirteen of the selections. Since 
 each of the thirteen is an item of considerable interest and im- 
 portance to a volume which attempts to present the best of 
 Lincoln's writings, he has reproduced them as edited by Nicolay 
 and Hay in the Complete Works of Abraham Lincoln. The source 
 of text for each selection will be found listed under "Sources." 
 
 The volume had its inception several years ago when the 
 editor had occasion to consult a number of manuscripts and found 
 to his amazement that Nicolay and Hay had in some instances so 
 
XXIV INTRODUCTION 
 
 emended or miscopied Lincoln as to leave either something less 
 or something more than Lincoln had written. The extent to which 
 their editorial labors took them included changes in diction, 
 punctuation, sentence structure, and paragraphing. No doubt the 
 sense of propriety which motivated Secretary John Hay in chang- 
 ing Lincoln's phrase "better posted" to "better informed" in the 
 "Letter to Henry W. Hoffman," October 10, 1864, remained with 
 him in later years. That Hay felt his superiority to the "Tycoon" 
 in matters pertaining to literary style is obvious from the tone of 
 comments scattered throughout his Diary — comments which 
 sometimes reveal a strangely inept sense of values in disparaging 
 Lincoln's rhetoric. Furthermore, the conception of guarding a 
 national tradition may have motivated both men in their desire 
 to leave nothing rough or uncouth in grammar and rhetoric that 
 would be incompatible with the memory of the great man. 
 
 The resolution which grew therefore, in the present editor's 
 mind, was to edit a volume of Lincoln's best writings just as 
 Lincoln had written them. The difficulties in the task were mini- 
 mized by ignorance, and the work was begun with the assembling 
 of a large number of photostatic copies of manuscripts from widely 
 scattered sources, to be transcribed into a typed script. Then ap- 
 peared the problems which eventually became so numerous as to 
 necessitate the drawing up of a list of rules for emending Lincoln's 
 punctuation so that it would conform to printing practice with a 
 minimum of misrepresentation. Of these rules, some were adopted 
 with reluctance. To abandon Lincoln's characteristic dash at the 
 end of a sentence seemed both more than called for and less than 
 representation, but on the advice of other students of Lincoln and 
 in the interest of general uniformity between pieces taken from 
 manuscript and pieces taken from printed sources the manuscript 
 dash had to go. Likewise, the double period which Lincoln occa- 
 sionally used after the initial in signing his name, and the two short 
 dashes, one above the other, which punctuated certain abbrevi- 
 ations, and the apostrophes which Lincoln sometimes dropped to 
 the position of commas, were normalized. 
 
 Less difficulty was encountered in deciding what to do about 
 careless grammar, diction, capitalization, and bad or obsolete 
 spelling. The obvious choice was to leave it as Lincoln had written 
 
INTRODUCTION XXV 
 
 it. To record only what the eye could see seemed simple enough. 
 With Lincoln's handwriting being what it was, however, the 
 trouble was to know what one saw. In his hurried scrawl, within 
 the same paragraph, would appear territory, teritory, and terrtory, 
 or slavery, slavey, slavy. Obviously Lincoln knew how to spell 
 both slavery and territory. Then, should all be made standard in 
 print? Also there were the words containing a and e, and often 
 Lincoln's as were left not merely open after the loop but identical 
 with e's, and his e's cropped up looking precisely like as in 
 instances where there could be no doubt of his intention to write 
 e. As in the handwriting of many persons, Lincoln's i and e 
 were also frequently identical except for the dot, and the dot was 
 often inadvertently omitted. And an occasional n would be, so far 
 as the pen stroke was concerned, an indubitable m, or an r would 
 be indistinguishable from an n or an s. One debates a long time 
 about these things and occasionally asks and disagrees with the 
 opinion of others. Recognizing Lincoln's early habit of dropping 
 apostrophes to the position of commas and occasionally writing an 
 s and an r identically, the editor had a hard time deciding that the 
 line in "The Bear Hunt" which has heretofore been printed as 
 "And Mose' Hill drops his gun," should read "And more, Hill 
 drops his gun." Then there was the embarrassing word, "seaman," 
 in the last sentence of the "Response to a Serenade," November 
 10, 1864: "And now, let me close by asking three hearty cheers 
 for our brave soldiers and seaman . . ." The editor is confident that 
 most readers who undertake to examine a photostatic copy of the 
 "Response" will offhand be sure that Lincoln wrote seaman rather 
 than seamen, and yet if they will also examine a number of other 
 o's and e's in the same photostatic copy and in a number of others, 
 he is satisfied that their opinion will soon waver, and that eventu- 
 ally they will find a dozen or more instances in which they cannot 
 distinguish an a from an e except that they know how the word 
 is spelled and presume that Lincoln also knew how to spell it. 
 But there is the next question. How far is an editor justified in 
 assuming that Lincoln knew how to spell? The notion that Lincoln 
 was usually a poor speller will vanish after a few hours spent 
 with his manuscripts. And likewise, lest one give the impression 
 that Lincoln's script is often illegible, it should be said that Lin- 
 
XXVI INTRODUCTION 
 
 coin's handwriting is normally far easier to read than that of most 
 literary figures whose script has been perused at length by the 
 editor. The question has been answered, but not always to the 
 editor's complete satisfaction, in each of a hundred or more 
 instances in this volume. 
 
 Lincoln's capitalization is sometimes inconsistent, but in addi- 
 tion Lincoln employs certain capital letters which are indis- 
 tinguishable from lower-case forms except in size, and size tends 
 to become indefinite in the hurry of composition. The editor's 
 best judgment has been used in each instance of uncertainty, but 
 he recognizes that there is room for disagreement. 
 
 With printed sources, the difficulties were less numerous, 
 but in many instances more complex. Most of Lincoln's early 
 speeches were not too carefully printed in the newspapers of the 
 day. It is charitable to remember that the typesetters and editors 
 of that day had to deal with the same sort of manuscripts that 
 we have been discussing, or had only a reporter's script. In any 
 event, there are errors and dubious sentences. Usually, it is best 
 and safest to stick to the source, except for the correction of obvious 
 typographical errors and omissions, and this has been done. For 
 certain speeches, however, there are several printed sources. 
 Collation then is in order, but which punctuation to choose out 
 of two or three possibilities is never easy to decide. When a later 
 printing authorized by Lincoln appeared, presumably corrected 
 over the earlier, it would seem obvious that the later should be 
 adopted in all things, but this is not always the case. One sen- 
 tence in the "House Divided Speech" will illustrate the difficulty. 
 The first printing was done from Lincoln's manuscript, and reads, 
 "I believe this government cannot endure, permanently half slave 
 and half free." The Sycamore edition, one of the earliest pamphlet 
 printings, adds a comma after permanently. In his "Letter to Hall, 
 Fullinwider, and Correll," February 14, 1860, Lincoln quoted the 
 sentence thus, "I believe this government can not endure perma- 
 nently, half slave, and half free." The shift in emphasis achieved 
 by the change in punctuation is obvious, and the editor thinks 
 deliberate, in Lincoln's effort to play down the implications drawn 
 by so many readers from the original statement balanced on the 
 comma which follows endure. Finally, in the official edition of 
 
INTRODUCTION XXV11 
 
 the Debates, the sentence appears without internal punctuation. 
 Did Lincoln give up trying to punctuate it internally, for political 
 reasons, leaving the reader to place the emphasis where he would, 
 or did Lincoln's editors simply abandon the comma at their own 
 discretion? And which, finally, is the best reading? The editor 
 has chosen the first because he believes it represents what Lincoln 
 wanted to say with the emphasis Lincoln originally desired it to 
 have. 
 
 A final word about Lincoln's punctuation will give the reader 
 at least a clue to the motivation of choice in instances such as the 
 one mentioned. Lincoln's manuscripts show him punctuating 
 for pause and emphasis as one accustomed to speak rather 
 than to write for print. He breaks sentences into clauses and 
 phrases sometimes to the point of fragmentation. Likewise, his 
 liberal use of italics to point his emphasis is the use of a speaker 
 trying to carry inflections of voice to the written word. The 
 speeches which he wrote out, and which were set in type from 
 manuscript, thus show a remarkable similarity in punctuation to 
 those taken down by newspaper reporters who caught the inflec- 
 tion and phrase groupings from the platform and to a certain 
 extent carried them over into their text. For this reason most 
 speeches which were merely reported are not noticeably at vari- 
 ance in style with those written out for publication by Lincoln 
 himself, and, in the editor's opinion, are often better representa- 
 tions of Lincoln's pauses than the later revised editions pub- 
 lished in the Debates, or the revisions of revisions to be found 
 in the Complete Works of Abraham Lincoln. That there is room 
 for difference of opinion in such matters must, of course, be 
 recognized. 
 
 In retrospect, the editor's opinion of Nicolay and Hay is con- 
 siderably mellowed by his own experience. Their task and accom- 
 plishment were immense. Their editorial performance leaves much 
 to be desired, but an understanding of the difficulties which beset 
 them banishes all desire to carp at their achievement. Until a 
 truly definitive edition of Lincoln's complete works appears, it is 
 hoped that the present volume may supply the reader with a 
 superior text for Lincoln's best writings, and afterwards may 
 remain a serviceable single volume of selections. 
 
XXV111 INTRODUCTION 
 
 The following rules have been observed to the best of the 
 editor's ability. 
 
 Bracket all editorial suggestions. 
 
 For a printed source — keep it as it is except for correction 
 of typographical errors, and normalizing of spacing and type face 
 in headings, salutations, closes, and signatures. 
 For a manuscript source: 
 
 Dash at end of sentence — change to period. 
 
 Dash in heading or close of letter — let it stand. 
 
 Double dash, one above other, after abbreviations — change 
 
 to period. 
 
 Double period after initial — reduce to period. 
 
 Period omitted at end of sentence — let it stand. 
 
 Period omitted after abbreviation — let it stand. 
 
 Comma or period omitted in letter heading — let it stand. 
 
 Comma used for apostrophe — raise to apostrophe. 
 
 Apostrophe inadvertently omitted or incorrectly used — 
 
 let it stand. 
 
 Misspelled word — let it stand and [sic], but do not quibble 
 
 over i or e y a or e. 
 
 Obsolete and variant spelling — let it stand. 
 
 Word blurred or obliterated in manuscript — bracket as in 
 
 Complete Works of Abraham Lincoln. 
 
 Inadvertent omission — insert omitted word followed by a 
 
 question mark and inclose in brackets. 
 
 Any other error — let it stand and [sic]. 
 
 Print single underscoring in italics and double under- 
 scoring in small capitals, except in letter heading, saluta- 
 tion, or signature. 
 
 Normalize spacing in all headings, salutations, closes, and 
 
 signatures. 
 
 The editor wishes to acknowledge that a very large share of 
 the labor in editing the selections has been done by his wife, 
 Virginia Anderson Basler. Hardly less than her assistance has 
 been that of Mr. Harry E. Pratt, formerly Executive Secretary of 
 The Abraham Lincoln Association, who very early in the project 
 
INTRODUCTION XXIX 
 
 laid open the Association's files and continually gave invaluable 
 suggestions. Mr. W. E. Barringer, successor to Mr. Pratt in the 
 Secretaryship of the Association, has also been helpful. Mr. Oliver 
 R. Barrett of Chicago, whose wealth of manuscripts is matched 
 by his wealth of generosity and sound advice, has been indis- 
 pensable to the making of this volume. Mr. Paul M. Angle, for- 
 merly Librarian of the Illinois State Historical Library and now 
 Director of the Chicago Historical Society, has made available the 
 library's large collection of manuscripts and offered pointed criti- 
 cal comments which have contributed largely to whatever quality 
 the volume may have. Dr. Louis A. Warren, Director of the Lin- 
 coln National Life Foundation, has likewise opened the resources 
 of his institution. 
 
 In addition to these without whom the work could not have 
 been undertaken, the editor wishes to express his indebtedness to 
 Mr. Carl Sandburg, and to Professor Jay B. Hubbell of Duke 
 University for reading the introductory sketch of Lincoln's 
 development as a writer. Among the many people who have lent 
 their assistance, the following persons deserve the editor's special 
 thanks: Miss Margaret Flint and Mr. Jay Monaghan of the Illinois 
 State Historical Library; Mr. D. W. McClellan, Mr. St. George L. 
 Sioussat, Miss Lucy Salamanca, Mr. C. Percy Powell, Mr. James 
 B. Childs, Mrs. Amelia Baldwin, and Mr. H. S. Parsons — all of 
 The Library of Congress; Mr. P. M. Hamer of The National 
 Archives; Mr. Otto K. Bach of The Grand Rapids Art Gallery; 
 Mr. George B. Utley of The Newberry Library; Mr. McKendree 
 L. Raney and Miss Gladys Sanders of The University of Chicago 
 Libraries; Mrs. Herbert A. Kellar of the McCormick Historical 
 Association; Miss Mae Gilman of the Maine Historical Society; 
 Miss Marie Hamilton Law of the Drexel Institute Library; Mr. 
 Paul North Rice of The New York Public Library; Mr. William 
 Reitzel of The Historical Society of Pennsylvania; Mr. Allyn B. 
 Forbes of the Massachusetts Historical Society; Mr. G. V. Fuller 
 of the Michigan Historical Commission; Mr. Henry V. Van Hoesen 
 and Miss Edna M. Worthington of the Brown University Library; 
 Miss Norma Cuthbert of the Henry E. Huntington Library; Mr. 
 R. Gerald McMurtry of Lincoln Memorial University; Miss 
 Brenda Richard of the Missouri Historical Society; Mr. Raphael 
 
XXX INTRODUCTION 
 
 Semmes of the Maryland Historical Society; Miss Frances B. 
 Wells of the Maryland State Library; Mr. A. J. Wall of The New 
 York Historical Society; Mr. C. C. Williamson of the Columbia 
 University Libraries; Miss Miriam L. Colston of the New York 
 University Library; Miss Sudie J. Kinkead of The Filson Club, 
 Louisville; Miss Edith H. Rowley of the Allegheny College 
 Library; Mr. F. Lauriston Bullard of Boston; Mr. Thomas I. Starr 
 of Detroit; Mr. William H. Townsend of Lexington, Kentucky; 
 Mr. Sherman Day Wakefield of New York; Mr. J. Friend Lodge of 
 Philadelphia; Mr. Ralph G. Lindstrom of Los Angeles; Mr. A. L. 
 Maresh, Jr., of Cleveland; Mr. Philip Van Doren Stern of New 
 York; the firm of Gabriel Wells, New York; Mr. Louis W. Bridg- 
 man of Madison, Wisconsin; Mr. Percy E. Lawler of the Rosen- 
 bach Company, Philadelphia; and Miss Myrtle Emerson of State 
 Teachers College Library, Florence, Alabama. 
 
 ROY P. BASLER 
 
LINCOLN'S DEVELOPMENT AS A WRITER 
 
LINCOLN'S DEVELOPMENT 
 AS A WRITER 
 
 Concerning Lincoln's early life, the facts which he con- 
 sidered significant enough to relate in his autobiographical 
 sketches written in 1859 and 1860 are still those which most 
 concern a student of his writings, and there seems to be little 
 need to do more than refer the reader to them among the 
 selections in this volume. 
 
 A word of caution should be sufficient to prevent one's falling 
 into the common error of supposing — as Lincoln did — that this 
 period is notable only for its barrenness. A certain type of 
 biographer has made much of the hardships, poverty of educa- 
 tional opportunity, and undistinguished culture of the frontier 
 settlements in which Lincoln grew up; and in reaction, another 
 type has attempted to glorify the same environment as the para- 
 dise of opportunity for virile American genius. In any event, 
 Lincoln's early life sufficed to provide him with a great store of 
 practical knowledge and a deep understanding of and sympathy 
 with the people among whom he would live most of his life. This 
 knowledge and understanding provided a firm footing which 
 served him more dependably than an- elaborate schooling served 
 many of his contemporaries. 
 
 Anyone inclined toward the various types of "progressive" 
 education which are sponsored today by the pedagogically elite — 
 with their emphasis on "social living," "cooperative endeavor," 
 "discussion-action," and "learning by doing," might, in fact, 
 conclude that Lincoln's early educational advantages were non- 
 pareil. He learned the fundamentals of farming, surveying, busi- 
 ness, and politics by doing them, and his need directed the 
 acquisition of manual and mental skills in what "progressive" 
 
 1 
 
Z ABRAHAM LINCOLN: 
 
 educators today might call "meaningful situations." In short, he 
 received an abundance of the practical kind of well-rounded 
 education which it is becoming customary in the twentieth cen- 
 tury for financially favored urban parents to send their children 
 hundreds of miles, with hundreds of dollars, to get. 
 
 What is perhaps more important is the personal philosophy 
 of education which Lincoln developed during these years, and 
 which he did not materially alter during his mature life. It is 
 summarized in the succinct and homely adage, "a man is never 
 too old to learn." Of his several expressions which state this atti- 
 tude, one of the best is the following piece of advice on studying 
 law, written in 1858: 
 
 When a man has reached the age that Mr. Widmer has, and 
 has already been doing for himself, my judgment is, that he 
 reads the books for himself without an instructor. That is 
 precisely the way I came to the law. Let Mr. Widmer read 
 Blackstone's Commentaries, Chitty's Pleadings, Greenleaf's 
 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. Widmer to make a lawyer of himself. 
 
 And also, Lincoln might have agreed, it is the best way for one 
 to grow in general intellect. 
 
 In keeping with this philosophy is the constant development 
 in Lincoln's whole personality throughout his entire life. If there 
 is one incontrovertible theme that runs throughout the bio- 
 graphical sequence of facts, opinions, and legends concerning 
 Lincoln, it is that as a personality he never ceased to grow in a 
 unique pattern, which was both organically logical and objectively 
 adaptable. There is only a half-truth in the famous statement of 
 Charles Francis Adams, Jr., that "during the years intervening 
 between 1861 and 1865 the man developed immensely; he 
 became in fact another being. History, indeed, hardly presents an 
 analogous case of education through trial." Lincoln did grow 
 between 1861 and 1865, but in no essential did he become a 
 different being. The failure of numerous biographers to bridge 
 the gap between his early life and his presidency might have 
 
HIS SPEECHES AND WRITINGS 6 
 
 been avoided had they given as much attention to his writings as 
 to the minutiae of his daily living. 
 
 Something should be said of his schooling and study during 
 his boyhood years. His own testimony that he went to school "by 
 littles" which in "the aggregate did not amount to one year" has 
 been accepted by some as a statement indicating relatively slight 
 acquisition of knowledge or skill. Actually, this means that Lin- 
 coln attended school for several years, short terms of two or three 
 months being the general rule, and many school terms averaging 
 less. Need one be reminded that even yet in the United States 
 in certain areas it would require three years of schooling to 
 accumulate an "aggregate" of twelve months? Or, that if con- 
 centrated attention on the skills of learning — all the frontier school 
 concerned itself with — be considered, then four or five grades, 
 and perhaps more, of a modern curriculum would be required to 
 furnish the equivalent of Lincoln's twelve months? One year, by 
 littles, of learning to read, write, and cipher enabled Lincoln to 
 acquire the basic tools which he used and kept sharp until he 
 could at twenty-three study Kirkham's Grammar, a difficult text- 
 book, and within a few months write with a clarity that few 
 college graduates ever achieve today. This fact need not startle 
 us when we consider that although undeniable advancement 
 has been made in the manner of education, the essentials of 
 logic and rhetoric and the basic skills are still matters which one 
 learns rather than is taught. The intellectual avidity of the child 
 is more important than methods of instruction, and good books, 
 with the opportunity and desire to master them, need little from 
 a teacher when in the hands of an exceptional student. 
 
 The textbooks which Lincoln studied probably provided as 
 good an opportunity for learning the essentials and the graces of 
 expression then, as the best modern textbooks do now. Dilworth's 
 A New Guide to the English Tongue — the leading elementary 
 textbook of the day, with lessons in spelling, grammar, and read- 
 ing; tables of homonyms; exemplary fables and recommended 
 prayers — is in spite of its stilted precepts, pedagogically sound. 
 The Kentucky Preceptor and Scott's Lessons in Elocution, with 
 well-chosen selections of prose and poetry, might be criticized as 
 too mature and difficult for the slow-to-average child, but are 
 
4 ABRAHAM LINCOLN: 
 
 excellent collections for a child intellectually alert. A careful 
 examination of these and other textbooks which Lincoln studied 
 both in and out of school will not impress anyone with Lincoln's 
 poverty of opportunity for the study of grammar and rhetoric. 
 It is safe to say that few children today learn as much through 
 twelve years of formal schooling in these two subjects as one 
 finds in the several textbooks which Lincoln is supposed to have 
 studied. 
 
 Thus, one may conclude that Lincoln came to his study of 
 Kirkham's Grammar in 1831-32 as an advanced student, ready to 
 form a permanent habit in writing. This was his own testimony, 
 allowing for modesty, in 1860, when he wrote in his "Auto- 
 biography": "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." That this 
 was no idle claim, the student may determine by analysis of the 
 earliest selections in this volume. Noting the possible but unlikely 
 truth of the tradition that his friend Mentor Graham assisted him 
 in composing the announcement, "To the People of Sangamo 
 County" (1832), the student will, nevertheless, recognize pre- 
 dominantly the certainty and deliberateness in style which 
 marked Lincoln's mature writing. 
 
 By his twenty-eighth year Lincoln had acquired the facility 
 in fundamentals of rhetoric which marks all his later work. "The 
 Perpetuation of Our Political Institutions" ( 1838 ) contains many 
 passages comparing favorably with more famous paragraphs often 
 admired in his later speeches. Other speeches of this early period 
 show similar facility, and if they err, it is in the excessive use of 
 rhythm and trope. Lincoln's taste improves much thereafter, as his 
 literary stature increases; but the very sins of his early public 
 style, subdued, become the virtues of his mature public style. 
 His private style as revealed in his early letters is constant 
 throughout his later letters in its idiomatic, loosely deliberate, 
 and colloquial effectiveness. 
 
 But even his worst rhetorical blandishments in his early 
 speeches exemplify his deliberate seeking for effect. There is, for 
 example, the concluding paragraph of "The Sub-Treasury" 
 (1839), a campaign speech in which Lincoln attacked the Sub- 
 
HIS SPEECHES AND WRITINGS O 
 
 Treasury and defended the National Bank. The fact that his 
 audience loved such rhetoric perhaps made the performance 
 expedient, for certainly the speech as a whole, though a tight bit 
 of reasoning, could hardly have been inspirational and needed 
 some political fireworks as a tail-piece. 
 
 Aside from textbooks, the efforts of biographers have un- 
 covered a good many books that Lincoln indubitably read before 
 1831, but the list is undeniably spare, perhaps largely because 
 the records of his life prior to this date are poor at best, and 
 because books were without doubt scarce in his younger life. 
 Among other works, Lincoln read Arabian Nights, Ramsey's Life 
 of Washington ( the book damaged by rain and paid for with two 
 days' labor topping corn, as first narrated by John L. Scripps in 
 his campaign biography), Grimshaw's History of the United 
 States, Aesop's Fables, Bunyan's The Pilgrim's Progress, Defoe's 
 Robinson Crusoe, Weems's Life of Washington, and the King 
 James Bible. In so far as his early reading may have influenced 
 his later style as a speaker and as a writer, the two most significant 
 of these are the Fables and the Bible. His technique in telling 
 stories to enforce a truth and his fondness for rhythmic 
 parallelism and balanced structure may have derived chiefly, 
 though not entirely, from these two sources. 
 
 II 
 
 Lincoln went to New Salem, Illinois, in July, 1831, and 
 during the next six years his intellectual horizon extended rapidly. 
 Apparently it was during the first year that he began his study of 
 grammar, possibly as tradition has it, under the tutelage of his 
 appropriately named friend, Mentor Graham; for he composed 
 and published on March 9, 1832, his political announcement, 
 "To the People of Sangamo County," his first writing of impor- 
 tance, so far as is known. Just how much Mentor Graham had to 
 do with this composition is not certain, but what is certain is that 
 the announcement was ably written, and that the few letters 
 written by Mentor Graham which are preserved in the Herndon- 
 Weik papers do not even suggest a competence in grammar or 
 rhetoric sufficient to account for any material assistance that 
 
6 ABRAHAM LINCOLN: 
 
 Lincoln may have had in writing this piece. With whatever 
 assistance, Lincoln continued his study and reading and in the 
 fall of 1833 mastered the rudiments of surveying in order to work 
 for the county surveyor, John Calhoun. 
 
 In addition to the schoolmaster, Graham, Lincoln had for 
 friends a number of well-educated people whose libraries and 
 conversation were educational gold mines. Among these was 
 Jack Kelso, whose love for and knowledge of Shakespeare and 
 Burns became a legend to a later generation. If Lincoln's fond- 
 ness for these poets had not developed before this time as a result 
 of his early reading, possibly his reading and discussion of them 
 with Kelso may have served to fix a literary preference that 
 remained strong until his death. 
 
 Without attempting to give an inclusive list of books that 
 Lincoln read during his residence at New Salem, one may note 
 that accounts of this period agree in portraying him as ransacking 
 the private libraries of his friends, though they do not always 
 agree as to the specific books read. William H. Herndon's 
 biography has Lincoln running a gamut from newspapers and 
 the sentimental novels of Caroline Lee Hentz through Thomas 
 Paine, Voltaire, Volney, and Rollin, to Burns and Shakespeare. 
 It is unlikely that Lincoln acquired a fondness for the novels of 
 Mrs. Hentz during this period, since the earliest was not in print 
 until 1846, and most of them were published in the fifties; but 
 that Thomas Paine in particular may have been one of Lincoln's 
 favorite authors seems not improbable. In philosophy, no other 
 writer of the eighteenth century, with the exception of Jefferson, 
 parallels more closely the temper or gist of Lincoln's later thought. 
 In style, Paine above all others affords the variety of eloquence 
 which, chastened and adapted to Lincoln's own mood, is revealed 
 in Lincoln's formal writings. From reading such as this, rather 
 than from the instruction of a frontier schoolmaster, Lincoln 
 derived his most important literary education. Aside from general 
 reading during this period Lincoln studied law, borrowing books 
 from his friend, John T. Stuart, and purchasing a copy of Black- 
 stone's Commentaries at an auction in Springfield. 
 
 Lincoln's writing was apparently not confined at this time to 
 
HIS SPEECHES AND WRITINGS 7 
 
 letters, legislative bills, and political speeches. Herndon refers to 
 a predilection for scribbling verses which began when Lincoln 
 was a youth in Indiana, and expresses the opinion that it is just 
 as well none are extant. Perhaps during this period also Lincoln 
 began a practice of writing pseudonymous political letters to the 
 Sangamo Journal,* which he continued until 1842, when one of 
 them resulted in a challenge to a duel. The problem of assigning 
 pseudonymous or anonymous letters and editorials to Lincoln is, 
 however, a dangerous one, and requires more careful study than 
 has sometimes been given to it. Of these writings one may say 
 that Lincoln's authorship has not been finally established for any 
 except those included in this volume. Several political letters 
 which appeared in the Journal in 1837-1838, signed variously 
 "Sampson's Ghost," "Old Settler," and "A Conservative," seem 
 certainly to have been written by Lincoln, but in no instance do 
 they add to his literary accomplishment. In racy idiom, satire, 
 and humor they are distinctly inferior to the second "Rebecca" 
 letter, which will be discussed later, f 
 
 Lincoln's move from New Salem to Springfield in April, 1837, 
 brought a further extension of his social and intellectual horizon. 
 Springfield became the State Capital in 1839, Lincoln having 
 largely directed the legislative maneuvering that deprived Van- 
 dalia of this distinction. But before this event Springfield was a 
 thriving town in its own right, containing among other ad- 
 vantages "a State Bank, land office, two newspapers . . . the 
 Thespian Society, the Young Men's Lyceum, a Colonization 
 Society and a Temperance Society."! To the Young Men's Lyceum 
 on January 27, 1838, he delivered the address previously men- 
 tioned, which was his first considerable literary effort, though 
 he had a year earlier delivered before the Legislature a speech 
 
 * The name of this newspaper was originally Sangamon Journal (1831-1832), 
 but was shortened to the colloquial Sangamo Journal (1832-1847), and became 
 Illinois Journal (1847-1855), and finally Illinois State Journal (1855 to date). 
 
 f For a discussion of these pseudonymous letters see Glen H. Seymour, 
 "'Conservative' — Another Lincoln Pseudonym?" Journal Illinois State Historical 
 Society, July, 1936; Bulletin, The Abraham Lincoln Association, No. 50, December, 
 1937; Roy P. Basler, "The Authorship of the 'Rebecca' Letters," The Abraham 
 Lincoln Quarterly, June, 1942. 
 
 \ Harry E. Pratt, Lincoln, 1809-1839, p. lviii. 
 
8 ABRAHAM LINCOLN: 
 
 defending the State Bank, which is significant for its logical 
 analysis and close argument. 
 
 "The Perpetuation of Our Political Institutions" is resound- 
 ingly conservative in its treatment of the theme of law and 
 order, swelling deeply with moral and patriotic fervor but com- 
 pletely ignoring the greatest moral issue of the day — the abolition 
 of slavery. In the set of "objections," which Lincoln together with 
 Dan Stone drew up in March, 1837, opposing resolutions passed 
 by the Legislature in support of slavery, Lincoln stated carefully 
 "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." The position taken in these 
 conservative "objections," Lincoln maintained until he was 
 elected President. On the whole the "Lyceum" address probably 
 represents Lincoln's personal ideas during this period fairly 
 accurately, and as such it must be judged, though inferior when 
 compared with his later expressions, of great interest for its ideas 
 as well as for its rhetoric. Herndon certainly underestimates it as 
 "highly sophomoric," but comments that it created for "the young 
 orator a reputation which soon extended beyond the limits of the 
 locality in which he lived." 
 
 In his early speeches Lincoln reveals himself clearly as the 
 intellectual and spiritual child of the romantic era no less than 
 Emerson, Thoreau, Whitman, Whittier, and Lowell, as well as 
 William Ellery Channing, Theodore Parker, William Lloyd 
 Garrison and many lesser lights. The philosophical ideas that 
 animated American thought from the time of the American 
 Revolution to the Civil War were perhaps no less potent in 
 Springfield than in Boston. Among the ideas which run through 
 both "The Perpetuation of Our Political Institutions" ( 1838 ) and 
 the "Temperance Address Delivered before the Washington 
 Temperance Society" ( 1842 ) are the concepts of human perfecti- 
 bility and the progressive improvement of human society through 
 education; the exaltation of reason, of "all conquering mind," as 
 the human attribute through which progress may be achieved; 
 and the ideal of liberty, equality, and brotherhood. These con- 
 cepts composed the essential humanitarianism of Thomas Jeffer- 
 son, which consistently held men above things. Likewise they 
 
HIS SPEECHES AND WRITINGS 9 
 
 were the essentials of Lincoln's philosophy, though subdued by 
 the innate conservatism that held him aloof from the radical 
 reformers of his day. 
 
 It is clear in "The Perpetuation of Our Political Institutions" 
 that the fundamental theme of the "Gettysburg Address," which 
 was later to be woven out of these very concepts, was essentially 
 in 1838 what it was in 1863, the central concept of Lincoln's 
 political philosophy. Lincoln thought of American democracy as 
 an experiment in achieving human liberty, relatively successful 
 though far from completed, and threatened most by the mobocratic 
 spirit and the failure of the citizens to observe and preserve the 
 duly constituted authority of government. One sentence from 
 this early speech contains the essential germ of the "Gettysburg 
 Address." Speaking of the founders of American political institu- 
 tions, Lincoln said, "Theirs was the task (and nobly they per- 
 formed it) to possess themselves, and through themselves us, of 
 this goodly land, and to uprear upon its hills and its valleys a 
 political edifice of liberty and equal rights; 'tis ours only to trans- 
 mit these — the former unprofaned by the foot of the invader, the 
 latter undecayed by the lapse of time and untorn by usurpation — 
 to the latest generation that fate shall permit the world to know." 
 In 1863 he was to say, "It is rather for us to be here dedicated to 
 the great ta'sk remaining before us . . . that government of the 
 people, by the people, for the people, shall not perish from the 
 earth." 
 
 Curiously woven into the texture of these essential concepts 
 is Lincoln's belief in the "doctrine of necessity," which he defined 
 as the "belief that the human mind is impelled to action, or held 
 in rest by some power, over which the mind itself has no control." 
 Like several of the early nineteenth century romantics, Lincoln 
 made a correlation of his belief in "necessity" and his belief in 
 human progress and perfectibility. William Godwin's "doctrine of 
 necessity," which so deeply influenced Coleridge, Wordsworth, 
 Shelley, and others among the English romantics, was such a 
 correlation of necessitarianism and perfectionism. Godwin him- 
 self began as a Calvinist, came under the influence of Condorcet, 
 Rousseau, and others of the French school, and eclectically con- 
 cocted his own philosophy from the concepts of his masters by 
 
10 ABRAHAM LINCOLN: 
 
 correlating the "doctrine of necessity" with the romantic doctrine 
 of human perfectibility rather than with Calvin's doctrine of 
 human depravity. 
 
 Although Lincoln probably had not read Godwin's Political 
 Justice, Godwin's theories along with those of Rousseau may have 
 come to him as to many, in the never ending succession of ripples 
 in popular thought created by the original intellectual splash pro- 
 duced by the writings of those worthies. It is just as possible 
 that Lincoln made somewhat the same correlation in his own 
 thinking without benefit, either at first or second hand, of Godwin's 
 philosophy. In any event, necessitarianism and perfectionism were 
 inextricably woven into Lincoln's personal philosophy during 
 these early years and remained strong with him until his death. 
 
 Though Lincoln's writings are few between 1838 and 1842, 
 these were otherwise busy years during which his legal practice 
 was growing, his political leadership of the Illinois Whigs was 
 becoming firmly established, and his social position was gradually 
 elevated. He courted the Kentucky belle Mary Todd, jilted her, 
 suffered terrific hypochondria, recovered, and re-established his 
 position as favored suitor to marry her November 4, 1842. 
 
 Ill 
 
 The year 1842 is one of considerable literary significance. 
 Lincoln's remarkable friendship with Joshua Speed, apparently 
 the only intimate personal friendship of Lincoln's life, is recorded 
 in an interesting series of letters. The "Address before the Wash- 
 ington Temperance Society/' already noted, was delivered on 
 Washington's birthday. A "Eulogy on the Death of Benjamin 
 Ferguson," delivered before the same society on February 8, dis- 
 plays a solemn rhythm and elegiac diction not matched in literary 
 effect by anything he had written prior to this time. But most 
 interesting is Lincoln's participation in a series of pseudonymous 
 political satires published in the Sangamo Journal during August 
 and September. The second "Rebecca" letter, the only one of the 
 series which Lincoln wrote, reveals a bent indicative of a wider 
 scope in his literary possibilities than he had shown before. The 
 fact that he afterwards eschewed such literary activity, perhaps 
 
HIS SPEECHES AND WRITINGS 11 
 
 largely because of the unpleasantness which followed, does not 
 diminish the letter's significance to the student of Lincoln's growth 
 as a writer. It displays an ability to portray character, a skill in 
 handling dialogue, a realistic humor, and a biting satire, which 
 mark him at this time the potential equal of his Southern con- 
 temporaries, Augustus Baldwin Longstreet and Johnson Jones 
 Hooper, if not of the later Mark Twain. 
 
 Lincoln's literary activity during the next four years is relatively 
 slight in significance, except for his writing a series of poems. Dur- 
 ing the political activity of the campaign of 1844, he revisited his 
 boyhood home in Indiana, and in typically romantic fashion was 
 prompted, as he said, to "feelings . . . which were certainly 
 poetry; though whether my expression of those feelings is poetry 
 is quite another question." These powerful feelings, apparently 
 "recollected in tranquillity," resulted in a group of poems begin- 
 ning with the nostalgic "My Childhood Home I See Again," and 
 including "The Bear Hunt" and perhaps others that have been 
 lost. A literary friendship which he formed with Andrew Johnston, 
 a lawyer of Quincy, Illinois, occasioned Lincoln's inclosing parts 
 of the first, and perhaps all of the second of these poems in letters 
 written to this friend. The manuscript of a third section of the first 
 poem seems to have been lost. 
 
 Another piece of writing doubtless the result of his friend- 
 ship with Johnston is the narrative of a "Remarkable Case," a 
 murder trial with an unusual denouement, which appeared in the 
 Quincy Whig, April 15, 1846. Lincoln had told the story earlier, 
 shortly after defending the accused, in his "Letter to Joshua 
 Speed," June 19, 1841. As he wrote it for publication in the Quincy 
 Whig, it is a well-told mystery story, worthy of careful study as 
 one of his few ventures in narrative. 
 
 Without danger of exaggerating their importance, it is safe 
 to say that Lincoln's poems are superior to the average run of 
 verse published in America before 1850, and that the first and 
 best of them reveals a quality which wears better than Lincoln's 
 biographers have supposed. One cannot read "My Childhood 
 Home I See Again" without sensing faintly the manner and mood 
 of minor English poetry in the late eighteenth century, a typical 
 example of which, William Knox's "Mortality," was Lincoln's 
 
12 ABRAHAM LINCOLN: 
 
 favorite poem at this time. Although these verses suffer much when 
 placed beside the "Farewell Address" or the "Second Inaugural 
 Address/' they are by no means the pure doggerel that many of 
 Lincoln's biographers have termed them. As literary critics, Lin- 
 coln's biographers have displayed, with few exceptions, a lack of 
 literary perspective exceeded only by their preoccupation with 
 political facts. Again, however, the student must find these poems 
 interesting as an art form which Lincoln abandoned along with 
 the realistic satire of the "Rebecca" letter. They are most signifi- 
 cant as literary experimentation, which showed promise of growth 
 but was frustrated by the environment and the events of the milieu 
 in which it occurred. In Lincoln we have a literary artist, con- 
 strained by social and economic circumstances and a dominant 
 political tradition to deal with facts as facts, yet always moti- 
 vated by his love of words and symbols and his eternal craving 
 to entertain people and to create beauty. It is this love of 
 words, never completely subservient, which finally flowers in the 
 unique art of his "Gettysburg Address," "Farewell Address," 
 "Second Inaugural Address," and even earlier in his "Concluding 
 Speech" in the campaign of 1858. Lincoln spoke as an artist 
 because he was first of all an artist at heart. Had he otherwise 
 developed these talents, it is not difficult to imagine for him an 
 important place among American poets or writers of fiction. 
 
 Of special interest to the student of Lincoln's literary growth 
 is the partnership in law practice which he formed in December, 
 1844, with William H. Herndon, who earlier had clerked in the 
 store of Lincoln's friend, Speed, and had been a student in the law 
 office of Logan & Lincoln. The partnership continued until 1861, 
 and up to the time of Lincoln's departure for Washington perhaps 
 no other person contributed more to his intellectual develop- 
 ment, directly or indirectly, than Herndon did through his per- 
 petual reading and discussion of books. The general impression 
 abetted by Herndon's testimony that Lincoln came to books chiefly 
 through his partner's library is, however, not compatible with the 
 fact that Lincoln's own library was of considerable extent and that 
 he had convenient access to the State Library. The student must 
 gauge carefully Herndon's statement that Lincoln "comparatively 
 speaking had no knowledge of literature. . . . He never in his 
 
HIS SPEECHES AND WRITINGS 13 
 
 life sat down and read a book through," as the statement of an 
 omnivorous reader who was more impressed by Lincoln's intel- 
 lect than by the breadth of his literary culture. 
 
 Lincoln's growing prestige in local Whig politics culminated 
 in his election to Congress from the Seventh Congressional Dis- 
 trict of Illinois in 1846. During the campaign he met strong 
 opposition in the candidacy of Peter Cartwright, the famous 
 Methodist circuit-rider, not on the national issues of the day so 
 much as on personal, moral, and religious issues. Cartwright and 
 his supporters resorted to the "grape-vine telegraph" in spreading 
 reports of Lincoln's infidelity, and the charges thus made clung to 
 Lincoln's name, in spite of his forthright denial, until long after 
 his death. The most significant piece of writing which resulted was 
 the "Letter to the Editor of the Illinois Gazette," August 11, 1846, 
 and a political handbill in which Lincoln expressed his religious 
 views. Both of these items were rediscovered in 1941 by Mr. Harry 
 E. Pratt. They contain perhaps the most complete statement of 
 personal religious philosophy which Lincoln wrote during his 
 early career. The nub of his statement, a part of which has 
 already been cited, is as follows: 
 
 That I am not a member of any Christian Church, is true; 
 but I have never denied the truth of the Scriptures; and I 
 have never spoken with intentional disrespect of religion 
 in general, or of any denomination of Christians in par- 
 ticular. It is true that in early life I was inclined to believe 
 in what I understand is called the "Doctrine of Necessity" — 
 that is, that the human mind is impelled to action, or held in 
 rest by some power, over which the mind itself has no con- 
 trol; and I have sometimes ( with one, two or three, but never 
 publicly) tried to maintain this opinion in argument — The 
 habit of arguing thus however, I have entirely left off for more 
 than five years — And I add here, I have always understood 
 this same opinion to be held by several of the Christian 
 denominations. The foregoing, is the whole truth, briefly 
 stated, in relation to myself, upon this subject. 
 
 Lincoln was elected by an unprecedented majority of 1511 
 votes, and went to Congress with prospects as bright as any first 
 
14 ABRAHAM LINCOLN: 
 
 term congressman could have wished. His experiences in Wash- 
 ington were doubtless important to his growth in many ways. 
 Although politically adept in the Illinois Legislature, he was new 
 to the larger activities of Congress and proceeded to work dili- 
 gently, attending to routine duties and "learning the ropes." Con- 
 tacts with congressmen from other parts of the nation gave him 
 an understanding of political currents outside Illinois. Particu- 
 larly, he was acquainted with the rising importance of slavery as 
 a national issue, not only through the sometimes heated arguments 
 of fellow congressmen who stayed at Mrs. Spriggs's boarding 
 house and through the serious discussions in Congress of various 
 bills and resolutions for abolishing slavery in the District of Co- 
 lumbia and limiting its spread into new territories, but also through 
 his speech-making tour of New England states during the 
 presidential campaign in the summer of 1848. Most of the political 
 animus engendered in Congress by the issues of the Mexican 
 War was concerned directly or indirectly with the question of the 
 extension of slavery, and conservative though he was on the ques- 
 tion of abolition, Lincoln took his stand with his party against a 
 war denounced by Henry Clay as being "for the purpose of prop- 
 agating slavery." In the "Spot Resolutions," which Lincoln intro- 
 duced on December 22, 1847, shortly after the session opened, and 
 in the speech which he delivered on January 12, 1848, he was 
 sticking close to the tactics of Henry Clay, whom he had heard to 
 declare only a few weeks earlier in Lexington, Kentucky: "This is 
 no war of defence, but one of unnecessary and offensive aggres- 
 sion." 
 
 This important Mexican War speech was essentially an apo- 
 logia for himself and for all those Whig members of Congress who 
 had voted what amounted to a general censure of President Polk 
 for starting an unnecessary war. As exposition it is one of the ablest 
 speeches Lincoln ever delivered and deserves to rank with the best 
 of his later expository writing, though the unpopularity of its 
 theme may make it as difficult of appreciation for some students 
 of his works as it was for his contemporaries. In spite of the vigor- 
 ous diction and strong figures in which he condemned Polk's 
 action and defended the Whig position, many of his constituents 
 saw in the speech only a betrayal of the national destiny, and 
 
HIS SPEECHES AND WRITINGS 15 
 
 as a consequence, his political future became overcast. His letters 
 to Herndon and Linder, written a few weeks later, in spite of 
 their merit as further statements of his case, apparently did little 
 to change the rapidly forming opinion among even his closest 
 friends that his political career was finished. 
 
 Of the other speeches delivered before the House, one in 
 particular deserves notice as perhaps the best example of his 
 popular, rough-and-tumble style as a stump speaker. It was de- 
 livered on July 27, 1848, shortly after the Whig Convention in 
 Philadelphia had nominated General Taylor, "Old Rough and 
 Ready." The purpose of the speech was entertainment at the polit- 
 ical expense of the Democrats, who had nominated General 
 Lewis Cass, and in ridiculing Cass, Lincoln gave satire, sarcasm, 
 and rough humor a free rein. Although it scarcely adds to his 
 stature as a statesman, it has real significance in his development 
 as an artist. His inclination to entertain his audience had been both 
 a strength and a weakness throughout his political career up to 
 this time, getting votes from the people on the one hand and 
 arousing suspicion of demagoguery on the other. The Illinois 
 Register, in commenting on one of his political debates in 1839, 
 had noted: "Lincoln's argument was truly ingenious. He has, how- 
 ever, a sort of assumed clownishness in his manner which does not 
 become him. . . . Mr. Lincoln will sometimes make his language 
 correspond with this clownish manner, and he can thus frequently 
 raise a loud laugh among his Whig hearers. . . . We seriously 
 advise Mr. Lincoln to correct this clownish fault before it grows 
 upon him." Like the "Rebecca" letter, however, this speech is 
 interesting as a good example of a variety of expression that Lin- 
 coln gradually abandoned in his later speeches, except for an 
 occasional recrudescence during the great debates with Douglas 
 in 1858. 
 
 At this point perhaps it may be well to comment briefly on 
 Lincoln's use of humor and satire, and in particular on his use of 
 anecdotes, since this speech is one of the few among the selec- 
 tions in this volume in which Lincoln displays his forte as a 
 humorist and a story-teller. In the first place, the stories for which 
 he was famed were generally confined to his impromptu speeches 
 and personal conversations, and became as a result largely a mat- 
 
16 ABRAHAM LINCOLN: 
 
 ter of oral tradition. Secondly, by all accounts they depended as 
 much on grimace and mimicry as they did on inherent humor or 
 point in producing their effect, and hence many of them have 
 become but poor reading as told second or third hand. Evidently, 
 however, Lincoln was a master of the art of telling the incident 
 and at the same time withholding the point until it served with 
 an immediate snap at the conclusion to clarify and give meaning 
 to the whole story. This is the fundamental pattern of all good 
 anecdotes, but added to this is Lincoln's practice of withholding 
 not only the point of the story, but also his particular application 
 of it, until the end. 
 
 Although in many of the stories credited to Lincoln with a 
 fair degree of authenticity he seems to have been working with 
 didactic purpose, certain apologists have erred in the assumption 
 that he told them only for serious purposes. His love for the writ- 
 ings of Artemus Ward, Petroleum V. Nasby, and other humorists 
 indicates a respect for humor in its own right, and his indulgence 
 in stories as well as his general clowning on the platform was 
 doubtless an expression of a genuine and deep-seated comic urge, 
 not necessarily incompatible with high sincerity when blended in 
 the genius of an artist. Today one can lament only that so few 
 of Lincoln's stories have been preserved in the actual manner of 
 telling which he gave them. Even the most authentic often show 
 less of Lincoln than they do of the person who is authority for 
 the tale. 
 
 Flashes of humor repeatedly occur in his letters. In these 
 flashes the humor is less satirical than in his political speeches, and 
 it grows mellower through the years. Nothing in his later writings 
 equals the biting satire of the second "Rebecca" letter, but even 
 in the letters written during his presidency his humor is sharp. He 
 once wrote Secretary Stanton that he wanted Jacob R. Freese 
 appointed colonel of a colored regiment "regardless of whether he 
 can tell the exact shade of Julius Caesar's hair," and another time 
 asked Cuthbert Rullitt, who had written a letter criticizing Army 
 policy at New Orleans, if he would carry on war "with elder-stalk 
 squirts charged with rose-water." But he was as ready to see 
 humor at his own expense and to satirize his own situation. In 
 the "Letter to R. P. Morgan," he returned an expired railroad 
 
HIS SPEECHES AND WRITINGS 17 
 
 pass and requested a new one thus: "Says Tom to John 'Here's 
 your old rotten wheelbarrow. IVe broke it, usin' on it. I wish you 
 would mend it, case I shall want to borrow it this arternoon.' " In 
 these instances, as in nearly all of Lincoln's humor, the general 
 allusions and the association of ideas for humorous effect are 
 drawn from common experiences of everyday life. In substance 
 it is the common humor of his time, but in the skill with which it 
 is used it is Lincoln's. 
 
 In the study of Lincoln's writings it would seem unnecessary 
 to emphasize the necessity of a sense of humor and an apprecia- 
 tion of irony, but, as H. B. Van Hoesen has pointed out in a bro- 
 chure entitled The Humor of Lincoln and the Seriousness of His 
 Biographers, Lincoln's humor has not always been perceived 
 by his readers, though the audiences to which he spoke could 
 scarcely miss the point. This circumstance is the result, in 
 part at least, of the fact that Lincoln's humor is so often ironical, 
 and that the point emphasized by vocal inflection is not always so 
 obvious on the printed page. Even his most serious speeches, such 
 as the "Address at Cooper Institute," contain humor which a reader 
 may miss unless he reads with awareness, but which Lincoln's 
 audience fully appreciated, if one may judge from contemporary 
 newspaper accounts of the occasion. An interesting example of 
 humor missed by Lincoln's editors occurs in the "Speech at Peoria." 
 After a lengthy analysis of Douglas's arguments extolling the 
 virtues of the Nebraska Bill, Lincoln sarcastically continued, "If 
 Nebraska Bill is the real author of these benevolent works, it is 
 rather deplorable, that he has, for so long a time, ceased work- 
 ing altogether." In three separate instances in the same paragraph 
 Lincoln made use of the personification for humorous effect, and in 
 each his editors humorlessly revised the phraseology to read "the 
 Nebraska Bill," and in the sentence quoted emended the pro- 
 noun he to it. 
 
 The political eclipse which followed Lincoln's term in Con- 
 gress was paralleled by an eclipse in his writing and speaking. 
 Until 1854 he devoted himself almost entirely to his law practice, 
 and in consequence achieved a considerable legal reputation and 
 a comfortable income. Aside from the personal letters written dur- 
 ing these years, his only work of much literary significance is 
 
18 ABRAHAM LINCOLN: 
 
 the "Eulogy on Henry Clay Delivered in the State House at Spring- 
 field/' July 6, 1852. This was a labor of love and genuine admira- 
 tion to which Lincoln carried a sympathetic understanding of 
 Clay's personality and a fine assessment of his political worth. 
 It shows what was perhaps unconsciously running through Lin- 
 coln's mind, the indebtedness of Lincoln to Clay both politically 
 and intellectually, and the remarkable degree to which their 
 personalities and genius held similar and contrasting qualities. One 
 can hardly read any paragraph in it without feeling that Lincoln 
 was, unconsciously or consciously, inviting comparison and con- 
 trast of himself with his "beau ideal of a statesman." 
 
 The presidential campaign of 1852 in which Pierce and Scott 
 were opponents produced another speech, worthy of mention only 
 because of its perfunctory mediocrity and because Nicolay and 
 Hay either ignored or conveniently overlooked it when compiling 
 the Complete Works. It is entitled "Address before the Springfield 
 Scott Club, in Reply to Judge Douglas's Richmond Speech." Its 
 very mediocrity and futile sarcasm are indicative of the senility of 
 Whig politics at the time. Apparently Lincoln could not, even by 
 choice, find anything worth saying in support of a party which was 
 dying because it strove only to avoid the great issues of the day 
 and could do no better than lift the slavery plank of an opposi- 
 tion platform. Even the satire and humor of the speech are far 
 below Lincoln's average. 
 
 IV 
 
 Lincoln's political inactivity ended in 1854 with the passage 
 of the Kansas-Nebraska Bill. The next five years saw his steady 
 rise from comparative political oblivion to a position of national 
 importance as the leading opponent of Douglas's doctrine of 
 Popular Sovereignty, and as one of the leading national figures in 
 the new Republican party. The contrast between Lincoln in 1852 
 and 1854 is remarkable. From a sarcastic politician with a party 
 allegiance but no issue, he emerged a serious statesman with a 
 great issue but as yet no party to lead. From the futile medi- 
 ocrity of his "Address before the Springfield Scott Club" he rose to 
 the impassioned seriousness of the "Speech at Peoria." The con- 
 
HIS SPEECHES AND WRITINGS 19 
 
 trast is immense but not mysterious. Lincoln had simply found a 
 theme worthy of his best, and the high level of literary merit in his 
 speeches and other writings is a record of his emotional convic- 
 tion. Although he did not reach his peak as a literary artist until 
 an even greater theme — preservation of the Union — began to 
 dominate his thinking, during the next six years he composed a 
 body of speeches and letters which in power and distinction of 
 style is second to none other in American political literature. 
 
 Careful study of Lincoln's works of this middle period ( 1854- 
 1861 ) emphasizes the fact that his later beauty of expression was 
 not an accident of inspiration, as thought by many of his biogra- 
 phers, which simply happened to a man who had no particular care 
 for finely wrought sentences. Indeed, the "Speech at Peoria" 
 (1854), "A House Divided: Speech Delivered at Springfield, 
 Illinois" ( 1858 ) , and the "Address at Cooper Institute" ( 1860 ) , to 
 mention only three of the many, have in a large measure the 
 technical distinction of style that is generally credited only to his 
 later masterpieces. It is not so much in technical command of 
 style as it is in power of feeling and imagination that his later 
 works surpass those of his middle period. 
 
 A critical examination of Lincoln's more important works of 
 this period reveals the supremacy that has always existed in the 
 works of an indisputable master of language. With vital imagina- 
 tion he infused into the political matter of the pre-Civil War epoch 
 great poetic significance: "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. . . . '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." In lan- 
 guage seemingly effortless and yet grandly beautiful he phrased 
 the emotional convictions upon which he believed human political 
 progress to be founded: "Repeal the Missouri Compromise — repeal 
 all compromises — repeal the Declaration of Independence — repeal 
 all past history, you still cannot repeal human nature. It will be 
 the abundance of man's heart, that slavery extension is wrong; 
 and out of the abundance of his heart, his mouth will continue to 
 
20 ABRAHAM LINCOLN: 
 
 speak." He took, and made his own, the thought and spirit of 
 those phases of the epoch which he has since come to symbolize, 
 in such a manner that, though others spoke before him and others 
 have spoken since, today one can scarcely think of the common 
 matter of his argument except as matter that is particularly and 
 peculiarly his. From the "Speech at Peoria" to the "Address at 
 Cooper Institute" Lincoln displayed again and again his power to 
 synthesize without recourse to illusive transcendental generalities, 
 and to stamp with unity without narrowing to personal bias, polit- 
 ical matter covering nearly a century. 
 
 The "Speech at Peoria" was one of many that Lincoln made 
 during the campaign of 1854, most of the others probably express- 
 ing the same anti-Nebraska Bill sentiments, and in fact one of 
 them delivered at Springfield on October 4 being the same speech 
 later delivered at Peoria. On one occasion at Bloomington when 
 Stephen A. Douglas was the principal Democratic speaker and 
 Lincoln's friend Jesse W. Fell attempted to arrange a debate, 
 Douglas declined. The "Speech at Peoria" was Lincoln's four- 
 fold answer to Douglas's sponsorship of the Kansas-Nebraska Bill: 
 first, the bill was a reversal of all historical precedents established 
 for limiting the extension of slavery; second, there was no necessity 
 or public demand for repealing the Missouri Compromise; third, 
 the repeal was morally wrong in that it violated a compact agreed 
 upon by two parties and denied that the Negro had any human 
 rights; last, only the restoration of the Missouri Compromise could 
 prevent ultimate political disintegration. 
 
 When the election was over, it was clear that anti-Nebraska 
 sentiment had prevailed. In the Illinois Legislature anti-Nebraska 
 men held a majority of five, Since Lincoln had led the fight, it was 
 only natural that he be the choice for United States Senator, 
 although there is no indication in his writings that he entertained 
 any such ambition before the election. What happened afterward 
 is told by Lincoln in his "Letter to E. B. Washburne," February 
 9, 1855. In short, to insure an anti-Nebraska senator, Lincoln 
 threw his support to Lyman Trumbull, an anti-Nebraska Demo- 
 crat. 
 
 Although the year 1855 was one of political inactivity for 
 Lincoln and apparently no speeches were written, his letters show 
 
HIS SPEECHES AND WRITINGS 21 
 
 constant evolution of ideas. The "Letter to George Robertson," 
 August 15, 1855, concludes with a paragraph adumbrating the 
 famous opening of the "House Divided Speech," still three years 
 away: "Our political problem now is, 'Can we as a nation con- 
 tinue together permanently — forever — half slave and half free?' 
 The problem is too mighty for me — may God, in his mercy, 
 superintend the solution." The "Letter to Joshua F. Speed," 
 August 24, 1855, shows his resolution to continue the fight for 
 restoration of the Missouri Compromise, and likewise his insistence 
 that he was still a Whig and certainly not a member of the Ameri- 
 can party: 
 
 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 prog- 
 ress 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 con- 
 trol, it will read "all men are created equal, except negroes, 
 and foreigners, and Catholics." When it comes to this I shall 
 prefer emigrating to some country where they make no 
 pretence of loving liberty — to Russia, for instance, where 
 despotism can be taken pure, and without the base alloy of 
 hypocrisy. 
 
 In the next year, 1856, Lincoln definitely lined up with the 
 new Republican party and took active lead in organizing the 
 state convention at Bloomington in May. It was here that he 
 delivered the famous so-called "Lost Speech," which according to 
 the local tradition was the supreme effort that fused discordant 
 elements into a unified party. The tradition has it that even hard- 
 boiled newspapermen were so overpowered by his eloquence 
 that they forgot pencil and pad to sit enraptured. A report of the 
 speech, reconstructed by Henry C. Whitney from notes taken at 
 the time, and published in 1896, probably follows the general 
 argument very well, but it hardly reproduces the rhetorical effect 
 claimed for the utterance. In any event, however, the speech did 
 inspire the convention with unity of purpose. Within a month 
 
22 ABRAHAM LINCOLN: 
 
 Lincoln's national importance was recognized by delegates to the 
 Republican National Convention, when 110 of them cast their 
 votes for him on a nomination for Vice-President. 
 
 Although Lincoln made many speeches in the campaign that 
 followed, none has been preserved in entirety except the "Speech 
 Delivered at Kalamazoo, Michigan," August 27, 1856. In it Lin- 
 coln insisted that the issue of the campaign was, "Shall the Gov- 
 ernment of the United States prohibit slavery in the United 
 States?" and that it was "very nearly the sole question." He pointed 
 out the political power and position of white men in slave states 
 whose representation in Congress was enhanced by the slave popu- 
 lation to the point that a white man's vote in the South was worth 
 two in the North. He stressed the importance of free labor as an 
 essential to the future development of democracy. He claimed 
 that Buchanan, the Democratic candidate, was committed to the 
 extension of slavery into the territories. Finally, he scouted 
 the idea that the election of the Republican candidate, Fremont, 
 would bring disunion. In all it was perhaps his frankest anti- 
 slavery utterance up to this time. 
 
 Of two fragments of other speeches made during this cam- 
 paign, one is preserved in a manuscript entitled "Sectionalism," 
 apparently a portion of a speech which he delivered a number 
 of times. It holds the distinction of being the only considerable 
 speech manuscript known to be in existence from this period. 
 In it Lincoln tried to show that Republicanism was not in- 
 herently sectional, and that if it appeared so, such appearance 
 was not its own making but that of the Southerners who refused 
 to take anything but a sectional attitude toward it. This argument 
 he would recur to in later years, but with particular effect in the 
 "Address at Cooper Institute." 
 
 In 1857, an off-year in politics, came the Dred Scott decision, 
 handed down by the Supreme Court on March 11. In his one 
 important speech of the year, delivered in Springfield, June 26, 
 after paying his respects to the dilemma of popular sovereignty 
 in Utah and to the election in Kansas, Lincoln attacked the Dred 
 Scott decision and Douglas's speech of two weeks earlier uphold- 
 ing it, and indicated the line of future Republican action: "We 
 know the court that made it has often overruled its own decisions, 
 
HIS SPEECHES AND WRITINGS 23 
 
 and we shall do what we can to have it overrule this." Ignoring — 
 as Douglas had done — the merits of the decision, Lincoln never- 
 theless cut deeply into the ground that Douglas had taken in 
 maintaining that the decision was acceptable and should be 
 respected and upheld. He cited the action of Andrew Jackson in 
 ignoring a court decision — and incidentally Douglas's approval of 
 Jackson — as precedent for Republican endeavor to have the deci- 
 sion reversed. The Republican attitude was particularly justified in 
 that the decision was not unanimous, was not "in accordance with 
 steady practice of [government] departments," and was "based on 
 assumed historical facts which are not really true." Although the 
 speech contains some of the most memorable passages in his writ- 
 ings, it lacks the unity of effect which marks his best. The truth is 
 that Lincoln had no solution to the problem of slavery except the 
 colonization idea which he had inherited from Henry Clay, and 
 when he spoke beyond his points of limiting the extension of 
 slavery, of preserving the essential central idea of human equality, 
 and of respecting the Negro as a human being, his words lacked 
 effectiveness. 
 
 V 
 
 From June to November, 1858, Lincoln delivered more than 
 sixty speeches which, though they failed in their immediate pur- 
 pose of defeating Douglas in the campaign for the United States 
 senatorship, made Lincoln's national reputation and eventually led 
 to the Presidency. He began on June 16 with his famous "House 
 Divided Speech" in Springfield, accepting the unanimous nomi- 
 nation of the Republican State Convention as its "first and only 
 choice" for the Senate. A greater speech had never before been 
 delivered to an American political party gathering, and yet, 
 although Lincoln said in it the essential things that he would 
 repeat over and over during the next months, he found so many 
 new ways, some of them memorable, of modifying and clarifying 
 and emphasizing these essentials, that it is exceedingly difficult 
 to eliminate any single speech of the campaign from analysis 
 and comment. He closed his campaign on October 30 in Spring- 
 field with a speech which marked yet another peak in political 
 
24 ABRAHAM LINCOLN: 
 
 oratory. The striking contrast between the "House Divided 
 Speech" and the "Last Speech in the Campaign of 1858" is in 
 mood rather than in power of expression. The former is an 
 electrifying challenge to conflict; the latter, an avowal of faith 
 and resignation, phrased with lyric calm and cadenced beauty 
 of expression which Lincoln had never before equaled, and 
 would afterward excel only in the three or four passages that 
 are graven in the mind of humanity more permanently than in 
 the granite of all the monuments to his greatness. The summer 
 of 1858 was the literary, as well as the political, climax of his 
 middle period. 
 
 His theme in the "House Divided Speech" was that political 
 acts and events had for years been building a trap which would, 
 unless avoided, catch and forever imprison the essential ideal 
 of human liberty. Under the guise of allaying controversy and 
 establishing national unity, the Democratic party had constantly 
 pushed slavery into new territory and had thwarted all efforts 
 aimed at control and ultimate extinction of the evil. The crisis 
 was at hand and the issue clear: either national politics would 
 have to control slavery, or slavery would control national politics. 
 The speech concluded with a plea for party harmony and support 
 of Republican principles. 
 
 In a fine though homely figure of speech Lincoln pictured 
 the political "machinery" built for the extension of slavery by the 
 Nebraska Bill and the Dred Scott decision, which would work 
 with the "don't care" policy of Douglas's popular sovereignty not 
 to permit local determination of the issue in the territories, but to 
 guarantee extension of slavery in spite of local opposition. The 
 figure of the "house or mill," constructed by the Democrats for the 
 perpetuation of slavery, constantly reappeared in his other 
 speeches of the campaign and was the spearhead of his attack upon 
 Douglas, implying as it did that Douglas had been consciously or 
 unconsciously working for the extension of slavery. The idea was 
 not new with Lincoln: Republican leaders everywhere had 
 attacked the Supreme Court for complicity in a scheme to spread 
 slavery. It remained for Lincoln to make the charge vivid and 
 persuasive in a figure of speech and to so involve Douglas by 
 
HIS SPEECHES AND WRITINGS 25 
 
 implication that the entire effect would weigh heavily not only in 
 the immediate contest, but in any future contest as well. 
 
 We can not absolutely know that all these exact adapta- 
 tions are the result of preconcert. But when we see a lot of 
 framed timbers, different portions of which we know have 
 been gotten out at different times and places and by different 
 workmen — Stephen, Franklin, Roger and James, for instance 
 — and when we see these timbers joined together, and see 
 they exactly make the frame of a house or a mill, all the 
 tenons and mortices exactly fitting, and all the lengths and 
 proportions of the different pieces exactly adapted 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 can see the place in the frame exactly fitted and prepared 
 to yet bring such piece in — in such a case, we find it im- 
 possible to not 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 lick was struck. 
 
 There has prevailed among students of American letters a 
 notion that Lincoln was as a writer and speaker "plain home- 
 spun," and that his usual style was unadorned with figures of 
 speech and other rhetorical devices. It would be difficult to find 
 a plainer misstatement of Lincoln's style than the comment of V. 
 L. Parrington in Main Currents in American Thought: "His usual 
 style was plain homespun, clear and convincing, but bare of 
 imagery and lacking distinction of phrase. . . . Few men who 
 have risen to enduring eloquence have been so little indebted to 
 rhetoric." Study of Lincoln's works must find otherwise. 
 
 Lincoln's use of figures of speech is one of his most distinctive 
 stylistic traits. He is consistently and naturally figurative. His pithy 
 quips, his almost legendary stories, and his most serious analyses 
 as well as his poetic passages constantly reveal this trait. In 
 many instances his figure provides the texture of his thought so 
 unobtrusively that a casual reader may not even be aware of 
 metaphor. Although Lincoln tends to use figures more rather than 
 
26 ABRAHAM LINCOLN: 
 
 less than most orators of the time, in his later works he employs 
 them, if not less often, at least less obviously than in his early 
 works, and during his middle period they become more effective 
 and dramatic, though they remain consistently natural, even 
 homely, in quality. Even his finest figures in his later writings are 
 couched in terms that will appeal to the common man. Metaphor 
 in the grand manner of Webster's famous peroration to the "Reply 
 to Hayne" Lincoln seldom uses, and in early speeches where he 
 does employ something of the sort, he seems merely to be 
 experimenting with a technique not compatible with his own 
 style. 
 
 Yet one can scarcely agree with Daniel Kilham Dodge's sum- 
 mary opinion expressed in his monograph, Abraham Lincoln: The 
 Evolution of His Literary Style, that "Lincoln's figures almost 
 always serve a useful purpose in making an obscure thought 
 clear and a clear thought clearer." The implication of a purely 
 utilitarian motive hardly does justice to Lincoln's imaginative 
 quality of mind. Herndon insisted, and others have agreed, that 
 Lincoln had "no sense of the beautiful except in a moral world." 
 Such a limitation means nothing in an experimental or scientific 
 sense, but even if we grant it we need not presume that Lincoln 
 was oblivious to all but the utilitarian advantage in analogy and 
 metaphor. All of Lincoln's contemporaries did not agree with 
 Herndon. Stephen A. Douglas, as we shall see, thought Lincoln 
 loved figurative language for its own sake. 
 
 Lincoln's figures are of two kinds: those which he uses as 
 a method of explanation or a basis for drawing inference, and 
 those which he uses as rhetorical assertions for purposes of persua- 
 sion. Only the first type are primarily utilitarian, and then seldom 
 in the sense that Dodge supposes. If Lincoln had been writing 
 scientific treatises, such an employment of analogy might have been 
 very useful, though its usefulness would have diminished as the 
 inferences drawn tended to escape from the realm of unquestioned 
 fact. But, since Lincoln was making political speeches, this type 
 of figure often became more effective in discomfiting his opponent, 
 as the inferences drawn from it tended farther from the un- 
 questioned facts. In Lincoln's speeches the inferential values of 
 such figures nearly always seem to outweigh their explanatory 
 
HIS SPEECHES AND WRITINGS 27 
 
 values, and as this is more or less evident in any particular figure, 
 Dodge's comment seems less or more true. 
 
 If we examine Lincoln's figure in the "House Divided 
 Speech" as he carries it through the various stages of inference, 
 we shall very likely understand why Douglas sarcastically charged 
 in the "Ottawa Debate": "He studied that out — prepared that 
 one sentence with the greatest care, committed it to memory . . . 
 to show how pretty it is. His vanity is wounded because I will not 
 go into that beautiful figure of his about the building of a 
 house. . . ." Douglas replied in the only way one could reply — 
 with sarcasm — to an effective figure of speech which carried in 
 careful phrases an unforgettable image with implications of 
 something more than rational analysis could maintain. If this 
 figure works toward "making a clear thought clearer," that 
 clearness is like the glass near the edge of a lens, capable of dis- 
 torting vision rather than improving it. Lincoln's analogy, we may 
 admit, was effective in explaining to his hearers how the Dred 
 Scott decision and the Nebraska Bill were working together for 
 the extension of slavery, but its further and more important imme- 
 diate implication that Douglas was deliberately working for the 
 extension of slavery seemed to Douglas a distortion of truth. Yet 
 it was true, as Lincoln saw it, that Douglas's political activity did in 
 fact facilitate the extension of slavery, and as Lincoln had observed 
 of another figure of speech with political consequences, "the 
 point — the power to hurt — of all figures, consists in the truthful- 
 ness of their application."* 
 
 Lincoln's repeated use of the figure in later speeches leaves 
 no doubt as to his reason for making it. The pressure which this 
 figure brought upon Douglas, through constant repetition, set 
 the scene for the "Freeport Heresy." Douglas had no rhetorical 
 technique other than sarcasm with which to combat the implica- 
 tion, and sarcasm was insufficient. Then came Lincoln's ques- 
 tion: "Can the people of a United States Territory . . . exclude 
 slavery from its limits . . . ?" Asked and answered earlier with- 
 out the preparation, it could never have produced the impact 
 that it did at Freeport. Lincoln knew Douglas's answer before 
 
 * See "The Presidential Question: Speech in the United States House of Repre- 
 sentatives," July 27, 1848. 
 
28 ABRAHAM LINCOLN: 
 
 he asked the question. Douglas had said over and over that 
 slavery could not exist without favorable local legislation. So did 
 nearly everyone else know it. The only purpose Lincoln could 
 have had in asking it was to destroy forever any possibility of 
 Douglas's effecting a rapprochement with Southern Democrats. 
 Under the implications of Lincoln's figure, constantly pressed, 
 Douglas was constrained to make a statement of opinion that, 
 although it immediately cleared his way in the senatorial contest, 
 eventually cost him the Presidency. 
 
 It would be difficult to find in all history a precise instance in 
 which rhetoric played a more important role in human destiny 
 than it did in Lincoln's speeches of 1858. 
 
 In Chicago on July 10, after listening to Douglas's speech 
 on the night before, Lincoln delivered his second important speech 
 of the campaign. And again in Springfield on July 17, he covered 
 much the same ground. In these two speeches he explained his 
 declaration of belief that the country would become either all 
 slave or all free. It was not, as Douglas had charged, a statement 
 of wish for or purpose toward disunion, but rather an unpleasant 
 prediction that arose from his interpretation of the direction of 
 political events. He argued again that Douglas's "popular sover- 
 eignty" had been emasculated by the Dred Scott decision. He 
 continued his attack on the moral indifference of Douglas's "don't 
 care" attitude toward the extension of slavery. He admitted that, of 
 course, the Declaration of Independence was not meant as a 
 statement of fact that all men were "equal in all respects." The 
 statement was rather an ideal principle to be worked toward: 
 "I say in relation to the principle that all men are created equal, 
 let it be as nearly reached as we can." In his discussion of this 
 principle in the latter part of the "Chicago Speech" he reached 
 high points of persuasion and beauty of language. He concluded 
 the second "Springfield Speech" by renewing his charges of con- 
 spiracy, which Douglas had up to this time ignored. Then came 
 the challenge to debate and Douglas's acceptance. 
 
 The debates are on the whole inferior to Lincoln's preceding 
 speeches, but for the purpose of comparing and contrasting the 
 rhetorical effectiveness of the two men they offer the student 
 perhaps a better opportunity than the earlier speeches, and for 
 
HIS SPEECHES AND WRITINGS 29 
 
 that reason the first debate at Ottawa has been included in the 
 selections in this volume as representative of the lot. This debate 
 was in a sense the climax of the campaign viewed from Lincoln's 
 side. In it, as we have already noted, he finally forced Douglas to 
 take notice of the charge of conspiracy and particularly of the 
 "beautiful figure." In the next debate at Freeport came the denoue- 
 ment in the form of a list of questions, and among them the one 
 that Douglas answered to his eventual undoing. 
 
 After the seventh and last debate at Alton on October 15, 
 Lincoln continued making speeches up to the end, and on Octo- 
 ber 30 concluded in Springfield before "a giant Republican rally.'' 
 This speech, in style and emotional context, is a foretaste of 
 the later lyric mood of the "Farewell Address," "Gettysburg 
 Address," and the conclusions of the two "Inaugural" addresses. 
 The sentences flow easily with a subtle cadence, unobtrusive but 
 poetic. The diction is simple, but the words play a rich pattern of 
 assonance and alliteration. 
 
 My friends, to-day closes the discussions of this canvass. 
 The planting and the culture are over; and there remains 
 but the preparation, and the harvest. 
 
 I stand here surrounded by friends — some political, all 
 personal friends, I trust. May I be indulged, in this closing 
 scene, to say a few words of myself. I have borne a labori- 
 ous, and, in some respects to myself, a painful part in the 
 contest. Through all, I have neither assailed, nor wrestled 
 with any part of the Constitution. The legal right of the 
 Southern people to reclaim their fugitives I have constantly 
 admitted. The legal right of Congress to interfere with their 
 institution in the states, I have constantly denied. In resisting 
 the spread of slavery to new territory, and with that, what 
 appears to me to be a tendency to subvert the first principle 
 of free government itself my whole effort has consisted. To 
 the best of my judgment I have labored for, and not against 
 the Union. As I have not felt, so I have not expressed any 
 harsh sentiment towards our Southern brethren. I have 
 constantly declared, as I really believed, the only difference 
 between them and us, is the difference of circumstances. 
 
30 ABRAHAM LINCOLN: 
 
 I have meant to assail the motives of no party, or indi- 
 vidual; and if I have, in any instance (of which I am not 
 conscious ) departed from my purpose, I regret it. 
 
 I have said that in some respects the contest has been 
 painful to me. Myself, and those with whom I act have 
 been constantly accused of a purpose to destroy the Union; 
 and bespattered with every imaginable odious epithet; and 
 some who were friends, as it were but yesterday have made 
 themselves most active in this. I have cultivated patience, 
 and made no attempt at a retort. 
 
 Ambition has been ascribed to me. God knows how 
 sincerely I prayed from the first that this field of ambition 
 might not be opened. I claim no insensibility to political 
 honors; but today could the Missouri restriction be restored, 
 and the whole slavery question replaced on the old ground of 
 "toleration" by necessity where it exists, with unyielding 
 hostility to the spread of it, on principle, I would, in con- 
 sideration, gladly agree, that Judge Douglas should never be 
 out, and I never in, an office, so long as we both or either, 
 live. 
 
 VI 
 
 Although Lincoln lost the ensuing election, the national 
 publicity given the debates and his other speeches placed him 
 among the few top leaders of the Republican party. As shown by 
 his letters during the next few months, he was not immediately 
 aware that he had become important among the various prospec- 
 tive Republican candidates for the next presidential election, but 
 he worked consistently for party harmony and neglected few 
 opportunities to keep himself before the public, filling political 
 speaking engagements during 1859 in Ohio, Indiana, Wisconsin, 
 Iowa, Missouri, and Kansas. These speeches repeated most of the 
 arguments he had used in the campaign of 1858. 
 
 He was also in demand for popular lectures and even pre- 
 pared a somewhat colorless disquisition on the growth of Ameri- 
 can civilization under the title, "Discoveries, Inventions and Im- 
 provements." Although he delivered it a number of times, he 
 
HIS SPEECHES AND WRITINGS 31 
 
 never thought much of it, and in truth it did not measure up to 
 his other nonpolitical address delivered before the Wisconsin 
 State Agricultural Fair on September 30, 1859. Lincoln was not 
 at his best in making speeches for their own sake, but on this 
 occasion he had in the general theme of agricultural improve- 
 ment and the dignity of labor something about which he knew 
 well from his own experience and felt deeply from his own nature. 
 The- passages on labor are perhaps the most significant utter- 
 ances made on that subject by any important political figure of 
 the era: 
 
 The world is agreed that labor is the source from which 
 human wants are mainly supplied. There is no dispute upon 
 this point. From this point, however, men immediately di- 
 verge. Much disputation is maintained as to the best way of 
 applying and controlling the labor element. By some it is 
 assumed that labor is available only in connection with capi- 
 tal — that nobody labors, unless somebody else, owning capi- 
 tal, somehow, by use of that capital induces him to do it . . . 
 
 But another class of reasoners hold the opinion that there 
 is no such relation between capital and labor as assumed; 
 and that there is no such thing as a freeman being fatally 
 fixed for life in the condition of a hired laborer; that both 
 these assumptions are false, and all inferences from them 
 groundless. They hold that labor is prior to, and independent 
 of, capital; that in fact, capital is the fruit of labor, and 
 could never have existed if labor had not first existed; that 
 labor can exist without capital, but that capital could never 
 have existence without labor. Hence, they hold that labor 
 is the superior — greatly the superior — of capital. 
 
 They do not deny that there is, and probably always 
 will be, a relation between labor and capital. The error, as 
 they hold, is in assuming that the whole labor of the world 
 exists within that relation . . . 
 
 ... As each man has one mouth to be fed, and one pair 
 of hands to furnish food, it was probably intended that that 
 particular pair of hands should feed that particular mouth — 
 that each head is the natural guardian, director and pro- 
 
32 ABRAHAM LINCOLN: 
 
 tector of the hands and mouth inseparably connected with 
 it; and that being so, every head should be cultivated and 
 improved, by whatever will add to its capacity for perform- 
 ing its charge. In one word, free labor insists on universal 
 education. 
 
 His growing popularity as a speaker brought him an invita- 
 tion to speak in New York before the Young Men's Central Repub- 
 lican Union. The place was Cooper Institute. Evidently Lincoln 
 prepared the address for this occasion with more care than he had 
 given to any speech prior to this except the "House Divided 
 Speech" of two years earlier. In architecture it is if anything the 
 more carefully balanced of the two, and in dignity and precision of 
 expression it is fully the equal of the other, but it lacks perhaps 
 something of the dramatic fire with which the earlier speech 
 burns. The earlier speech is superior as a whole in imagination and 
 feeling, and the later is more consistently polished and perfect 
 in all its paragraphs and sentences. In no prior address, speech, 
 or letter are Lincoln's stylistic effects more carefully calculated. 
 His handling of the sentence taken as a text from Douglas's 
 "Speech at Columbus, Ohio" is for repetitive effect one of his 
 most skillful and adroit rhetorical successes. His straight exposi- 
 tion of the attitude taken toward slavery-extension by the found- 
 ing fathers is excellent historical analysis based on painstaking 
 factual research. His tempered statement of Republican prin- 
 ciples, although a repetition of what he had said often in 1858, is 
 in succinctness and force perhaps his best statement up to this 
 time. His employment of balanced structure in the paragraph 
 which clinches the political point of this analysis and concludes 
 the first part of the address is rhetorically the high-water mark 
 of the piece: 
 
 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 argu- 
 ment which he can. But he has no right to mislead others, 
 who have less access to history, and less leisure to study it, 
 
HIS SPEECHES AND WRITINGS 33 
 
 into the false belief that "our fathers who framed the Govern- 
 ment under which we live" were of the same opinion — thus 
 substituting 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 Constitu- 
 tion, 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 declaring 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 ques- 
 tion just as well, and even better, than we do now." 
 
 The dramatic analogy of the highwayman, with which he exposed 
 the irrationality of the more intemperate secessionists, is one of 
 his most successful figures: 
 
 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 abide 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 
 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!" 
 
 His peroration is one of his most effective and memorable con- 
 clusions : 
 
 Neither let us be slandered from our duty by false accu- 
 sations against us, nor frightened from it by menaces of 
 destruction 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. 
 
34 ABRAHAM LINCOLN: 
 
 VII 
 
 To survey the body of Lincoln's writings during the years of 
 his Presidency, commenting on each significant letter, message, 
 proclamation, or address in chronological order, is perhaps less 
 desirable at this point than a discussion of Lincoln's style in these 
 respective types, with some observations on significant examples of 
 each; for, in fact, one could otherwise hardly decide which pieces 
 to omit from consideration on principle of merit or interest. Among 
 students with a newly acquired interest in Lincoln's writings as 
 well as among inveterate admirers, there is so much diversity of 
 taste and individual preference for one piece over another that 
 one with a catholic taste may well be amazed at the bias with 
 which students of Lincoln privately claim top honor for their 
 favorite passages. The wide range of choice afforded by the writ- 
 ings of the years 1861-1865 has not tended to discourage this 
 diversity of preference. 
 
 Particularly difficult is the problem of selecting the best of 
 Lincoln's letters. The most famous of all his letters of condolence, 
 the "Letter to Mrs. Bixby," although it is undoubtedly a gem, 
 can nearly be matched in artistic effect with the "Letter to Colonel 
 Ellsworth's Parents," May 25, 1861, or the "Letter to Fanny Mc- 
 Cullough," December 23, 1862. 
 
 The differences between these three masterpieces are not 
 differences in literary success and felicity of phrasing so much as 
 differences in purpose and effect. The "Letter to Mrs. Bixby," is 
 a public letter, written, as were many of Lincoln's letters, with the 
 probability of publication in mind, to a woman whom Lincoln 
 knew only through War Department records as a bereaved mother, 
 and about whose sons he knew only the supposed facts stated in 
 the letter. His phraseology, though felicitous in place, might have 
 seemed pompously insincere in the "Letter to Fanny McCullough." 
 Likewise, the personal, fatherly tone and the pleading simplicity 
 of phrase in the "Letter to Fanny McCullough" would have been 
 intolerable in the "Letter to Mrs. Bixby." The eulogy of Colonel 
 Ellsworth to his parents is as fine in its way as either of the other 
 two, and in purpose and effect holds a middle ground between 
 them. Lincoln had known Colonel Ellsworth well as a student 
 
HIS SPEECHES AND WRITINGS 35 
 
 in his own law office, had admired and loved him, and in this letter 
 wrote his noblest tribute to a friend. 
 
 But when all is said, the "Letter to Mrs. Bixby" is not likely 
 to give way to either of the others in popular appeal, for like the 
 "Gettysburg Address" it so links the private theme of sorrow 
 with the public theme of preservation of freedom, that the letter 
 is in itself an emblem of a national ideal. As Carl Sandburg has 
 poetically phrased it, "Here was a piece of the American Bible. 
 'The cherished memory of the loved and lost' — these were the 
 blood-colored syllables of a sacred music." 
 
 The distinction between Lincoln's public and private style 
 must be kept in mind likewise in reading his letters and telegrams 
 to government officials, army officers, and various public figures. 
 On the one hand Lincoln could write a public masterpiece like 
 the "Letter to Horace Greeley," August 22, 1862, and on the other 
 hand a private masterpiece like the "Letter to General Joseph 
 Hooker," January 23, 1863. The one he expected to be published, 
 the other he expected only Hooker to read. Lincoln found an 
 inimitable manner of writing for each specific occasion that arose. 
 
 The degree to which his letters are informal and personal 
 varies considerably with the occasion. The sequence of letters 
 and telegrams to General McClellan runs from strictly formal to 
 informal and personal, and the variations in tone from one oc- 
 casion to the next make the sequence the most interesting group 
 of letters written by Lincoln to one man. Lincoln used every 
 manner and device he knew in his attempt to handle McClellan, 
 and all failed. His letters are a fascinating literary triumph in the 
 midst of executive failure. Certain of his letters, such as the 
 "Letter to James C. Conkling," August 26, 1863, are in effect 
 public addresses and as such display qualities of argument and 
 style which are typical of Lincoln's addresses of this period rather 
 than of his letters either formal or informal. In logic and in 
 rhetorical effectiveness they are in no way inferior to the best of 
 the addresses. 
 
 It may be said that during his Presidency, although he often 
 wrote hurriedly and without revising, Lincoln never wrote a bad 
 letter. A study of every letter included in this volume, its purpose, 
 and its adaptation of language to that purpose, will reveal even 
 
36 ABRAHAM LINCOLN: 
 
 in the less known pieces as high a degree of felicity in phrasing, 
 and as remarkable an adaptation of tone to theme, as can be 
 found in the more famous letters. Two days before he wrote the 
 famous "Letter to Mrs. Bixby," he composed a short "Letter to 
 General Rosecrans," November 19, 1864, which in its limited 
 sphere is as succinct, as delicately worded, and as definitive an 
 achievement of language as Lincoln ever composed. Similarly, two 
 days after the excellent public "Letter to Erastus Corning and 
 Others," June 12, 1863, he penned a short "Telegram to General 
 Hooker" which in its small way is no less an artistic triumph: "If 
 the head of Lee's army is at Martinsburg, and the tail of it on the 
 Plank road between Fredericksburg & Chancellors ville, the animal 
 must be very slim somewhere — Could you not break him?" In 
 short, even Lincoln's most casual pieces bear the inimitable marks 
 of literary excellence. 
 
 VIII 
 
 In his official proclamations and executive orders Lincoln 
 presents a peculiar problem to the biographer and critic. Many 
 of them are of little or no literary significance, being legal docu- 
 ments in precise legal phrase properly utilitarian and without 
 stylistic individuality. Even the "Emancipation Proclamation" 
 has in it little that is distinctly Lincolnian. There is, however, in 
 the proclamations of thanksgiving and fast days, a style of ex- 
 pression which has become the subject of some discussion be- 
 cause it is peculiar to these pieces and is not generally found in 
 any of Lincoln's other writings. Since these proclamations are 
 jointly signed by Seward as Secretary of State and by Lincoln as 
 President, and since the facts concerning their composition are 
 not fully known, the conjecture has been made that Seward wrote 
 them. Joseph H. Barrett, an early biographer of Lincoln, first 
 made the conjecture, but Nicolay and Hay took no notice of it and 
 included the proclamations without question in the Complete 
 Works. Daniel Kilham Dodge in his admirable little book, 
 Abraham Lincoln: Master of Words, comments on the conjec- 
 ture but arrives at no definite conclusion, though he seems to 
 assume Lincoln's authorship, while recognizing the possible in- 
 
HIS SPEECHES AND WRITINGS 37 
 
 fluence of The Book of Common Prayer on the style of the proc- 
 lamations, and the fact that Seward was an Episcopalian. The 
 chief stylistic trait which sets these pieces apart from Lincoln's 
 other writings is the use of words and phrases in pairs, as for 
 example in the following passage from the "Proclamation of a 
 National Fast Day," August 12, 1861: 
 
 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 offences, and for a blessing upon their 
 present and prospective action: 
 
 This is a general characteristic of phraseology in legal docu- 
 ments as well as in The Book of Common Prayer, but in legal 
 documents the effect is, according to legal tradition at least, to 
 make every statement incontestably clear, whereas in The Book of 
 Common Prayer the effect is primarily one of incantation. Ob- 
 viously, the effect in Lincoln's proclamations is nearer to that of 
 The Book of Common Prayer, but it does not therefore necessarily 
 follow that The Book of Common Prayer is the source of the 
 device. The fact that the proclamations as official pronounce- 
 ments are in their nature legal documents may well account for 
 Lincoln's use of a device with which he was thoroughly familiar 
 as a lawyer, and his use of it for rhetorical ends is only natural, 
 in view of the solemnity of the theme and the occasion. 
 
 The fact that none of the manuscripts of proclamations in- 
 cluded in this volume is entirely in Lincoln's hand neither adds 
 nor subtracts evidence, since it was customary for the official 
 copy to which signatures and seal were to be affixed to be en- 
 grossed by an official scribe. 
 
 In these proclamations, then, it may be supposed that we 
 have examples of a formal style which Lincoln adopted for the 
 specific purpose, and which for sonorous effect and solemn 
 rhythm is not less interesting than, though different from, the 
 style of his addresses. In his early writings, as we have seen, 
 
38 ABRAHAM LINCOLN: 
 
 Lincoln experimented with various forms of writing and several 
 styles, and it is only logical to assume that in this later period, 
 when confronted with the necessity of composing an expression 
 which required something distinct from his usual style of public 
 address, Lincoln adroitly made use of a device long familiar to 
 him. 
 
 IX 
 
 Presidential Messages to Congress have rarely ever been 
 noted for literary significance. Their very purpose and nature 
 limit their content to summary of national progress and recom- 
 mendations for congressional action. And of all Lincoln's writings 
 aside from legal papers and executive orders, his messages are 
 the most strictly utilitarian and necessarily prosaic. In spite of 
 these considerations, several of Lincoln's messages so transcend 
 the limitations of the occasion as to be worthy of inclusion among 
 his best writings. With one exception they suffer generally in 
 comparison with his great addresses, but in certain passages such 
 as the conclusion to the "Annual Message" of December 1, 1862, 
 they reach peaks of eloquence unsurpassed in the annals of 
 history. 
 
 Above all, the messages to Congress demonstrate again the 
 rhetorical care and precision with which Lincoln composed even 
 his most factual statements, and his feeling for exact coloring of 
 phrase and choice of word. The well-known incident concerning 
 his use of the term "sugar-coated" in the "Message to Congress 
 in Special Session," July 4, 1861, exemplifies the care with which 
 he chose his words. The public printer John D. Defrees objected 
 to the lack of dignity in the term as used in the sentence, "With 
 rebellion thus sugar-coated they have been drugging the public 
 mind of their section for more than thirty years . . ." To this Lincoln 
 is reported to have replied, "Well, Defrees, if you think the time 
 will ever come when people will not understand what 'sugar- 
 coated' means, I'll alter it; otherwise I think I'll let it go." Like his 
 many homely but effective figures of speech this one demanded 
 simple and idiomatic language, and it was Defrees, rather than 
 Lincoln, whose feeling for diction was awry. 
 
HIS SPEECHES AND WRITINGS 39 
 
 In this first "Message to Congress" Lincoln gave a new state- 
 ment of his philosophy of government as contained in the "First 
 Inaugural Address/' but without the pleading and palliation of 
 that address and with a vigorous statement of courage and con- 
 viction in the task of preserving the authority of the national 
 government. On the whole the message is nearer in purpose and 
 effect to his speeches and addresses than are his later messages. 
 This is in part, perhaps, the result of the fact that it was deliv- 
 ered on July 4, and was an address to the nation as well as to 
 Congress. In all his major messages, however, Lincoln tends to 
 keep a tone of public speech, though they were not delivered in 
 person, and in fact generally preserves the architecture of the 
 oration, especially in the peroration. The conclusion of this mes- 
 sage, though not so memorable as the peroration of the "Annual 
 Message/' December 1, 1862, is effective and somewhat reminis- 
 cent of the short peroration of the "Address at Cooper Institute." 
 
 The "Annual Message to Congress," December 3, 1861, aside 
 from discussion of specific problems of government, has as its 
 central theme the importance of free labor in a democracy. The 
 student may well compare Lincoln's discussion of labor and 
 capital, as well as his recommendations in regard to a department 
 of agriculture, with the ideas propounded in the "Address before 
 the Wisconsin Agricultural Society" in 1859. In spite of its 
 factuality, the second half of this message contains several in- 
 spired passages, and is consistently of high literary merit, though 
 its opening and its close are rhetorically less striking than those of 
 the next "Annual Message." 
 
 The "Annual Message to Congress," December 1, 1862, is 
 Lincoln's finest composition of this type. In many respects it is his 
 masterpiece, approximating both of the "Inaugural" addresses in 
 depth of conviction and even surpassing them in breadth of con- 
 ception and height of imagination. Perhaps no American living at 
 the time save Walt Whitman ever expressed so large a vision of 
 the future of American democracy, the magnitude of its geo- 
 graphic and economic potentialities, and the infinitude of its social 
 destiny in the quest for human liberty. In this huge scope Lincoln 
 saw the immediate problems underlying the Civil War — Union 
 and Emancipation — in their true perspective as subordinate to 
 
40 ABRAHAM LINCOLN: 
 
 the necessity of preserving not merely the words of the Declara- 
 tion of Independence, but its prophetic truth. In the largest sense 
 Lincoln sought not simply to preserve the Union or to free the 
 slaves, but rather to keep open the way to future amelioration in 
 the lot of all humanity and to the progressive achievement of 
 democracy in all human society. 
 
 The message reveals how truly Lincoln appreciated the 
 dramatic course of human events. Of all his prior speeches, only 
 the "House Divided Speech" of 1858 approaches it in the clair- 
 voyance with which Lincoln states the meaning of his era as a 
 turning point in the long quest for human dignity. From the 
 opening paragraph to the splendid peroration, the message is 
 charged with an electric feeling for the drama of a crisis in which 
 the citizens of the United States "shall nobly save, or meanly lose, 
 the last best hope of earth." 
 
 In spite of its formidable array of facts and figures and the 
 gray steel of its logical armor, the whole message is alive with 
 the dignity of the inspired word. If one thinks only of the "Gettys- 
 burg Address" and a few other short, lyrical passages, it is hard to 
 estimate the man's literary stature in comparison with the great 
 orators of other times; for these lyric speeches are scarcely com- 
 parable, being unique. But in judging this message the student 
 may with reason bring as a touchstone the best of Edmund 
 Burke, or Cicero, or Demosthenes, and yet find Lincoln's metal 
 too pure to assay by such a test. If one would try, let him 
 select his touchstone and then assay the concluding paragraph 
 of this message: 
 
 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 
 
HIS SPEECHES AND WRITINGS 41 
 
 — honorable alike in what we give, and what we preserve. 
 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 fol- 
 lowed, the world will forever applaud, and God must forever 
 bless. 
 
 X 
 
 Lincoln's numerous addresses, beginning with the "Farewell 
 Address" and continuing through the "Second Inaugural Address," 
 display little in the way of stylistic traits which differs essentially 
 from the characteristics of his earlier work, except in beauty. As 
 has already been noted, it is not in technical command of style so 
 much as it is in power of feeling and imagination that the ad- 
 dresses of this last period surpass by all odds those of his middle 
 period. 
 
 The new intensity seems to have been more the result of 
 internal experience than of external influence. It was a common 
 observation among Lincoln's friends that he was cold and un- 
 emotional. Also it is true that no other orator of his time was more 
 coldly logical, more careful of a self-imposed restraint, than Lin- 
 coln was from 1854 to 1861. Upon his departure from Springfield 
 in 1861 a note of fathomless emotion, at once heroic and simple, 
 sounded for the first time in his "Farewell Address." This note 
 was sounded again in the prose poem which he made of Seward's 
 suggested peroration for the "First Inaugural Address"; and 
 thenceforth, restrained but full, it suffused the more important 
 lyric utterances of his years in Washington, but above all the 
 "Gettysburg Address" and the "Second Inaugural Address." 
 
 It has been said that Lincoln's art is always applied art, 
 utilitarian in purpose and held strictly to the matter in hand. If 
 this implies that it does not therefore reach the heights of 
 imagination to which we conventionally expect only belletristic 
 art to attain, nothing could be farther from the truth. And yet, 
 perhaps, even in the deep-moving cadence and high imagination 
 of the "Gettysburg Address" and the "Second Inaugural Address," 
 he considered his prose chiefly as a means to an end, recognizing 
 
42 ABRAHAM LINCOLN: 
 
 that in an emotional crisis of national scope the truest appeal 
 could not be made to the intellect alone. And because he had 
 early learned to eschew the illusion of emotionalism, he was able 
 in his great hour to plumb depths hitherto rarely fathomed by ora- 
 tory. 
 
 The emergence of this new feeling was significantly coin- 
 cident with his assumption of what he seemed to consider his 
 supreme task — the preservation of the Union, and with it 
 democracy. His utterances regarding slavery, in fact, his words on 
 all other subjects, fine as many of them are, fall into place near 
 or far from the high words in which he defended and pleaded for 
 democracy as symbolized in the Union. Alexander Stephens once 
 said that the Union with Lincoln rose in sentiment to the "sub- 
 limity of a religious mysticism." The "Gettysburg Address" is 
 excellent literary evidence in support of Stephens's opinion, for 
 it reveals Lincoln's worship of the Union as the symbol of an 
 ideal yet to be realized. 
 
 Lincoln's problem at Gettysburg was to do two things: to 
 commemorate the past and to prophesy for the future. To do these 
 things he took the theme dearest to his audience, honor for the 
 heroic dead sons and fathers, and combined it with the theme 
 nearest to his own heart, the preservation of democracy. Out of 
 this double theme grew his poetic metaphor of birth, death, and 
 spiritual rebirth, of the life of man and the life of the nation. 
 To it he brought the fervor of devoutly religious belief. Democ- 
 racy was to Lincoln a religion, and he wanted it to be in a real 
 sense the religion of his audience. Thus he combined an elegiac 
 theme with a patriotic theme, skillfully blending the hope of 
 eternal life with the hope of eternal democracy. 
 
 Above all Lincoln believed that "all men are created equal," 
 in the only way that a mind as coldly logical as his could believe 
 in it. Just how he believed it, is indicated by his use of one word, 
 proposition. This word has proved a stumbling block for some 
 readers of the "Gettysburg Address." Matthew Arnold is reported, 
 probably inaccurately, to have read as far as "dedicated to the 
 proposition" and stopped. Charles Sumner said that at first he did 
 not like the word, but that he later decided it was satisfactory. 
 Yet the word proposition was inevitable for Lincoln. He often 
 
HIS SPEECHES AND WRITINGS 43 
 
 tried to use his words as exactly as a mathematician uses his 
 formulae. By his own account he had "studied and nearly 
 mastered'' Euclid, and hence we may be sure that he used the 
 word naturally in the logician's sense: a statement to be debated, 
 verified, proved. Thus democracy, as an active, living thing, 
 meant to Lincoln the verification or the proving of the proposi- 
 tion to which its very existence was in the beginning dedicated. 
 Eighty-seven years had gone into the proving, the Civil War had 
 come at a critical stage in the argument, the Union Armies at 
 Gettysburg had won an immediate victory, and the affirmation 
 that "all men are created equal" was still a live rather than a dead 
 issue. It was still a proposition open to argument and inviting 
 proof, but not on any account one that had already been proved. 
 The further proof was for "us the living, to be dedicated here to 
 the unfinished work which they who fought here have thus far so 
 nobly advanced." 
 
 It was thus that Lincoln believed in democracy, as a living 
 thing striving toward truth, not as an accomplished fact nor 
 as a meaningless form of words incapable of proof. He had 
 said some years before, "the Declaration of Independence con- 
 templated the progressive improvement in the condition of all 
 men." And again, "I say in relation to the principle that all 
 men are created equal let it be as nearly reached as we can." 
 Down through the years, again and again, there had appeared in 
 his speeches and letters this central concept of progressive im- 
 provement in the condition of mankind. And at Gettysburg 
 he took the occasion to reaffirm his belief in the necessity of 
 striving on. 
 
 So it was no accident that, as he thought on the past life of 
 American democracy, his words and allusions began, in his very 
 first sentence, calling to mind a haunting phrase out of the Old 
 Testament: "the days of our years are three score and ten," and 
 with it the symbolic act of consecration traditionally observed of 
 old by Hebrew and Christian, dedicating their children to the 
 service of God. And thus he wrote, "Fourscore and seven years 
 ago our fathers brought forth on this continent a new nation, 
 conceived in liberty, and dedicated to the proposition that all 
 men are created equal." 
 
44 ABRAHAM LINCOLN: 
 
 But the "new nation" had in eighty-four years grown old. It 
 was already thinking too much in terms of the past. The propo- 
 sition to which the founding fathers had dedicated it must not 
 mean anything new. Although the proposition had specifically 
 stated all men, the laws of the nation had insisted that it had not 
 meant all men; it had meant only white men; it must not mean 
 all men. The war had come, and with it the death of that old 
 nation, and the birth of a new. Its death was at Gettysburg, sym- 
 bolized in the graves of those "who here gave their lives that that 
 nation might live." Its life, too, was at Gettysburg, symbolized in 
 Lincoln's audience: "It is for us the living, rather, to be dedicated 
 here . . ." 
 
 The key words of the "Gettysburg Address" are three simple 
 ones, two pronouns and an adverb : they, we, here. With his usual 
 practice Lincoln repeats them, emphasizing again and again 
 what he wanted his audience to carry away. "It is for us the living 
 to be dedicated here to the unfinished work which they who 
 fought here have thus far so nobly advanced." 
 
 Repetition of sounds, as well as of words, is a marked charac- 
 teristic of Lincoln's style throughout his works. He often employs 
 in poetic flashes alliteration, assonance, and even rhyme sounds. 
 But in the "Gettysburg Address" these several varieties of repeti- 
 tion provide an effect unique in Lincoln's prose. With these 
 devices indicated by italics, the oral peculiarities of the first sen- 
 tence of the address become apparent: "Four score and seven 
 years ago our fathers brought forth on this continent a new nation, 
 conceived in liberty and dedicated to the proposition that all men 
 are created equal." The reader may, if he is interested, verify for 
 himself the remarkable extent to which Lincoln employs these 
 devices with fine effect in the remainder of the "Gettysburg 
 Address" as well as in many other passages. 
 
 Another variety of repetition, grammatical parallelism, is 
 equally characteristic of Lincoln's general style. He uses this 
 device with such frequency and variety that it seems to have 
 been a consistent habit of his mind to seek repetitive sequences 
 in both diction and sentence structure for the alignment of 
 his thought. That this was the result of his deliberate seeking 
 for an emphasis and simplicity which would prove effective with 
 
HIS SPEECHES AND WRITINGS 45 
 
 the common man is implied in the often repeated testimony given 
 by Herndon: "He used to bore me terribly by his methods, 
 processes, manners, etc., etc. Mr. Lincoln would doubly explain 
 things to me that needed no explanation. . . . Lincoln's ambition 
 in this line was this: he wanted to be distinctly understood by the 
 common people . . ." Herndon might have added that Lincoln's 
 favorite ideas — those which appear again and again in his works, 
 and which he turned over and over in his mind through months 
 and even years — and his most memorable phrases almost in- 
 variably betray this repetitive pattern. 
 
 On this basic pattern of parallelism in thought, Lincoln often 
 elaborates a distinctly poetical cadence, suggesting comparison 
 with the cadenced prose of the seventeenth century. Although 
 balanced rhythms with caesuras are indigenous to English poetry 
 and perhaps to English prose, Hebrew literature through the King 
 James Bible probably provided the literary examples which Lin- 
 coln knew best; and from his fondness for Biblical phraseology 
 he may have derived his mastery of the technique. 
 
 In his lyrical passages balance becomes most striking, as 
 it enriches his melancholy reflections or his fervent appeals 
 to the hearts of his audience. Within single sentences it occurs in 
 two forms: in a balanced sentence of two parts with a caesura 
 approximately midway; and in a series of phrases or clauses sepa- 
 rated by caesuras and grouped in balanced staves of two or more 
 phrase units. Within an individual phrase or clause internal 
 balance and parallelism often occur. A fine example of the first 
 type, with a pointed use of antithesis, is the following sentence 
 from the "Letter to J. H. Hackett," November 2, 1863: "I have 
 endured a great deal of ridicule without much malice; and have 
 received a great deal of kindness, not quite free from ridicule." 
 An example of the second type is the concluding sentence of the 
 "Second Inaugural Address": 
 
 With malice 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 nation'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 
 
46 ABRAHAM LINCOLN: 
 
 and cherish a just and lasting peace, among ourselves, and 
 with all nations. 
 
 Sometimes this rhythm pattern extends over an entire group 
 of sentences, or even the whole of a short address: the "Farewell 
 Address" for example. In this address there are two parallel pat- 
 terns, of thought and of rhythm. Within and between some sen- 
 tences they become identical. In others they merely coincide. 
 Between others there is a compensating balance of phrases and 
 pauses, although the sentence movement is reversed from peri- 
 odic to loose structure, . and the rhythm pattern is varied. The 
 only sentence which appears without a compensating rhythm 
 is the first, standing alone as a topic statement. Within this gen- 
 eral pattern of close parallels there is enough variety in individual 
 sentences to avoid monotony but sufficient regularity of rhythm to 
 produce distinct cadence, in some phrases approximating loose 
 metrical effect: 
 
 My Friends: No one, not in my situation, can appre- 
 ciate 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. 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. Trusting 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. 
 
 As these balanced rhythms sometimes approach meter in 
 their regularity, Lincoln tends to heighten their effect with an 
 occasional metrical phrase or sentence. Such phrases occur most 
 frequently in perorations or passages of high emotional content: 
 as for example, in a phrase of the "Second Inaugural Address": 
 ". . . to do all which may achieve and cherish a just and lasting 
 
HIS SPEECHES AND WRITINGS 47 
 
 peace among ourselves . . ."; or in a phrase of the "Gettysburg 
 Address": "The world will little note nor long remember what we 
 say . . . 
 
 Although Lincoln was without doubt consciously deliberate 
 in attention to sound, his choice of words seems to have been 
 guided primarily by other values: meaning more than sound or 
 connotation, concrete words more than abstract words, current 
 idiom more than authoritarian nicety. So much has been written 
 on the qualities of exactness, clarity, and simplicity in his style 
 that it seems unnecessary to stress them further. They are, how- 
 ever, the qualities of prose excellence wherever it is met with, 
 and as such hardly set Lincoln's style apart from that of Edmund 
 Burke, though they do, in their degree, set his style apart from 
 that of Stephen A. Douglas or that of William H. Seward. 
 Important and obvious as these qualities are, one may wonder 
 if Lincoln's memorable passages are not remembered today 
 for their unique effects of arrangement, rhythm, and sound as well 
 as for the intrinsic value of their thought. What Lincoln's own 
 answer might have been we may infer from the following com- 
 ment in one of Herndon's letters to Jesse W. Weik: 
 
 Mr. Lincoln's habits, methods of reading law, politics, 
 poetry, etc., etc., were to come into the office, pick up book, 
 newspaper, etc., and to sprawl himself out on the sofa, chairs, 
 etc., and read aloud, much to my annoyance. I have asked 
 him often why he did so and his invariable reply was: "I 
 catch the idea by two senses, for when I read aloud I hear 
 what is read and I see it; and hence two senses get it and 
 I remember it better, if I do not understand it better." 
 
 There is an old Arabian proverb which holds that "that is the 
 best description which makes the ear an eye." In his use of figures 
 of speech, sound, and rhythm, Lincoln illustrates again and again 
 the truth of the old saying, which he probably had never heard. 
 Lincoln's composition has so much the stamp of these pe- 
 culiarities even in the first draft of such a piece as the "Gettysburg 
 Address" that his revisions do little more than accent them. In 
 his revision of Secretary Seward's suggested peroration for the 
 "First Inaugural Address," however, he demonstrates the delib- 
 
48 
 
 ABRAHAM LINCOLN: 
 
 erate artistry of his style, bringing his own peculiar pattern of 
 thought and rhythm to another man's ideas, substituting his own 
 exact and concrete words for orotund and vague terms, removing 
 redundant and useless words, bringing closer together words that 
 will enhance through assonance and alliteration the sound effect 
 of the whole, and finally, changing a vague, transcendental 
 metaphor into a homely but poetic figure which will be understood 
 by every man who hears or reads it. 
 
 To label one of the following as Lincoln's is superfluous. 
 Every sentence declares its creator: 
 
 I close. 
 
 I am loth to close. 
 
 We are not, we must not be, 
 aliens or enemies, but fellow- 
 countrymen and brethren. 
 
 We are not enemies, but 
 friends. We must not be 
 enemies. 
 
 Although passion has strained Though passion may have 
 
 our bonds of affection too strained, it must not break our 
 
 hardly, they must not, I am bonds of affection, 
 sure they will not, be broken. 
 
 The mystic chords which, pro- 
 ceeding from so many battle- 
 fields and so many patriot 
 graves, pass through all the 
 hearts and all the 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 mystic chords of memory, 
 stretching from every battle- 
 field, and patriot grave, to every 
 living heart and hearth-stone, 
 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. 
 
 The study of Lincoln's works reveals the dignity of a great 
 mind and heart that seeks for Tightness in principle, fairness in 
 act, and beauty in utterance. He is a creative consciousness in 
 whom the reality of nineteenth century America yet lives and 
 breathes. As this reality is in Lincoln intrinsic, and his com- 
 munication of it inimitable, so his words endure, representative 
 
HIS SPEECHES AND WRITINGS 49 
 
 and symbolic with singular completeness of the epoch which 
 nurtured him. And so it is that he becomes as we study him, like 
 the classic literary figures of the past, something more than a 
 man. Time may dissipate the factual significance of his deeds, 
 both as private citizen and as President, but we must always 
 know and acknowledge the shining spirit that illumines his words. 
 
SELECTIONS, WITH NOTES 
 
 LIBRARY 
 
TO THE PEOPLE OF SANGAMO COUNTY: 
 POLITICAL ANNOUNCEMENT. MARCH 9, 1832 
 
 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 prin- 
 ciples of true republicanism, it becomes my duty to make known 
 to you — the people whom I propose to represent — my senti- 
 ments with regard to local affairs. 
 
 Time and experience have verified to a demonstration, the 
 public utility of internal improvements. That the poorest and 
 most thinly populated countries would be greatly benefitted by 
 the opening of good roads, and in the clearing of navigable 
 streams within their limits, is what no person will deny. But yet 
 it is folly to undertake works of this or any other kind, without 
 first knowing that we are able to finish them — as half finished 
 work generally proves to be labor lost. There cannot justly be 
 any objection to having rail roads and canals, any more than to 
 other good things, provided they cost nothing. The only objec- 
 tion is to paying for them; and the objection to paying arises from 
 the want of ability to pay. 
 
 With respect to the County of Sangamo, some more easy 
 means of communication than we now possess, for the purpose 
 of facilitating the task of exporting the surplus products of its 
 fertile soil, and importing necessary articles from abroad, are 
 indispensably necessary. A meeting has been held of the citizens 
 of Jacksonville, and the adjacent country, for the purpose of 
 deliberating and enquiring into the expediency of constructing 
 a railroad from some eligible point on the Illinois river, through 
 the town of Jacksonville, in Morgan county, to the town of 
 Springfield, in Sangamo county. This is, indeed, a very desirable 
 object. No other improvement that reason will justify us in hoping 
 
 53 
 
54 
 
 ABRAHAM LINCOLN: 
 
 for, can equal in utility the rail road. It is a never failing source 
 of communication, between places of business remotely situated 
 from each other. Upon the rail road the regular progress of 
 commercial intercourse is not interrupted by either high or low 
 water, or freezing weather, which are the principal difficulties 
 that render our future hopes of water communication precarious 
 and uncertain. Yet, however desirable an object the construction 
 of a rail road through our country may be; however high our 
 imaginations may be heated at thoughts of it — there is always 
 a heart appalling shock accompanying the account of its cost, 
 which forces; us to shrink from our pleasing anticipations. The 
 probable cost of this contemplated rail road is estimated at 
 $290,000; — the bare statement of which, in my opinion, is suffi- 
 cient to justify the belief, that the improvement of the Sangamo 
 river is an object much better suited to our infant resources. 
 
 Respecting this view, I think I may say, without the fear of 
 being contradicted, that its navigation may be rendered com- 
 pletely practicable, as high as the mouth of the South Fork, or 
 probably higher, to vessels of from 25 to 30 tons burthen, for at 
 least one half of all common years, and to vessels of much greater 
 burthen a part of that time. From my peculiar circumstances, it 
 is probable that for the last twelve months I have given as 
 particular attention to the stage of the water in this river as any 
 other person in the country. In the month of March, 1831, in 
 company with others, I commenced the building of a flat boat on 
 the Sangamo, and finished and took her out in the course of the 
 spring. Since that time, I have been concerned in the mill at New 
 Salem. These circumstances are sufficient evidence, that I have 
 not been very inattentive to the stages of the water. — The time 
 at which we crossed the mill dam, being in the last days of April, 
 the water was lower than it had been since the breaking of winter 
 in February, or than it was for several weeks after. The principal 
 difficulties we encountered in descending the river, were from 
 the drifted timber, which obstructions all know is not difficult to 
 be removed. Knowing almost precisely the height of water at that 
 time, I believe I am safe in saying that it has as often been higher 
 as lower since. 
 
 From this view of the subject, it appears that my calculations 
 
HIS SPEECHES AND WRITINGS 55 
 
 with regard to the navigation of the Sangamo cannot be un- 
 founded in reason; but whatever may be its natural advantages, 
 certain it is, that it never can be practically useful to any great 
 extent, without being greatly improved by art. The drifted timber, 
 as I have before mentioned, is the most formidable barrier to this 
 object. Of all parts of this river, none will require so much labor 
 in proportion, to make it navigable, as the last thirty or thirty-five 
 miles; and going with the meanderings of the channel, when we 
 are this distance above its mouth, we are only between twelve 
 and eighteen miles above Beardstown, in something near a 
 straight direction; and this route is upon such low ground as to 
 retain water in many places during the season, and in all parts 
 such as to draw two-thirds or three-fourths of the river water at 
 all high stages. 
 
 This route is upon prairie land the whole distance; — so that it 
 appears to me, by removing the turf, a sufficient width and dam- 
 ming up the old channel, the whole river in a short time would 
 wash its way through, thereby curtailing the distance, and in- 
 creasing the velocity of the current very considerably, while there 
 would be no timber upon the banks to obstruct its navigation in 
 future; and being nearly straight, the timber which might float in 
 at the head, would be apt to go clear through. There are also 
 many places above this where the river, in its zig zag course, 
 forms such complete peninsulas, as to be easier cut through at the 
 necks than to remove the obstructions from the bends — which, if 
 done, would also lessen the distance. 
 
 What the cost of this work would be, I am unable to say. It 
 is probable, however, it would not be greater than is common to 
 streams of the same length. Finally, I believe the improvement of 
 the Sangamo river, to be vastly important and highly desirable to 
 the people of this county; and if elected, any measure in the legis- 
 lature having this for its object, which may appear judicious, will 
 meet my approbation, and shall receive my support. 
 
 It appears that the practice of loaning money at exorbitant 
 rates of interest, has already been opened as a field for discussion; 
 so I suppose I may enter upon it without claiming 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 cor- 
 
56 ABRAHAM LINCOLN: 
 
 roding system, acting almost as prejudicial 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 setting a limit to the rates of 
 usury. A law for this purpose, I am of opinion, may be made 
 without materially injuring any class of people. In cases of ex- 
 treme necessity there could always be means found to cheat the 
 law, while in all other cases it would have its intended effect. 
 I would not favor the passage of a law upon this subject, which 
 might be very easily evaded. Let it be such that the labor and 
 difficulty of evading it, could only be justified in cases of the 
 greatest necessity. 
 
 Upon the subject of education, not presuming to dictate 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 moderate education, and 
 thereby be enabled to read the histories of his own and other 
 countries, by which he may duly appreciate the value of our free 
 institutions, appears to be an object of vital importance, even on 
 this account alone, to say nothing of the advantages and satisfac- 
 tion 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 the 
 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. 
 
HIS SPEECHES AND WRITINGS 57 
 
 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 thought. I may be wrong in regard to any or all of 
 them; but holding it a sound maxim, that it is better to be only 
 sometimes right, than at all times 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 
 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 gratify- 
 ing 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 to 
 recommend me. My case is thrown exclusively upon the inde- 
 pendent voters of this county, and if elected they will have con- 
 ferred 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 back ground, I have been too 
 familiar with disappointments to be very much chagrined. 
 
 Your friend and fellow-citizen, 
 
 A. Lincoln 
 
 New Salem, March 9, 1832. 
 
 Nicolay and Hay state that this piece was also 
 'printed as a political handbill. Although this may quite 
 probably be true, the present editor has not been able 
 to locate any other source than the Sangamo Journal. It 
 seems likely that Nicolay and Hay also used this Journal 
 text, for the deviations in their text from that of the 
 Journal are generally in the nature of debatable "im- 
 provements" of diction such as they habitually under- 
 took. 
 
 Lincoln's discussion of laws governing usury (para- 
 graph 8) has long been a matter for comment. A very 
 sensible suggestion made by H. B. Van Hoesen in The 
 
58 ABRAHAM LINCOLN*. 
 
 Humor of Lincoln and the Seriousness of His Biogra- 
 phers is that Lincoln's comments on "cases of extreme 
 necessity' is ironical humor of the sort common in Lin- 
 coln's speeches, but which is often missed in the printed 
 word, where inflections of voice made it obvious to an 
 audience. Recognizing the difficulty of controlling usury 
 when individuals are resolved to exploit the needs of 
 the borrower to the fullest extent, Lincoln indulges his 
 sardonic realism by making ironical reference to the 
 practical limitations which operate against legislating 
 morality. Certainly Lincoln is not engaging in what is 
 today known as e double-talk." His final sentence in the 
 paragraph makes clear his position, as well as his recog- 
 nition that in some circumstances the law will be evaded. 
 
 ANNOUNCEMENT OF POLITICAL VIEWS 
 IN SANGAMO JOURNAL. JUNE 13, 1836 
 
 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 who 
 are announced in the Journal, 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 burthens. Consequently I go for admitting 
 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 
 
HIS SPEECHES AND WRITINGS 59 
 
 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 proceeds of the sales of 
 the public lands to the several states, to enable our state, in 
 common with others, to dig canals and construct rail roads, with- 
 out borrowing money and paying 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 COLONEL ROBERT ALLEN 
 JUNE 21, 1836 
 
 New Salem, June 21, 1836. 
 Dear Col. 
 
 I am told that during my absence last week, you passed 
 through this place, and stated publicly, that you were in posses- 
 sion of a fact or facts, which, if known to the public, would 
 entirely destroy the prospects of N. W. Edwards and myself at 
 the ensuing election; but that, through favour to us, you should 
 forbear to divulge them. 
 
 No one has needed favours more than I, and generally, few 
 have been less unwilling to accept them; but in this case, favour 
 to me would be injustice to the public, and therefore I must beg 
 your pardon for declining it. That I once had. the confidence of 
 the people of Sangamon, is sufficiently evident, and if I have 
 since done any thing, either by design or misadventure, which 
 if known, would subject me to a forfeiture of that confidence, 
 he that knows of that thing, and conceals it, is a traitor to his 
 country's interest. 
 
 I find myself wholly unable to form any conjecture of what 
 
60 ABRAHAM LINCOLN: 
 
 fact or facts, real or supposed, you spoke; but my opinion of 
 your veracity, will not permit me, for a moment, to doubt, that 
 you at least believed what you said. 
 
 I am flattered with the personal regard you manifested for 
 me, but I do hope that, on more mature reflection, you will view 
 the public interest as a paramount consideration, and, therefore, 
 determine to let the worst come. 
 
 I here assure you, that the candid statement of facts, on your 
 part, however low it may sink me, shall never break the tie of 
 personal friendship between us. 
 
 I wish an answer to this, and you are at liberty to publish 
 both if you choose 
 
 Verry [sic] Respectfully, 
 
 A. Lincoln. 
 
 This letter was toritten from New Salem. Allen, a 
 Democrat, lived in Springfield. His gossip was appar- 
 ently never revealed in print, for there seems to be no 
 record of it. Although Lincoln's allusions to friendship 
 are probably ironical at this time, their later relationship 
 seems to have been neither more nor less than casual 
 and friendly. A number of references to Allen in later 
 letters indicate business dealings. 
 
 LETTER TO MISS MARY OWENS 
 DECEMBER 13, 1836 
 
 Vandalia, Deer. 13, 1836 
 Mary 
 
 I have been sick ever since my arrival here, or I should have 
 written sooner. It is but little difference, however, as I have very 
 
HIS SPEECHES AND WRITINGS 61 
 
 little even yet to write. And more, the longer I can avoid the 
 mortification of looking in the Post Office for your letter and not 
 finding it, the better. You see I am mad about that old letter yet. 
 I dont like very well to risk you again. I'll try you once more, 
 any how. 
 
 The new State House is not yet finished, and consequently 
 the legislature is doing little or nothing. The Governor delivered 
 an inflamitory [sic] political message, and it is expected there will 
 be some sparring between the parties about it as soon as the two 
 Houses get to business. Taylor delivered up his petition for the 
 New County to one of our members this morning. I am told he 
 dispairs [sic] of it's success, on account of all the members from 
 Morgan County opposing it. There are names enough on the 
 petition, I think, to justify the members from our county in going 
 for it; but if the members from Morgan oppose it, which they 
 say they will, the chance will be bad. 
 
 Our chance to take the seat of Government to Springfield is 
 better than I expected. An Internal Improvement Convention 
 was held here since we met, which recommended a loan of 
 several millions of dollars on the faith of the State to construct 
 Rail Roads. Some of the legislature are for it and some against it: 
 which has the majority I can not tell. There is great strife and 
 struggling for the office of the U. S. Senator here at this time. It is 
 probable we shall ease their pains in a few days The opposition 
 men have no candidate of their own, and consequently they 
 smile as complacently at the angry snarls of the contending Van 
 Buren candidates and their respective friends, as the Christain 
 [sic] does at Satan's rage. You recollect I mentioned in the outset 
 of this letter that I had been unwell. That is the fact, though I 
 believe I am about well now; but that, with other things I can not 
 account for, have conspired and have gotten my spirits so low, 
 that I feel that. I would rather be any place in the world than 
 here I really can not endure the thought of staying here ten 
 weeks. Write back as soon as you get this, and if possible [say] 
 something that will please me, for really I have n[ot been p]leased 
 since I left you. This letter is so dry an[d stupid that] I am 
 ashamed to send it, but with my p[resent feeli]ngs I can not do 
 
62 ABRAHAM LINCOLN: 
 
 any better. Give my best respects to [Mr. and M]rs. Abell [Able?] 
 and family. 
 
 Your friend 
 
 Lincoln 
 Miss Mary S. Owens 
 
 The story of Lincoln's courtship of Mary Owens as 
 revealed in his letters is so curiously obscure and yet so 
 suggestive of his emotional complexities that it has 
 long been a prime object of speculation among biogra- 
 phers. The few letters themselves were obtained by 
 Herndon, along with some scanty comment and re- 
 served admissions on the part of Mary Owens, after 
 Lincoln's death thirty years later. Because of the obvious 
 lack of romantic sentiment in the letters, the episode has 
 been treated as the antithetical aftermath of the more or 
 less legendary Ann Rutledge romance. Lincoln's desire 
 for feminine companionship and friendship, his chariness 
 of sentiment, and his actual fear of emotional involve- 
 ment, are apparent and have given both amateur and 
 professional psychoanalysts sufficient, if incomplete, data 
 to diagnose a powerful repressive force in Lincoln's 
 personality which was apparently further complicated 
 by physiological and emotional factors too numerous to 
 mention here. Lincoln's own allusions to the moods of 
 depression which occasionally but often violently afflicted 
 him are numerous, but usually, as in the last paragraph 
 of this letter, too obscure for more than general diagno- 
 sis. Three works of genuine but uneven worth may be 
 mentioned for their attempt to solve the personality of 
 Lincoln: Milton Henry Shutes, Lincoln and the Doctors; 
 Leon Pierce Clark, Lincoln; a Psychobiography; William 
 F. Petersen, Lincoln-Douglas: The Weather as Destiny. 
 
 Clark's study indicates the elementary psychological 
 motivations in Lincoln's life to have been a mother 
 fixation and a fear of the father, with narcissism under- 
 lying a depressive temperament which is characteristic 
 
HIS SPEECHES AND WRITINGS 63 
 
 of Lincoln but not sufficient to be diagnosed as melan- 
 cholia. Lincoln s development of an unusually powerful 
 super-ego (conscience) is traced to its Freudian source 
 in father-fear. One fault which many students of Lincoln 
 find with Clark's study is the authors lack of discrimina- 
 tion in evaluating his sources of evidence; anything 
 which fits Freudian interpretation is grist to his mill, 
 and much that he credits is either questionable or 
 definitely known to be incorrect. This does not entirely 
 vitiate his analysis, however, which in broad outline 
 is plausible enough. It must be recognized that no 
 practicing analyst would find in the data which Clark 
 uses, sufficient evidence for formulating a complete 
 diagnosis of an actual patient, and it is to be noted that 
 Clark is of little help to the reader in analyzing the 
 situation indicated in the Mary Owens incident as a 
 whole. 
 
 SPEECH IN THE ILLINOIS LEGISLATURE 
 JANUARY 11, 1837 
 
 Mr. Chairman: 
 
 Lest I should fall into the too common error, of being mis- 
 taken in regard to which side I design to be upon, I shall make 
 it my first care to remove all doubt on that point, by declaring 
 that I am opposed to the resolution under consideration, in toto. 
 Before I proceed to the body of the subject, I will further remark, 
 that it is not without a considerable degree of apprehension, that 
 I venture to cross the track of the gentleman from Coles (Mr. 
 Linder). Indeed, I do not believe I could muster a sufficiency of 
 courage to come in contact with that gentleman, were it not for 
 the fact, that he, some days since, most graciously condescended 
 to assure us that he would never be found wasting ammunition 
 
64 ABRAHAM LINCOLN: 
 
 on small game. On the same fortunate occasion, he further gave us 
 to understand, that he regarded himself as being decidedly the 
 superior of our common friend from Randolph ( Mr. Shields ) ; and 
 feeling, as I really do, that I, to say the most of myself, am nothing 
 more than the peer of our friend from Randolph, I shall regard 
 the gentleman from Coles as decidedly my superior also, and con- 
 sequently, in the course of what I shall have to say, whenever I 
 shall have occasion to allude to that gentleman, I shall endeavor 
 to adopt that kind of court language which I understand to be 
 due to decided superiority. In one faculty, at least, there can be 
 no dispute of the gentleman's superiority over me, and most other 
 men; and that is, the faculty of entangling a subject, so that neither 
 himself, or any other man, can find head or tail to it. Here he has 
 introduced a resolution, embracing ninety-nine printed lines across 
 common writing paper, and yet more than one half of his opening 
 speech has been made upon subjects about which there is not 
 one word said in his resolution. 
 
 Though his resolution embraces nothing in regard to the con- 
 stitutionality of the Bank, much of what he has said has been with 
 a view to make the impression that it was unconstitutional in its 
 inception. Now, although I am satisfied that an ample field may be 
 found within the pale of the resolution, at least for small game, yet 
 as the gentleman has travelled out of it, I feel that I may, with all 
 due humility, venture to follow him. The gentleman has discovered 
 that some gentleman at Washington city has been upon the very 
 eve of deciding our Bank unconstitutional, and that he would 
 probably have completed his very authentic decision, had not some 
 one of the Bank officers placed his hand upon his mouth, and 
 begged him to withhold it. The fact that the individuals compos- 
 ing our Supreme Court have, in an official capacity, decided in 
 favor of the constitutionality of the Bank, would, in my mind, 
 seem a sufficient answer to this. It is a fact known to all, that 
 the members of the Supreme Court, together with the Governor, 
 form a Council of Revision, and that this Council approved this 
 Bank Charter. I ask, then, if the extra-judicial decision — not quite, 
 but only almost made, by the gentleman at Washington, before 
 whom, by the way, the question of the constitutionality of our 
 Bank never has, nor never can come — is to be taken as paramount 
 
HIS SPEECHES AND WRITINGS 65 
 
 to a decision officially made by that tribunal, by which and which 
 alone, the constitutionality of the Bank can ever be settled? But, 
 aside from this view of the subject, I would ask, if the committee 
 which this resolution proposes to appoint, are to examine into 
 the constitutionality of the Bank? Are they to be clothed with 
 power to send for persons and papers, for this object? And after 
 they have found the bank to be unconstitutional, and decided it so, 
 how are they to enforce their decision? What will their decision 
 amount to? They cannot compel the Bank to cease operations, 
 or to change the course of its operations. What good, then, can 
 their labors result in? Certainly none. 
 
 The gentleman asks, if we, without an examination, shall, by 
 giving the State deposits to the Bank, and by taking the stock 
 reserved for the State, legalize its former misconduct. Now I 
 do not pretend to possess sufficient legal knowledge to decide, 
 whether a legislative enactment, proposing to, and accepting 
 from, the Bank, certain terms, would have the effect to legalize or 
 wipe out its former errors, or not; but I can assure the gentleman, 
 if such should be the effect, he has already got behind the settle- 
 ment of accounts; for it is well known to all, that the Legislature, 
 at its last session, passed a supplemental Bank charter, which the 
 Bank has since accepted, and which, according to his doctrine, 
 has legalized all the alleged violations of its original charter in the 
 distribution of its stock. 
 
 I now proceed to the resolution. By examination it will be 
 found that the first thirty-three lines, being precisely one third of 
 the whole, relate exclusively to the distribution of the stock by the 
 commissioners appointed by the State. Now, Sir, it is clear that no 
 question can arise on this portion of the resolution, except a ques- 
 tion between capitalists in regard to the ownership of stock. Some 
 gentlemen have the stock in their hands, while others, who have 
 more money than they know what to do with, want it; and this, 
 and this alone, is the question, to settle which we are called on to 
 squander thousands of the people's money. What interest, let me 
 ask, have the people in the settlement of this question? What 
 difference is it to them whether the stock is owned by Judge 
 Smith, or Sam. Wiggins? If any gentleman be entitled to stock in 
 the Bank, which he is kept* out of possession of by others, let him 
 
66 ABRAHAM LINCOLN: 
 
 assert his right in the Supreme Court, and let him or his antagonist, 
 whichever may be found in the wrong, pay the costs of suit. It 
 is an old maxim, and a very sound one, that he that dances should 
 always pay the fiddler. Now, sir, in the present case, if any gentle- 
 men, whose money is a burden to them, choose to lead off a dance, 
 I am decidedly opposed to the people's money being used to pay 
 the fiddler. No one can doubt that the examination proposed by 
 this resolution must cost the State some ten or twelve thousand 
 dollars; and all this to settle a question in which the people have 
 no interest, and about which they care nothing. These capitalists 
 generally act harmoniously and in concert, to fleece the people, 
 and now, that they have got into a quarrel with themselves, we are 
 called upon to appropriate the people's money to settle the quarrel. 
 
 I leave this part of the resolution, and proceed to the remain- 
 der. It will be found that no charge in the remaining part of the 
 resolution, if true, amounts to the violation of the Bank charter, 
 except one, which I will notice in due time. It might seem quite 
 sufficient, to say no more upon any of these charges or insinua- 
 tions, than enough to show they are not violations of the charter; 
 yet, as they are ingeniously framed and handled, with a view to 
 deceive and mislead, I will notice in their order, all the most 
 prominent of them. The first of these, is in relation to a connexion 
 between our Bank and several Banking institutions in other States. 
 Admitting this connection to exist, I should like to see the gentle- 
 man from Coles, or any other gentleman, undertake to show that 
 there is any harm in it. — What can there be in such a connexion, 
 that the people of Illinois are willing to pay their money to get a 
 peep into? By a reference to the tenth section of the Bank charter, 
 any gentleman can see that the framers of the act contemplated 
 the holding of stock in the institutions of other corporations. Why, 
 then, is it, when neither law nor justice forbids it, that we are asked 
 to spend our time and money, in inquiring into its truth? 
 
 The next charge, in the order of time, is, that some officer, 
 director, clerk or servant of the Bank, has been required to take 
 an oath of secrecy in relation to the affairs of said Bank. Now, I 
 do not know whether this be true or false — neither do I believe 
 any honest man cares. I know that the seventh section of the 
 charter expressly guarantees to the Bank the right of making, 
 
HIS SPEECHES AND WRITINGS 67 
 
 under certain restrictions, such by-laws as it may think fit; and I 
 further know that the requiring an oath of secrecy would not 
 transcend those restrictions. What, then, if the Bank has chosen 
 to exercise this right? Who can it injure? Does not every merchant 
 have his secret mark? and who is ever silly enough to complain of 
 it? I presume if the Bank does require any such oath of secrecy, 
 it is done through a motive of delicacy to those individuals who 
 deal with it. — Why, sir, not many days since, one gentleman upon 
 this floor, who, by the way, I have no doubt is now ready to join 
 this hue and cry against the Bank, indulged in a philippic against 
 one of the Bank officers, because, as he said, he had divulged a 
 secret. 
 
 Immediately following this last charge, there are several 
 insinuations in the resolution, which are too silly to require any 
 sort of notice, were it not for the fact, that they conclude by say- 
 ing, "to the great injury of the people at large." In answer to this 
 I would say, that it is strange enough, that the people are suffer- 
 ing these "great injuries," and yet are not sensible of it! Singular 
 indeed that the people should be writhing under oppression and 
 injury, and yet not one among them to be found to raise the 
 voice of complaint. If the Bank be inflicting injury upon the peo- 
 ple, why is it, that not a single petition is presented to this body 
 on the subject? If the Bank really be a grievance, why is it, that 
 no one of the real people is found to ask redress of it? The truth 
 is, no such oppression exists. If it did, our table would groan with 
 memorials and petitions, and we would not be permitted to rest 
 day or night, till we had put it down. The people know their 
 rights; and they are never slow to assert and maintain them, when 
 they are invaded. Let them call for an investigation, and I shall 
 ever stand ready to respond to the call. But they have made no 
 such call. I make the assertion boldly, and without fear of con- 
 tradiction, that no man, who does not hold an office, or does not 
 aspire to one, has ever found any fault of the Bank. It has doubled 
 the prices of the products of their farms, and filled their pockets 
 with a sound circulating medium, and they are all well pleased 
 with its operations. No, Sir, it is the politician who is the first to 
 sound the alarm, ( which, by the way, is a false one. ) It is he, who, 
 by these unholy means, is endeavoring to blow up a storm that 
 
68 ABRAHAM LINCOLN: 
 
 he may ride upon and direct. It is he, and he alone, that here 
 proposes to spend thousands of the people's public treasure, for no 
 other advantage to them, than to make valueless in their pockets 
 the reward of their industry. Mr. Chairman, this work is exclu- 
 sively the work of politicians; a set of men who have interests 
 aside from the interests of the people, and who, to say the most of 
 them, are, taken as a mass, at least one long step removed from 
 honest men. I say this with the greater freedom, because, being 
 a politician myself, none can regard it as personal. 
 
 Again, it is charged, or rather insinuated, that officers of the 
 Bank have loaned money at usurious rates of interest. Suppose this 
 to be true, are we to send a committee of this House to enquire 
 into it? Suppose the committee should find it true can they redress 
 the injured individuals? Assuredly not. If any individual had been 
 injured in this way, is there not an ample remedy, to be found 
 in the laws of the land? Does the gentleman from Coles know, 
 that there is a statute standing in full force, making it highly 
 penal, for an individual to loan money at a higher rate of interest 
 than twelve per cent? If he does not he is too ignorant to be placed 
 at the head of the committee which his resolution proposes; and if 
 he does, his neglect to mention it, shows him to be too uncandid to 
 merit the respect or confidence of any one. 
 
 But besides all this, if the Bank were struck from existence, 
 could not the owners of the capital still loan it usuriously, as well 
 as now? Whatever the Bank, or its officers, may have done, I know 
 that usurious transactions were much more frequent and enormous 
 before the commencement of its operations, than they have ever 
 been since. 
 
 The next insinuation is, that the Bank has refused specie pay- 
 ments. This, if true, is a violation of the charter. But there is not 
 the least probability of its truth; because, if such had been the 
 fact, the individual to whom payment was refused, would have had 
 an interest in making it public, by suing for the damages to which 
 the charter entitles him. Yet no such thing has been done; and the 
 strong presumption is, that the insinuation is false and groundless. 
 
 From this to the end of the resolution, there is nothing that 
 merits attention — I therefore drop the particular examination of it. 
 
 By a general view of the resolution, it will be seen that a 
 
HIS SPEECHES AND WRITINGS 69 
 
 principal object of the committee is, to examine into, and ferret 
 out, a mass of corruption, supposed to have been committed by 
 the commissioners who apportioned the stock of the Bank. I 
 believe it is universally understood and acknowledged, that all men 
 will ever act correctly, unless they have a motive to do otherwise. 
 If this be true, we can only suppose that the commissioners acted 
 corruptly, by also supposing that they were bribed to do so. Taking 
 this view of the subject, I would ask if the Bank is likely to find 
 it more difficult to bribe the committee of seven, which we are 
 about to appoint, than it may have found it to bribe the commis- 
 sioners? 
 
 (Here Mr. Linder called to order. The Chair decided that 
 Mr. Lincoln was not out of order. Mr. Linder appealed to the 
 House; — but, before the question was put, withdrew his appeal, 
 saying, he preferred to let the gentleman go on; he thought he 
 would break his own neck. Mr. Lincoln proceeded: ) — 
 
 Another gracious condescension. I acknowledge it with grati- 
 tude. I know I was not out of order; and I know every sensible 
 man in the House knows it. I was not saying that the gentleman 
 from Coles could be bribed, nor, on the other hand, will I say he 
 could not. In that particular, I leave him where I found him. I 
 was only endeavoring to show that there was at least as great a 
 probability of any seven members that could be selected from this 
 House, being bribed to act corruptly, as there was, that the twenty- 
 four commissioners had been so bribed. By a reference to the ninth 
 section of the Bank charter, it will be seen that those commis- 
 sioners were John Tilson, Robert K. McLaughlin, Daniel Wann, 
 A. G. S. Wight, John C. Riley, W. H. Davidson, Edward M. Wilson, 
 Edward L. Pierson, Robert R. Green, Ezra Baker, Aquilla Wren, 
 John Taylor, Samuel C. Christy, Edmund Roberts, Benjamin 
 Godfrey, Thomas Mather, A. M. Jenkins, W. Linn, W. S. Gilman, 
 Charles Prentice, Richard I. Hamilton, A. H. Buckner, W. F. 
 Thornton, and Edmund D. Taylor. 
 
 These are twenty-four of the most respectable men in the 
 State. Probably no twenty-four men could be selected in the State, 
 with whom the people are better acquainted, or in whose honor 
 and integrity, they would more readily place confidence. And I 
 now repeat, that there is less probability that those men have 
 
70 ABRAHAM LINCOLN: 
 
 been bribed and corrupted, than that any seven men, or rather 
 any six men, that could be selected from the members of this 
 House, might be so bribed and corrupted; even though they were 
 headed and led on by "decided superiority" himself. 
 
 In all seriousness, I ask every reasonable man, if an issue be 
 joined by these twenty-four commissioners, on the one part, and 
 any other seven men, on the other part, and the whole depend 
 upon the honor and integrity of the contending parties, to which 
 party would the greatest degree of credit be due? Again: Another 
 consideration is, that we have no right to make the examination. 
 What I shall say upon this head I design exclusively for the law- 
 loving and law-abiding part of the House. To those who claim 
 omnipotence for the Legislature, and who in the plenitude of 
 their assumed powers, are disposed to disregard the Constitution, 
 law, good faith, moral right, and every thing else, I have not a 
 word to say. But to the law-abiding part I say, examine the Bank 
 charter, go examine the Constitution; go examine the acts that the 
 General Assembly of this State has passed, and you will find just 
 as much authority given in each and every of them, to compel the 
 Bank to bring its coffers to this hall, and to pour their contents 
 upon this floor, as to compel it to submit to this examination 
 which this resolution proposes. Why, sir, the gentleman from 
 Coles, the mover of this resolution, very lately denied on this 
 floor, that the Legislature had any right to repeal, or otherwise 
 meddle with its own acts, when those acts were made in the nature 
 of contracts, and had been accepted and acted on by other parties. 
 Now I ask, if this resolution does not propose, for this House 
 alone, to do, what he, but the other day, denied the right of the 
 whole Legislature to do? He must either abandon the position he 
 then took, or he must now vote against his own resolution. It is no 
 difference to me, and I presume but little to any one else, which 
 he does. 
 
 I am by no means the special advocate of the Bank. I have 
 long thought that it would be well for it to report its condition to 
 the General Assembly, and that cases might occur, when it might 
 be proper to make an examination of its affairs by a committee. 
 Accordingly, during the last session, while a bill supplemental to 
 the Bank charter, was pending before the House, I offered an 
 
HIS SPEECHES AND WRITINGS 71 
 
 amendment to the same, in these words: "The said corporation 
 shall, at the next session of the General Assembly, and at each sub- 
 sequent General Session, during the existence of its charter, report 
 to the same the amount of debts due from said corporation; the 
 amount of debts due to the same; the amount of specie in its 
 vaults, and an account of all lands then owned by the same, and 
 the amount for which such lands have been taken; and moreover, 
 if said corporation shall at any time neglect or refuse to submit its 
 books, papers, and all and everything necessary for a full and 
 fair examination of its affairs, to any person or persons appointed 
 by the General Assembly, for the purpose of making such exami- 
 nation, the said corporation shall forfeit its charter." 
 
 This amendment was negatived by a vote of 34 to 15. Eleven 
 of the 34 who voted against it, are now members of this House; 
 and though it would be out of order to call their names, I hope 
 they will all recollect themselves, and not vote for this examina- 
 tion to be made without authority, inasmuch as they refused to 
 reserve the authority when it was in their power to do so. 
 
 I have said that cases might occur, when an examination 
 might be proper; but I do not believe any such case has now 
 occurred; and if it has, I should still be opposed to making an 
 examination without legal authority. I am opposed to encouraging 
 that lawless and mobocratic spirit, whether in relation to the Bank 
 or any thing else, which is already abroad in the land; and is 
 spreading with rapid and fearful impetuosity, to the ultimate over- 
 throw of every institution, or even moral principle, in which per- 
 sons and property have hitherto found security. 
 
 But supposing we had the authority, I would ask what good 
 can result from the examination? Can we declare the Bank uncon- 
 stitutional, and compel it to cease operations? Can we compel it 
 to desist from the abuses of its power, provided we find such 
 abuses to exist? Can we repair the injuries which it may have 
 done to individuals? Most certainly we can do none of these things. 
 Why then shall we spend the public money in such employment? 
 O, say the examiners, we can injure the credit of the Bank, if 
 nothing else. — Please tell me, gentlemen, who will suffer most by 
 that? You cannot injure, to any extent, the stockholders. They are 
 men of wealth — of large capital; and consequently, beyond the 
 
72 ABRAHAM LINCOLN: 
 
 power of fortune, or even the shafts of malice. But by injuring the 
 credit of the Bank, you will depreciate the value of its paper in 
 the hands of the honest and unsuspecting farmer and mechanic, 
 and that is all you can do. But suppose you could effect your whole 
 purpose; suppose you could wipe the Bank from existence, which 
 is the grand ultimatum of the project, what would be the conse- 
 quence? Why, sir, we should spend several thousand dollars of the 
 public treasure in the operation, annihilate the currency of the 
 State, render valueless in the hands of our people that reward of 
 their former labors, and finally, be once more under the com- 
 fortable obligation of paying the Wiggins' loan, principal and 
 interest. 
 
 If the student is interested in the political back- 
 ground of this speech, he should consult Albert J. 
 Beveridge, Abraham Lincoln: 1809-1858, Vol. I, chs. iv-v. 
 Lincoln's speech was made in opposition to a resolution 
 offered by Usher F. hinder, to institute an inquiry into 
 the management of the State Bank. Lincoln's philosophy 
 of law as developed from the particular issue under dis- 
 cussion and stated in the last five paragraphs should be 
 compared with the theme of the Address, "The Perpetua- 
 tion of Our Political Institutions/' The "Shields from 
 Randolph" alluded to in the speech, in friendly if some- 
 what ironical vein, is the same James Shields, Demo- 
 cratic politician, with whom Lincoln became involved 
 during the summer of 1842 in a farcical challenge to a 
 duel. (See "A Letter from the Lost Townships," August 
 27, 1842, et seq.) 
 
HIS SPEECHES AND WRITINGS 73 
 
 LETTER TO MISS MARY OWENS 
 
 MAY 7, 1837 
 
 Springfield May 7 1837 
 Friend Mary 
 
 I have commenced two letters to send you before this, both 
 of which displeased me before I got half done, and so I tore them 
 up. The first I thought was nt serious enough, and the second was 
 on the other extreme. I shall send this, turn out as it may. 
 
 This thing of living in Springfield is rather a dull business 
 after all, at least it is so to me. I am quite as lonesome here as 
 [I?] ever was anywhere in my life. I have been spoken to by but 
 one woman since I've been here, and should not have been by 
 her, if she could have avoided it. I've never been to church yet, 
 nor probably shall not be soon. I stay away because I am conscious 
 I should not know how to behave myself. 
 
 I am often thinking about what we said of your coming to 
 live at Springfield. I am afraid you would not be satisfied. There 
 is a great deal of flourishing about in carriages here, which it 
 would be your doom to see without shareing [sic] in it. You would 
 have to be poor without the means of hiding your poverty. Do you 
 believe you could bear that patiently? Whatever woman may 
 cast her lot with mine, should any ever do so, it is my intention to 
 do all in my power to make her happy and contented; and there 
 is nothing I can immagine [sic], that would make me more 
 unhappy than to fail in the effort. I know I should be much happier 
 with you than the way I am, provided I saw no signs of discontent 
 in you. What you have said to me may have been in jest, or I 
 may have misunderstood it. If so, then let it be forgotten; if other- 
 wise, I much wish you would think seriously before you decide. 
 For my part I have already decided. What I have said I will most 
 positively abide by, provided you wish it. My opinion is that you 
 had better not do it. You have not been accustomed to hardship, 
 and it may be more severe than you now immagine [sic], I know 
 
74 ABRAHAM LINCOLN: 
 
 you are capable of thinking correctly on any subject, and if you 
 deliberate maturely upon this, before you decide, then I am willing 
 to abide your decision. 
 
 You must write me a good long letter after you get this. You 
 have nothing else to do, and though it might not seem interest- 
 ing to you, after you had written it, it would be a good deal of 
 company to me in this "busy wilderness". Tell your sister I dont 
 want to hear any more about selling out and moving. That gives 
 me the hypo whenever I think of it. 
 
 Yours &c — 
 
 Lincoln 
 
 Lincoln's vacillation, which has been perhaps too 
 simply interpreted by some biographers as an effort to 
 wriggle out of a compromising situation, is probably a 
 quite sincere attempt to state his indecision. He wanted, 
 and he did not want, Mary Owens. He admired certain 
 qualities in her and wanted her companionship, but he 
 could not contemplate the intimacy of marriage without 
 misgivings. Lincoln's frankness illustrates his lack of 
 taste, perhaps, but scarcely proves his intent to injure, 
 and reveals a condition of mind hardly so abnormal as 
 to require a psychiatric diagnosis of sexual inhibitions 
 such as sometimes has been attempted. In the next letter 
 immediately following, Lincoln's situation becomes as 
 comical as it is serious. He did not know where he stood 
 and was afraid that he would regret whatever developed. 
 To find in this letter, as well as in the other letters to 
 Mary, evidence that Lincoln was trifling with her af- 
 fections requires a degree of animosity or naivete which 
 but few students of Lincoln have possessed. 
 
HIS SPEECHES AND WRITINGS 75 
 
 LETTER TO MISS MARY OWENS 
 AUGUST 16, 1837 
 
 Springfield Aug. 16th 1837 
 Friend Mary. 
 
 You will, no doubt, think it rather strange, that I should write 
 you a letter on the same day on which we parted; and I can only 
 account for it by supposing, that seeing you lately makes me 
 think of you more than usual, while at our late meeting we had but 
 few expressions of thoughts. You must know that I can not see 
 you, or think of you, with entire indifference; and yet it may be, 
 that you, are mistaken in regard to what my real feelings toward 
 you are. If I knew you were not, I should not trouble you with 
 this letter. Perhaps any other man would know enough without 
 further information; but I consider it my peculiar right to plead 
 ignorance, and your bounden duty to allow the plea. I want in all 
 cases to do right; and most particularly so, in all cases with 
 women. I want, at this particular time, more than anything else, 
 to do right with you, and if I knew it would be doing right, as I 
 rather suspect it would, to let you alone, I would do it. And for 
 the purpose of making the matter as plain as possible, I now say, 
 that you can now drop the subject, dismiss your thoughts (if you 
 ever had any) from me forever, and leave this letter unanswered, 
 without calling forth one accusing murmer [sic] from me. And I 
 will even go further, and say, that if it will add any thing to your 
 comfort, or peace of mind, to do so, it is my sincere wish that you 
 should. Do not understand by this, that I wish to cut your 
 acquaintance. I mean no such thing. What I do wish is, that our 
 further acquaintance shall depend upon yourself. If such further 
 acquaintance would contribute nothing to your happiness, I am 
 sure it would not to mine. If you feel in any degree bound 
 to me, I am now willing to release you, provided you wish it; 
 while, on the other hand, I am willing, and even anxious to bind 
 you faster, if I can be convinced that it will, in any considerable 
 
76 ABRAHAM LINCOLN: 
 
 degree, add to your happiness. This, indeed, is the whole ques- 
 tion with me. Nothing would make me more miserable than to 
 believe you miserable — nothing more happy, than to know you 
 were so. 
 
 In what I have now said, I think I can not be misunderstood; 
 and to make myself understood, is the only object of this letter. 
 
 If it suits you best to not answer this — farewell — a long life 
 and a merry one attend you. But if you conclude to write back, 
 speak as plainly as I do. There can be neither harm nor danger, 
 in saying, to me, anything you think, just in the manner you 
 think it. 
 
 My respects to your sister. 
 
 Your friend 
 
 Lincoln 
 
 THE PERPETUATION OF OUR POLITICAL 
 INSTITUTIONS: ADDRESS BEFORE THE YOUNG 
 MEN'S LYCEUM OF SPRINGFIELD, ILLINOIS 
 JANUARY 27, 1838 
 
 As a subject for the remarks of the evening, the perpetuation 
 of our political institutions, is selected. 
 
 In the great journal of things happening under the sun, we, 
 the American People, find our account running, under date of the 
 nineteenth century of the Christian era. — We find ourselves in the 
 peaceful possession, of the fairest portion of the earth, as regards 
 extent of territory, fertility of soil, and salubrity of climate. We 
 find ourselves under the government of a system of political insti- 
 tutions, conducing more essentially to the ends of civil and 
 religious liberty, than any of which the history of former times 
 tells us. We, when mounting the stage of existence, found our- 
 selves the legal inheritors of these fundamental blessings. We 
 
HIS SPEECHES AND WRITINGS 77 
 
 toiled not in the acquirement or establishment of them — they are 
 a legacy bequeathed us, by a once hardy, brave, and patriotic, but 
 now lamented and departed race of ancestors. Theirs was the 
 task (and nobly they performed it) to possess themselves, and 
 through themselves, us, of this goodly land; and to uprear upon 
 its hills and its valleys, a political edifice of liberty and equal 
 rights; 'tis ours only, to transmit these, the former, unprofaned 
 by the foot of an invader; the latter, undecayed by the lapse of 
 time and untorn by usurpation, to the latest generation that fate 
 shall permit the world to know. This task gratitude to our fathers, 
 justice to ourselves, duty to posterity, and love for our species in 
 general, all imperatively require us faithfully to perform. 
 
 How then shall we perform it? — At what point shall we 
 expect the approach of danger? By what means shall we fortify 
 against it? — Shall we expect some transatlantic military giant, to 
 step the Ocean, and crush us at a blow? Never! — All the armies 
 of Europe, Asia and Africa combined, with all the treasure of the 
 earth (our own excepted) in their military chest; with a Buona- 
 parte for a commander, could not by force, take a drink from the 
 Ohio, or make a track on the Blue Ridge, in a trial of a thou- 
 sand years. 
 
 At what point then is the approach of danger to be expected? 
 I answer, if it ever reach us, it must spring up amongst us. It can- 
 not come from abroad. If destruction be our lot, we must ourselves 
 be its author and finisher. As a nation of freemen, we must live 
 through all time, or die by suicide. 
 
 I hope I am over wary; but if I am not, there is, even now, 
 something of ill-omen, amongst us. I mean the increasing disregard 
 for law which pervades the country; the growing disposition to 
 substitute the wild and furious passions, in lieu of the sober judg- 
 ment of Courts; and the worse than savage mobs, for the execu- 
 tive ministers of justice. This disposition is awfully fearful in any 
 community; and that it now exists in ours, though grating to our 
 feelings to admit, it would be a violation of truth, and an insult 
 to our intelligence, to deny. Accounts of outrages committed by 
 mobs, form the every-day news of the times. They have pervaded 
 the country, from New England to Louisiana; — they are neither 
 peculiar to the eternal snows of the former, nor the burning suns 
 
78 ABRAHAM LINCOLN: 
 
 of the latter; — they are not the creature of climate — neither are 
 they confined to the slave-holding, or the non-slave-holding States. 
 Alike, they spring -up among the pleasure hunting masters of 
 Southern slaves, and the order loving citizens of the land of 
 steady habits. — Whatever, then, their cause may be, it is common 
 to the whole country. 
 
 It would be tedious, as well as useless, to recount the horrors 
 of all of them. Those happening in the State of Mississippi, and at 
 St. Louis, are, perhaps, the most dangerous in example and revolt- 
 ing to humanity. In the Mississippi case, they first commenced by 
 hanging the regular gamblers; a set of men, certainly not following 
 for a livelihood, a very useful, or very honest occupation; but one 
 which, so far from being forbidden by the laws, was actually 
 licensed by an act of the Legislature, passed but a single year 
 before. Next, negroes, suspected of conspiring to raise an insur- 
 rection, were caught up and hanged in all parts of the State: then, 
 white men, supposed to be leagued with the negroes; and finally, 
 strangers, from neighboring States, going thither on business, were, 
 in many instances subjected to the same fate. Thus went on this 
 process of hanging, from gamblers to negroes, from negroes to 
 white citizens, and from these to strangers; till, dead men were 
 seen literally dangling from the boughs of trees upon every road 
 side; and in numbers almost sufficient, to rival the native Spanish 
 moss of the country, as a drapery of the forest. 
 
 Turn, then, to that horror-striking scene at St. Louis. A single 
 victim was only sacrificed there. His story is very short; and is, 
 perhaps, the most highly tragic, of anything of its length, that has 
 ever been witnessed in real life. A mulatto man, by the name of 
 Mcintosh, was seized in the street, dragged to the suburbs 
 of the city, chained to a tree, and actually burned to death; and 
 all within a single hour from the time he had been a freeman, 
 attending to his own business, and at peace with the world. 
 
 Such are the effects of mob law; and such are the scenes, 
 becoming more and more frequent in this land so lately famed for 
 love of law and order; and the stories of which, have even now 
 grown too familiar, to attract any thing more, than an idle remark. 
 
 But you are, perhaps, ready to ask, "What has this to do with 
 the perpetuation of our political institutions?" I answer, it has 
 
HIS SPEECHES AND WRITINGS 79 
 
 much to do with it. Its direct consequences are, comparatively 
 speaking, but a small evil; and much of its danger consists, in the 
 proneness of our minds, to regard its direct, as its only con- 
 sequences. Abstractly considered, the hanging of the gamblers at 
 Vicksburg, was of but little consequence. They constitute a por- 
 tion of population, that is worse than useless in any community; 
 and their death, if no pernicious example be set by it, is never 
 matter of reasonable regret with any one. If they were annually 
 swept, from the stage of existence, by the plague or small pox, 
 honest men would, perhaps, be much profited, by the operation. — 
 Similar too, is the correct reasoning, in regard to the burning of 
 the negro at St. Louis. He had forfeited his life, by the perpetra- 
 tion of an outrageous murder, upon one of the most worthy and 
 respectable citizens of the city; and had he not died as he did, he 
 must have died by the sentence of the law, in a very short time 
 afterwards. As to him alone, it was as well the way it was, as it 
 could otherwise have been. — But the example in either case, was 
 fearful. — When men take it in their heads to day, to hang gam- 
 blers, or burn murderers, they should recollect, that, in the con- 
 fusion usually attending such transactions, they will be as likely 
 to hang or burn some one who is neither a gambler nor a murderer 
 as one who is; and that, acting upon the example they set, the mob 
 of to-morrow, may, and probably will, hang or burn some of them 
 by the very same mistake. And not only so; the innocent, those 
 who have ever set their faces against violations of law in every 
 shape, alike with the guilty, fall victims to the ravages of mob 
 law; and thus it goes on, step by step, till all the walls erected for 
 the defence of the persons and property of individuals, are trod- 
 den down, and disregarded. But all this even, is not the full extent 
 of the evil. — By such examples, by instances of the perpetrators 
 of such acts going unpunished, the lawless in spirit, are encouraged 
 to become lawless in practice; and having been used to no 
 restraint, but dread of punishment, they thus become, absolutely 
 unrestrained. — Having ever regarded Government as their dead- 
 liest bane, they make a jubilee of the suspension of its operations; 
 and pray for nothing so much, as its total annihilation. While, on 
 the other hand, good men, men who love tranquility, who desire 
 to abide by the laws, and enjoy their benefits, who would gladly 
 
80 ABRAHAM LINCOLN: 
 
 spill their blood in the defence of their country; seeing their 
 property destroyed; their families insulted, and their lives endan- 
 gered; their persons injured; and seeing nothing in prospect that 
 forebodes a change for the better; become tired of, and disgusted 
 with, a Government that offers them no protection; and are not 
 much averse to a change in which they imagine they have nothing 
 to lose. Thus, then, by the operation of this mobocratic spirit, 
 which all must admit, is now abroad in the land, the strongest 
 bulwark of any Government, and particularly of those constituted 
 like ours, may effectually be broken down and destroyed — I mean 
 the attachment of the People. Whenever this effect shall be pro- 
 duced among us; whenever the vicious portion of population shall 
 be permitted to gather in bands of hundreds and thousands, and 
 burn churches, ravage and rob provision-stores, throw printing 
 presses into rivers, shoot editors, and hang and burn obnoxious 
 persons at pleasure, and with impunity; depend on it, this Govern- 
 ment cannot last. By such things, the feelings of the best citizens 
 will become more or less alienated from it; and thus it will be 
 left without friends, or with too few, and those few too weak, to 
 make their friendship effectual. At such a time and under such 
 circumstances, men of sufficient talent and ambition will not be 
 wanting to seize the opportunity, strike the blow, and overturn 
 that fair fabric, which for the last half century, has been the 
 fondest hope, of the lovers of freedom, throughout the world. 
 
 I know the American People are much attached to their 
 Government; — I know they would suffer much for its sake; — I 
 know they would endure evils long and patiently, before they 
 would ever think of exchanging it for another. Yet, notwithstand- 
 ing all this, if the laws be continually despised and disregarded, 
 if their rights to be secure in their persons and property, are held 
 by no better tenure than the caprice of a mob, the alienation of 
 their affections from the Government is the natural consequence; 
 and to that, sooner or later, it must come. 
 
 Here then, is one point at which danger may be expected. 
 
 The question recurs, "how shall we fortify against it?" The 
 answer is simple. Let every American, every lover of liberty, every 
 well wisher to his posterity, swear by the blood of the Revolution, 
 never to violate in the least particular, the laws of the country; 
 
HIS SPEECHES AND WRITINGS 81 
 
 and never to tolerate their violation by others. As the patriots of 
 seventy-six did to the support of the Declaration of Independence, 
 so to the support of the Constitution and Laws, let every Ameri- 
 can pledge his life, his property, and his sacred honor; — let every 
 man remember that to violate the law, is to trample on the blood 
 of his father, and to tear the character of his own, and his chil- 
 dren's liberty. Let reverence for the laws, be breathed by every 
 American mother, to the lisping babe, that prattles on her lap — 
 let it be taught in schools, in seminaries, and in colleges; let it 
 be written in Primers, spelling books, and in Almanacs; — let 
 it be preached from the pulpit, proclaimed in legislative 
 halls, and enforced in courts of justice. And, in short, let it 
 become the political religion of the nation; and let the old and 
 the young, the rich and the poor, the grave and the gay, of all 
 sexes and tongues, and colors and conditions, sacrifice unceasingly 
 upon its altars. 
 
 While ever a state of feeling, such as this, shall universally, 
 or even, very generally prevail throughout the nation, vain will be 
 every effort, and fruitless every attempt, to subvert our national 
 freedom. 
 
 When I so pressingly urge a strict observance of all the laws, 
 let me not be understood as saying there are no bad laws, nor that 
 grievances may not arise, for the redress of which, no legal pro- 
 visions have been made. — I mean to say no such thing. But I do 
 mean to say, that, although bad laws, if they exist, should be 
 repealed as soon as possible, still while they continue in force, for 
 the sake of example, they should be religiously observed. So also 
 in unprovided cases. If such arise, let proper legal provisions be 
 made for them with the least possible delay; but, till then, let 
 them, if not too intolerable, be borne with. 
 
 There is no grievance that is a fit object of redress by mob 
 law. In any case that arises, as for instance, the promulgation of 
 abolitionism, one of two positions is necessarily true; that is, the 
 thing is right within itself, and therefore deserves the protection of 
 all law and all good citizens; or, it is wrong, and therefore proper 
 to be prohibited by legal enactments; and in neither case, is 
 the interposition of mob law, either necessary, justifiable, or 
 excusable. 
 
82 ABRAHAM LINCOLN: 
 
 But, it may be asked, why suppose danger to our political 
 institutions? Have we not preserved them for more than fifty 
 years? And why may we not for fifty times as long? 
 
 We hope there is no sufficient reason. We hope all dangers 
 may be overcome; but to conclude that no danger may ever arise, 
 would itself be extremely dangerous. There are now, and will 
 hereafter be, many causes, dangerous in their tendency, which 
 have not existed heretofore; and which are not too insignificant 
 to merit attention. That our government should have been main- 
 tained in its original form from its establishment until now, is not 
 much to be wondered at. It had many props to support it through 
 that period, which now are decayed, and crumbled away. Through 
 that period, it was felt by all, to be an undecided experiment; 
 now, it is understood to be a successful one. — Then, all that 
 sought celebrity and fame, and distinction, expected to find them 
 in the success of that experiment. Their all was staked upon it: — 
 their destiny was inseparably linked with it. Their ambition aspired 
 to display before an admiring world, a practical demonstration of 
 the truth of a proposition, which had hitherto been considered, 
 at best no better, than problematical; namely, the capability of a 
 people to govern themselves. If they succeeded, they were to be 
 immortalized; their names were to be transferred to counties and 
 cities, and rivers and mountains; and to be revered and sung, and 
 toasted through all time. If they failed, they were to be called 
 knaves and fools, and fanatics for a fleeting hour; then to sink and 
 be forgotten. They succeeded. The experiment is successful; and 
 thousands have won their deathless names in making it so. But 
 the game is caught; and I believe it is true, that with the catching, 
 end the pleasures of the chase. This field of glory is harvested, 
 and the crop is already appropriated. But new reapers will arise, 
 and they, too, will seek a field. It is to deny, what the history of 
 the world tells us is true, to suppose that men of ambition and 
 talents will not continue to spring up amongst us. And, when they 
 do, they will as naturally seek the gratification of their ruling pas- 
 sion, as others have so done before them. The question then, is, 
 can that gratification be found in supporting and maintaining an 
 edifice that has been erected by others? Most certainly it cannot. 
 Many great and good men sufficiently qualified for any task they 
 
HIS SPEECHES AND WRITINGS 83 
 
 should undertake, may ever be found, whose ambition would 
 aspire to nothing beyond a seat in Congress, a gubernatorial or a 
 presidential chair; but such belong not to the family of the lion, 
 or the tribe of the eagle. What! think you these places would satisfy 
 an Alexander, a Caesar, or a Napoleon? — Never! Towering genius 
 disdains a beaten path. It seeks regions hitherto unexplored. — 
 It sees no distinction in adding story to story, upon the monu- 
 ments of fame, erected to the memory of others. It denies that it is 
 glory enough to serve under any chief. It scorns to tread in the 
 footsteps of any predecessor, however illustrious. It thirsts and 
 burns for distinction; and, if possible, it will have it, whether at 
 the expense of emancipating slaves, or enslaving freemen. Is it 
 unreasonable then to expect, that some man possessed of the 
 loftiest genius, coupled with ambition sufficient to push it to its 
 utmost stretch, will at some time, spring up among us? And when 
 such a one does, it will require the people to be united with each 
 other, attached to the government and laws, and generally intel- 
 ligent, to successfully frustrate his designs. 
 
 Distinction will be his paramount object, and although he 
 would as willingly, perhaps more so, acquire it by doing good as 
 harm; yet, that opportunity being past, and nothing left to be 
 done in the way of building up, he would set boldly to the task 
 of pulling down. 
 
 Here then, is a probable case, highly dangerous, and such a 
 one as could not have well existed heretofore. 
 
 Another reason which once was; but which, to the same 
 extent, is now no more, has done much in maintaining our institu- 
 tions thus far. I mean the powerful influence which the interesting 
 scenes of the revolution had upon the passions of the people as 
 distinguished from their judgment. By this influence, the jealousy, 
 envy, and avarice, incident to our nature, and so common to a 
 state of peace, prosperity, and conscious strength, were, for the 
 time, in a great measure smothered and rendered inactive; while 
 the deep-rooted principles of hate, and the powerful motive of 
 revenge, instead of being turned against each other, were directed 
 exclusively against the British nation. And thus, from the force 
 of circumstances, the basest principles of our nature, were either 
 made to lie dormant, or to become the active agents in the 
 
84 ABRAHAM LINCOLN: 
 
 advancement of the noblest of cause — that of establishing and 
 maintaining civil and religious liberty. 
 
 But this state of feeling must fade, is fading, has faded, with 
 the circumstances that produced it. 
 
 I do not mean to say, that the scenes of the revolution are 
 now or ever will be entirely forgotten; but that like every thing 
 else, they must fade upon the memory of the world, and grow 
 more and more dim by the lapse of time. In history, we hope, they 
 will be read of, and recounted, so long as the bible shall be 
 read; — but even granting that they will, their influence cannot be 
 what it heretofore has been. Even then, they cannot he so uni- 
 versally known, nor so vividly felt, as they were by the generation 
 just gone to rest. At the close of that struggle, nearly every adult 
 male had been a participator in some of its scenes. The conse- 
 quence was, that of those scenes, in the form of a husband, a 
 father, a son or a brother, a living history was to be found in every 
 family — a history bearing the indubitable testimonies of its own 
 authenticity, in the limbs mangled, in the scars of wounds received, 
 in the midst of the very scenes related — a history, too, that could 
 be read and understood alike by all, the wise and the ignorant, the 
 learned and the unlearned. — But those histories are gone. They 
 can be read no more forever. They were a fortress of strength; 
 but, what invading foeman could never do, the silent artillery of 
 time has done-, the leveling of its walls. They are gone. — They 
 were a forest of giant oaks; but the all-resistless hurricane has 
 swept Over them, and left only, here and there, a lonely trunk, 
 despoiled of its verdure, shorn of its foliage; unshading and un- 
 shaded, to murmur in a few more gentle breezes, and to combat 
 with its mutilated limbs, a few more ruder storms, then to sink, 
 and be no more. 
 
 They were the pillars of the temple of liberty; and now, that 
 they have crumbled away, that temple must fall, unless we, their 
 descendants, supply their places with other pillars, hewn from 
 the solid quarry of sober reason. Passion has helped us; but can do 
 so no more. It will in future be our enemy. Reason, cold, calculat- 
 ing, unimpassioned reason, must furnish all the materials for our 
 future support and defence. — Let those materials be moulded into 
 general intelligence, sound morality, and, in particular, a reverence 
 
HIS SPEECHES AND WRITINGS 85 
 
 for the constitution and laws: and, that we improved to the last; 
 that we remained free to the last; that we revered his name to the 
 last; that, during his long sleep, we permitted no hostile foot to 
 pass over or desecrate his resting place; shall be that which to 
 learn the last trump shall awaken our Washington. 
 
 Upon these let the proud fabric of freedom rest, as the rock 
 of its basis; and as truly as has been said of the only greater insti- 
 tution, "the gates of hell shall not prevail against it" 
 
 Critical estimates of this address have varied con- 
 siderably. Herndon terms it "highly sophomoric"; Beve- 
 ridge concludes that it was "the most notable of his life 
 thus far and, in fact, for many years thereafter'; James 
 Weber Linn, in "Such Were His Words" (Abraham Lin- 
 coln Association Papers), claims that the third para- 
 graph from the last was never surpassed by any- 
 thing Lincoln ever wrote. Perhaps the central para- 
 graphs are most significant, if not for rhetoric, certainly 
 for philosophy of government, for in them the student 
 may trace Lincoln's reasoning in regard to how American 
 political institutions may be preserved and yet modified 
 by the people to rectify errors in the structure of justice. 
 This central philosophy Lincoln held consistently, as his 
 later writings testify. 
 
 LETTER TO MRS. O. H. BROWNING 
 APRIL 1, 1838 
 
 Springfield, April 1. 1838— 
 Dear Madam: 
 
 Without appologising [sic] for being egotistical, I shall make 
 the history of so much of my own life, as has elapsed since I saw 
 
86 ABRAHAM LINCOLN: 
 
 you, the subject of this letter. And by the way I now discover, that 
 in order to give a full and inteligible [sic] account of the things I 
 have done and suffered since I saw you, I shall necessarily have to 
 relate some that happened before. 
 
 It was, then, in the autumn of 1836, that a married lady of 
 my acquaintance, and who was a great friend of mine, being 
 about to pay a visit to her father and other relatives residing in 
 Kentucky, proposed to me, that on her return she would bring a 
 sister of hers with her, upon condition that I would engage to 
 become her brother-in-law with all convenient dispach [sic], I, 
 of course, accepted the proposal; for you know I could not have 
 done otherwise, had I really been averse to it; but privately, be- 
 tween you and me, I was most confoundedly well pleased with the 
 project. I had seen the said sister some three years before, thought 
 her inteligent [sic] and agreeable, and saw no good objection to 
 plodding life through hand in hand with her. Time passed on, the 
 lady took her journey, and in due time returned, sister in com- 
 pany sure enough. This stomached me a little; for it appeared to 
 me, that her coming so readily showed that she was a trifle too 
 willing; but on reflection it occured [sic] to me, that she might 
 have been prevailed on by her married sister to come, without 
 any thing concerning me ever having been mentioned to her; and 
 so I concluded that if no other objection presented itself, I would 
 consent to waive this. All this occurred to me upon my hearing 
 of her arrival in the neighborhood; for, be it remembered, I had 
 not yet seen her, except about three years previous, as before 
 mentioned. 
 
 In a few days we had an interview, and although I had seen 
 her before, she did not look as my immagination [sic] had pic- 
 tured her. I knew she was over-size, but she now appeared a fair 
 match for Falstaff; I knew she was called an "old maid," and I 
 felt no doubt of the truth of at least half of the appelation [sic]; 
 but now, when I beheld her, I could not for my life avoid think- 
 ing of my mother; and this, not from withered features, for her 
 skin was too full of fat to permit of its contracting in to wrinkles; 
 but from her want of teeth, weather-beaten appearance in general, 
 and from a kind of notion that ran in my head, that nothing could 
 
HIS SPEECHES AND WRITINGS 87 
 
 have commenced at the size of infancy, and reached her present 
 bulk in less than thirty-five or forty years; and, in short, I was 
 not all pleased with her. But what could I do? — I had told her 
 sister that I would take her for better or for worse; and I made a 
 point of honor and conscience in all tilings, to stick to my word, 
 especially if others had been induced to act on it, which in this 
 case, I doubted not they had, for I was now fairly convinced, 
 that no other man on earth would have her, and hence the 
 conclusion that they were bent on holding me to my bargain. 
 Well, thought I, I have said it, and, be consequences what they 
 may, it shall not be my fault if I fail to do it. At once I determined 
 to consider her my wife; and this done, all my powers of discovery 
 were put to the rack, in search of perfections in her, which might 
 be fairly set-off against her defects. I tried to immagine [sic] she 
 was handsome, which, but for her unfortunate corpulency, was 
 actually true. Exclusive of this, no woman that I have ever seen, 
 has a finer face. I also tried to convince myself, that the mind was 
 much more to be valued than the person; and in this, she was 
 not inferior, as I could discover, to any with whom I had been 
 acquainted. 
 
 Shortly after this, without attempting to come to any positive 
 understanding with her, I set out for Vandalia, where and when 
 you first saw me. During my stay there, I had letters from her, 
 which did not change my opinion of either her intellect or in- 
 tention; but on the contrary, confirmed it in both. 
 
 All this while, although I was fixed "firm as the surge repelling 
 rock" in my resolution, I found I was continually repenting the 
 rashness which had led me to make it. Through life I have been 
 in no bondage, either real or imaginary, from the thraldom of 
 which I so much desired to be free. After my return home, I 
 saw nothing to change my opinion of her in any particular. She 
 was the same and so was I. I now spent my time between plan- 
 ing [sic] how I might get along through life after my contem- 
 plated change of circumstances should have taken place; and how 
 I might procrastinate the evil day for a time, which I really 
 dreaded as much — perhaps more, than an irishman [sic] does the 
 halter. 
 
88 
 
 ABRAHAM LINCOLN: 
 
 After all my suffering upon this deeply interesting subject, 
 here I am, wholly unexpectedly, completely out of the "scrape"; 
 and I now want to know, if you can guess how I got out of it. 
 Out clear in every sense of the term; no violation of word, honor 
 or conscience. I dont believe you can guess, and so I might as 
 well tell you at once. As the lawyers say, it was done in the 
 manner following, towit. After I had delayed the matter as long 
 as I thought I could in honor do, which by the way had brought 
 me round into the last fall, I concluded I might as well bring it 
 to a consumation [sic] without further delay; and so I mustered 
 my resolution, and made the proposal to her direct; but, shock- 
 ing to relate, she answered, No. At first I supposed she did it 
 through an affectation of modesty, which I thought but ill-be- 
 came her, under the peculiar circumstances of her case; but on my 
 renewal of the charge, I found she repeled [sic] it with greater 
 firmness than before. I tried it again and again, but with the 
 same success, or rather with the same want of success. 
 
 I finally was forced to give it up, at which I very unexpectedly 
 found myself mortified almost beyond endurance. I was morti- 
 fied, it seemed to me, in a hundred different ways. My vanity 
 was deeply wounded by the reflections, that I had so long been 
 too stupid to discover her intentions, and at the same time never 
 doubting that I understood them perfectly; and also, that she 
 whom I had taught myself to believe nobody else would have, 
 had actually rejected me with all my fancied greatness; and to 
 cap the whole, I then, for the first time, began to suspect that I 
 was really a little in love with her. But let it all go. I'll try and 
 out live it. Others have been made fools of by the girls; but this 
 can never with truth be said of me. I most emphatically, in this 
 instance, made a fool of myself. I have now come to the conclu- 
 sion never again to think of marrying, and for this reason; I can 
 never be satisfied with any one who would be block-head enough 
 to have me. 
 
 When you receive this, write me a long yarn about some- 
 thing to amuse me. Give my respects to Mr. Browning. 
 
 Your sincere friend 
 
 A. Lincoln 
 Mrs. O. H. Browning — 
 
HIS SPEECHES AND WRITINGS 89 
 
 Lincoln's sense of the ridiculous and his ability to 
 recognize the grotesque humor in his own actions — 
 from a distance of several months — are not sufficient to 
 account for this letter. That he enjoyed writing it is 
 obvious from its gusto, but why he wrote to Mrs. Brown- 
 ing is difficult to conjecture. If there was any other cor- 
 respondence between them, there is no record of it. 
 That she was Lincoln's confidante is a conclusion hardly 
 justified by any other evidence of this period, though 
 there is evidence that from early to late Lincoln always 
 enjoyed her company. Some have assumed that he 
 merely had a story to tell and had to get it off his chest. 
 One needs to confess one's vanity, stupidity, and emo- 
 tional vagaries occasionally perhaps. But to whom? 
 Although the actual record shows very little, it is difficult 
 to escape the inference from this manuscript that Lincoln 
 and Mrs. Browning enjoyed a mutual retailing of small 
 talk, in conversation at least, if not in letters, during the 
 considerable period of years in which Lincoln and 
 Browning were more or less continually associated in 
 common political activities. Like the letter to Mary Speed 
 it suggests, as do the letters to Mary Owens, a desire for 
 feminine associations which are definitely social rather 
 than romantic. 
 
90 ABRAHAM LINCOLN 
 
 THE SUB-TREASURY: SPEECH AT A POLITICAL 
 DISCUSSION IN THE HALL OF THE HOUSE OF 
 REPRESENTATIVES AT SPRINGFIELD, ILLINOIS 
 DECEMBER [26], 1839 
 
 Fellow-Citizens: 
 
 It is peculiarly embarrassing to me to attempt a continuance 
 of the discussion, on this evening, which has been conducted in 
 this Hall on several preceding ones. It is so, because on each 
 of those evenings, there was a much fuller attendance than now, 
 without any reason for its being so, except the greater interest 
 the community feel in the Speakers who addressed them then, 
 than they do in him who is to do so now. I am, indeed, apprehen- 
 sive, that the few who have attended, have done so, more to spare 
 me of mortification, than in the hope of being interested in any 
 thing I may be able to say. — This circumstance casts a damp 
 upon my spirits, which I am sure I shall be unable to overcome 
 during the evening. But enough of preface. 
 
 The subject heretofore, and now to be discussed, is the Sub- 
 Treasury scheme of the present Administration, as a means of 
 collecting, safe-keeping, transferring, and disbursing the revenues 
 of the Nation, as contrasted with a National Bank for the same 
 purposes. Mr. Douglas has said that we (the Whigs) have not 
 dared to meet them, (the Locos.) in argument on this question. 
 I protest against this assertion. I say that we have again and 
 again, during this discussion, urged facts and arguments against 
 the Sub-Treasury, which they have neither dared to deny nor 
 attempted to answer. But lest some may be led to believe that 
 we really wish to avoid the question, I now propose, in my humble 
 way, to urge those arguments again; at the same time, begging 
 the audience to mark well the positions I shall take, and the proof 
 I shall offer to sustain them, and that they will not again permit 
 Mr. Douglas or his friends, to escape the force of them, by a 
 
HIS SPEECHES AND WRITINGS 91 
 
 round and groundless assertion, that we "dare not meet them 
 in argument." 
 
 Of the Sub-Treasury then, as contrasted with a National 
 Bank, for the before enumerated purposes, I lay down the follow- 
 ing propositions, to wit: 
 
 1st. It will injuriously affect the community by its operation 
 on the circulating medium. 
 
 2d. It will be a more expensive fiscal agent. 
 
 3d. It will be a less secure depository for the public money. 
 
 To show the truth of the first proposition, let us take a short 
 review of our condition under the operation of a National Bank. 
 It was the depository of the public revenues. — Between the col- 
 lection of those revenues and the disbursements of them by the 
 government, the Bank was permitted to, and did actually loan 
 them out to individuals, and hence the large amount of money 
 annually collected for revenue purposes, which by any other 
 plan would have been idle, a great portion of time, was kept 
 almost constantly in circulation. Any person who will reflect, 
 that money is only valuable while in circulation, will readily 
 perceive, that any device which will keep the government 
 revenues, in constant circulation, instead of being locked up in 
 idleness, is no inconsiderable advantage. 
 
 By the Sub-Treasury, the revenue is to be collected, and 
 kept in iron boxes until the government wants it for disburse- 
 ment; thus robbing the people of the use of it, while the govern- 
 ment does not itself need it, and while the money is performing 
 no nobler office than that of rusting in iron boxes. The natural 
 effect of this change of policy, every one will see, is to reduce 
 the quantity of money in circulation. 
 
 But again, by the Sub-Treasury scheme the revenue is to be 
 collected in specie. I anticipate that this will be disputed. I ex- 
 pect to hear it said, that it is not the policy of the Administration 
 to collect the revenue in specie. If it shall, I reply, that Mr. Van 
 Buren, in his message recommended the Sub-Treasury, ex- 
 pended nearly a column of that document in an attempt to per- 
 suade Congress to provide for the collection of the revenue in 
 specie exclusively; and he concluded with these words. "It may 
 be safelv assumed, that no motive of convenience to the citizen, 
 
92 ABRAHAM LINCOLN: 
 
 requires trie reception of Bank paper." In addition to this, Mr. 
 Silas Wright, Senator from New York, and the political, personal 
 and confidential friend of Mr. Van Buren, drafted and introduced 
 into the Senate the first Sub-Treasury Bill, and that bill provided 
 for ultimately collecting the revenue in specie. It is true, I know, 
 that that clause was stricken from the bill, but it was done by 
 the votes of the Whigs, aided by a portion only of the Van Buren 
 Senators. — No Sub-Treasury bill has yet become a law, though 
 two or three have been considered by Congress, some with and 
 some without the specie clause; so that I admit there is room for 
 quibbling upon the question of whether the Administration favor 
 the exclusive specie doctrine or not; but I take it, that the fact 
 that the President at first urged the specie doctrine, and that under 
 his recommendation the first bill introduced embraced it, war- 
 rants us in charging it as the policy of the party until their head 
 as publicly recants it, as he at first espoused it. — I repeat then, 
 that by the Sub-Treasury, the revenue is to be collected in specie. 
 Now mark what the effect of this must be. By all estimates ever 
 made, there are but between 60 and 80 millions of specie in the 
 United States. The expenditures of the Government for the year 
 1838, the last for which we have had the report, were 40 mil- 
 lions. Thus it is seen, that if the whole revenue be collected in 
 specie, it will take more than half of all the specie in the nation 
 to do it. By this means, more than half of all the specie belonging 
 to the fifteen million of souls, who compose the whole popula- 
 tion of the country, is thrown into the hands of the public office- 
 holders, and other public creditors, composing in number per- 
 haps not more than one quarter of a million; leaving the other 
 fourteen millions and three quarters to get along as they best 
 can, with less than one half of the specie of the country, and what- 
 ever rags, and shin-plasters they may be able to put, and keep, in 
 circulation. By this means, every office-holder, and other public 
 creditor may, and most likely will, set up shaver; and a most 
 glorious harvest will the specie men have of it; each specie man, 
 upon a fair division, having to his share, the fleecing of about 59 
 rag-men.* — In all candor, let me ask, was such a system for bene- 
 
 * On January 4, 1839, the Senate of the United States passed the following 
 resolution, to wit: 
 
HIS SPEECHES AND WRITINGS 93 
 
 fiting the few at the expense of the many, ever before devised? 
 And was the sacred name of Democracy, ever before made to 
 endorse such an enormity against the rights of the people? 
 
 I have already said that the Sub-Treasury will reduce the 
 quantity of money in circulation. This position is strengthened by 
 the recollection that the revenue is to be collected in specie, so that 
 the mere amount of revenue is not all that is withdrawn, but the 
 amount of paper circulation that the 40 millions would serve to as 
 a basis, is withdrawn; which would be in a sound state at least 
 
 "Resolved, That the Secretary of the Treasury be directed to communicate to 
 the Senate any information he may recently have received in respect to the mode 
 of collecting, keeping, and disbursing public moneys in foreign countries." 
 
 Under this resolution, the Secretary communicated to the Senate a letter, the 
 following extract from which clearly shows that the collection of the revenue in 
 specie will establish a sound currency for the office-holders, and a depreciated 
 one for the people; and that the office-holders and other public creditors will 
 turn shavers upon all the rest of the community. Here is the extract from the 
 letter, being all of it that relates to the question: 
 
 "Hague, October 12, 1838. 
 
 "The financial system of Hamburg is, as far as is known, very simple, as may 
 be supposed from so small a territory. The whole amount of Hamburg coined 
 money is about four and a half millions of marks current, or one million two 
 hundred and eighty-two thousand five hundred dollars; and, except under very 
 extraordinary circumstances, not more than one half that amount is in circulation, 
 and all duties, taxes, and excise must be paid in Hamburg currency. The con- 
 sequence is that it invariably commands a premium of one to three per centum. 
 Every year one senator and ten citizens are appointed to transact the whole of 
 the financial concern, both as to receipt and disbursement of the funds, which is 
 always in cash, and is every day deposited in the bank, to the credit of the 
 chancery; and, on being paid out, the citizen to whose department the payment 
 belongs must appear personally with the check or order, stating the amount and 
 to whom to be paid. The person receiving very seldom keeps the money, preferring 
 to dispose of it to a money-changer at a premium, and taking other coin at a 
 discount, of which there is a great variety and a large amount constantly in 
 circulation, and on which in his daily payment he loses nothing-, and those who 
 have payments to make to the government apply to the money-changers again for 
 Hamburg currency, which keeps it in constant motion, and I believe it frequently 
 occurs that the bags, which are sealed and labeled with the amount, are returned 
 again to the bank without being opened. 
 
 "With great respect, your obedient servant, „„ _ ^ _ , 
 
 6 F y "John Cuthbert." 
 
 "To the Hon. Levi Woodbury, 
 
 "Secretary of the Treasury, 
 
 Washington, D.C." 
 
 This letter is found in Senate documents, p. 113 of the session of 1838-9 
 
 [Lincoln's note]. 
 
94 ABRAHAM LINCOLN: 
 
 100 millions. — When 100 millions, or more, of the circulation we 
 now have, shall be withdrawn, who can contemplate, without 
 terror, the distress, ruin, bankruptcy and beggary, that must 
 follow? 
 
 The man who has purchased any article, say a horse, on 
 credit, at 100 dollars, when there are 200 millions circulating in 
 the country, if the quantity be reduced to 100 millions by the 
 arrival of pay-day, will find the horse but sufficient to pay half 
 the debt; and the other half must either be paid out of his 
 other means, and thereby become a clear loss to him, or go un- 
 paid, and thereby become a clear loss to his creditor. What I 
 have here said of a single case of the purchase of a horse, will 
 hold good in every case of a debt existing at the time a reduction 
 in the quantity of money occurs, by whomsoever, and for what- 
 soever it may have been contracted. It may be said that what the 
 debtor loses, the creditor gains by this operation— but on ex- 
 amination this will be found true only to a very limited extent. It 
 is more generally true, that all lose by it. — The creditor, by losing 
 more of his debts, than he gains by the increased value of those 
 he collects; the debtor by either parting with more of his property 
 to pay his debts, than he received in contracting them; or, by en- 
 tirely breaking up in his business, and thereby being thrown upon 
 the world in idleness. 
 
 The general distress thus created, will, to be sure, be tem- 
 porary; because whatever change may occur in the quantity of 
 money in any community, time will adjust the derangement 
 produced; but while that adjustment is progressing, all suffer 
 more or less, and very many lose everything that renders life 
 desirable. Why then, shall we suffer a severe difficulty, even 
 though it be but temporary, unless we receive some equivalent 
 for it? 
 
 What I have been saying as to the effect produced by a re- 
 duction of the quantity of money, relates to the whole country. 
 I now propose to show, that it would produce a peculiar and 
 permanent hardship upon the citizens of those States and Terri- 
 tories in which the public lands lie. The Land Officers in those 
 States and Territories, as all know, form the great gulf by which 
 all, or nearly all the money in them, is swallowed up. When the 
 
Meserve No. 20. A photograph by Mathew B. Brady made 
 in New York on February 27, 1860. It is known as the 
 Cooper Institute portrait, having been made on the day 
 Lincoln delivered his speech under the auspices of the 
 Young Men's Central Republican Union. This and two 
 other portraits made the same day are the first of Lincoln 
 made by Brady. 
 
HIS SPEECHES AND WRITINGS 95 
 
 quantity of money shall be reduced, and consequently every 
 thing under individual control brought down in proportion, the 
 price of those lands, being fixed by law, will remain as now. Of 
 necessity it will follow, that the produce or labor that now raises 
 money sufficient to purchase 80 acres, will then raise but sufficient 
 to purchase 40, or perhaps not that much. — And this difficulty 
 and hardship, will last as long, in some degree, as any portion of 
 these lands shall remain undisposed of. Knowing, as I well do, the 
 difficulty that poor people now encounter in procuring homes, 
 I hesitate not to say, that when the price of the public lands shall 
 be doubled or trebled; or, which is the same thing, produce and 
 labor cut down to one half, or one third of their present prices, it 
 will be little less than impossible for them to procure those homes 
 at all. 
 
 In answer to what I have said as to the effect the Sub-Treas- 
 ury would have upon the currency, it is often urged that the 
 money collected for revenue purposes will not lie idle in the 
 vaults of the Treasury; and, farther, that a National Bank pro- 
 duces greater derangement in the currency, by a system of con- 
 tractions and expansions, than the Sub-Treasury would produce 
 in any way. In reply, I need only show, that experience proves 
 the contrary of both these propositions. It is an undisputed fact, 
 that the late Bank of the United States paid the government 
 $75,000 annually, for the privilege of using the public money be- 
 tween the times of its collection and disbursement. Can any man 
 suppose, that the Bank would have paid this sum, annually for 
 twenty years, and then offered to renew its obligations to do so, 
 if in reality there was no time intervening between the collection 
 and disbursement of the revenue, and consequently no privilege 
 of using the money extended to it? 
 
 Again, as to the contractions and expansions of a National 
 Bank, I need only point to the period intervening between the 
 time that the late Bank got into successful operation and that at 
 which the Government commenced war upon it, to show that dur- 
 ing that period, no such contractions or expansions took place. 
 If before, or after that period, derangement occurred in the cur- 
 rency, it proves nothing. The Bank could not be expected to 
 regulate the currency, either before it got into successful opera- 
 
96 ABRAHAM LINCOLN: 
 
 tion or after it was crippled and thrown into death convulsions, 
 by the removal of the deposits from it, and other hostile measures 
 of the Government, against it. We do not pretend that a National 
 Bank can establish and maintain a sound and uniform state of 
 currency in the country in spite of the National Government; but 
 we do say, that it has established and maintained such a cur- 
 rency, and can do so again, by the aid of that Government; and 
 we further say, that no duty is more imperative on that Govern- 
 ment, than the duty it owes the people, of furnishing them a 
 sound and uniform currency. 
 
 I now leave the proposition as to the effect of the Sub- 
 Treasury upon the currency of the country, and pass to that rela- 
 tive to the additional expense which must be incurred by it over 
 that incurred by a National Bank, as a fiscal agent of the Gov- 
 ernment. By the late National Bank, we had the public revenue 
 received, safely kept, transferred and disbursed, not only with- 
 out expense, but we actually received of the Bank $75,000 an- 
 nually for its privileges, while rendering us those services. By the 
 Sub-Treasury, according to the estimate of the Secretary of the 
 Treasury, who is the warm advocate of the system and which 
 estimate is the lowest made by any one, the same services are to 
 cost $60,000. Mr. Rives, who, to say the least, is equally talented 
 and honest, estimates that these services, under the Sub-Treasury 
 system, cannot cost less than $600,000. For the sake of liberality, 
 let us suppose that the estimates of the Secretary and Mr. Rives, 
 are the two extremes, and that their mean is about the true 
 estimate, and we shall then find, that when to that sum is added 
 the $75,000 which the Bank paid us, the difference between the 
 two systems, in favor of the Bank and against the Sub-Treasury, 
 is $405,000 a year. This sum, though small when compared to the 
 many millions annually expended by the General Government, 
 is when viewed by itself, very large; and much too large, when 
 viewed in any light, to be thrown away once a year for nothing. 
 It is sufficient to pay the pensions of more than 4,000 Revolu- 
 tionary Soldiers, or to purchase a 40 acre tract of Government 
 land, for each one of more than 8,000 poor families. 
 
 To the argument against the Sub-Treasury, on the score of 
 additional expense, its friends, so far as I know, attempt no 
 
HIS SPEECHES AND WRITINGS 97 
 
 answer. They choose, so far as I can learn, to treat the throwing 
 away $405,000 once a year as a matter entirely too small to merit 
 their democratic notice. 
 
 I now come to the proposition, that it would be less secure 
 than a National Bank, as a depository of the public money. The 
 experience of the past, I think, proves the truth of this. And here, 
 inasmuch as I rely chiefly upon experience to establish it, let 
 me ask, how is it that we know any things — that any event will 
 occur, that any combination of circumstances will produce a 
 certain result — except by the analogies of past experience? What 
 has once happened, will invariably happen again, when the same 
 circumstances, which combined to produce it shall again combine 
 in the same way. We all feel that we know that a blast of wind 
 would extinguish the flame of the candle that stands by me. How 
 do we know it? We have never seen this flame thus extinguished. 
 We know it, because we have seen through all our lives, that a 
 blast of wind extinguishes the flame of a candle whenever it is 
 thrown fully upon it. Again, we all feel to know that we have to 
 die. — How? We have never died yet. We know it, because we 
 know, or at least think we know, that of all the beings, just like 
 ourselves, who have been coming into the world for six thousand 
 years, not one is now living who was here two hundred years 
 ago. 
 
 I repeat, then, that we know nothing of what will happen in 
 future, but by the analogy of experience, and that the fair anal- 
 ogy of past experience fully proves that the Sub-Treasury would 
 be a less safe depository of the public money than a National 
 Bank. Examine it. — By the Sub-Treasury scheme, the public 
 money is to be kept, between the times of its collection and dis- 
 bursement, by Treasurers of the Mint, Custom-house officers, 
 Land officers, and some new officers to be appointed in the same 
 way that those first enumerated are. Has a year passed, since the 
 organization of the Government, that numerous defalcations have 
 not occurred among this class of officers? Look at Swartwout 
 with his $1,200,000, Price with his $75,000, Harris with his 
 $109,000, Hawkins with his $100,000, Linn with his $55,000, 
 together with some twenty-five hundred lesser lights. Place the 
 public money again in these same hands, and will it not again 
 
98 ABRAHAM LINCOLN: 
 
 go the same way? Most assuredly it will. But turn to the history 
 of the National Bank in this country, and we shall there see, 
 that those Banks performed the fiscal operations of the Govern- 
 ment thro* a period of 40 years, received, safely kept, transferred, 
 disbursed, an aggregate of nearly five hundred millions of dol- 
 lars; and that, in all that time, and with all that money, not one 
 dollar, nor one cent, did the Government lose by them. Place the 
 public money again in a similar depository, and will it not again be 
 safe? 
 
 But, conclusive as the experience of fifty years is, that in- 
 dividuals are unsafe depositories of the public money, and of 
 forty years that National Banks are safe depositories, we are not 
 left to rely solely upon that experience for the truth of those 
 propositions. — If experience were silent upon the subject, con- 
 clusive reasons could be shown for the truth of them. 
 
 It is often urged that to say the public money will be more 
 secure in a National Bank, than in the hands of individuals, as 
 proposed in the Sub-Treasury, is to say, that Bank directors and 
 Bank officers are more honest than sworn officers of the Govern- 
 ment. Not so. We insist on no such thing. We say that public 
 officers, selected with reference to their capacity and honesty, 
 ( which by the way, we deny is the practice in these days, ) stand 
 an equal chance, precisely, of being capable and honest, with 
 Bank officers selected by the same rule. — We further say, that 
 with however much care selections may be made, there will be 
 some unfaithful and dishonest in both classes. The experience 
 of the whole world, in all by-gone times, proves this true. The 
 Saviour of the world chose twelve disciples, and even one of 
 that small number, selected by super-human wisdom, turned out 
 a traitor and a devil. And, it may not be improper here to add, 
 that Judas carried the bag — was the Sub-Treasurer of the Saviour 
 and his disciples. 
 
 We, then, do not say, nor need we say, to maintain our prop- 
 osition, that Bank officers are more honest than Government 
 officers, selected by the same rule. What we do say, is, that the 
 interest of the Sub-Treasurer is against his duty — while the inter- 
 est of the Bank is on the side of its duty. — Take instances — a Sub- 
 Treasurer has in his hands one hundred thousand dollars of 
 
HIS SPEECHES AND WRITINGS 99 
 
 public money; his duty says, — "You ought to pay this money 
 over" — but his interest says, "You ought to run away with this 
 sum, and be a nabob the balance of your life." And who that 
 knows any thing of human nature, doubts that, in many instances, 
 interest will prevail over duty, and that the Sub-Treasurer will 
 prefer opulent knavery in a foreign land, to honest poverty at 
 home? But how different is it with a Bank. Besides the Govern- 
 ment money deposited with it, it is doing business upon a large 
 capital of its own. If it proves faithful to the Government, it con- 
 tinues its business, if unfaithful it forfeits its charter, breaks up 
 its business, and thereby loses more than all it can make by seiz- 
 ing upon the Government funds in its possession. Its interest, 
 therefore, is on the side of its duty — is to be faithful to the Gov- 
 ernment, and consequently, even the dishonest amongst its man- 
 agers, have no temptation to be faithless to it. Even if robberies 
 happen in the Bank, the losses are borne by the Bank, and the 
 Government loses nothing. It is for this reason then, that we say 
 a Bank is the more secure. It is because of that admirable feature 
 in the Bank system, which places the interest and the duty of the 
 depository both on one side; whereas that feature can never enter 
 into the Sub-Treasury system. By the latter, the interest of the 
 individuals keeping the public money, will wage an eternal war 
 with their duty, and in very many instances must be victorious. 
 In answer to the argument drawn from the fact that individual 
 depositories of public money, have always proved unsafe, it is 
 urged that, even if we had a National Bank, the money has to 
 pass through the same individual hands, that it will under the 
 Sub-Treasury. This is only partially true in fact, and wholly fal- 
 lacious in argument. 
 
 It is only partially true, in fact, because by the Sub-Treasury 
 bill, four Receivers-General are to be appointed by the President 
 and Senate. These are new officers, and consequently, it cannot 
 be true that the money, or any portion of it, has heretofore 
 passed thro' their hands. These four new officers are to be located 
 at New York, Boston, Charleston, and St. Louis, and conse- 
 quently are to be depositories of all the money collected at or near 
 those points; so that more than three-fourths of the public money 
 will fall into the keeping of these four new officers, which did 
 
100 ABRAHAM LINCOLN: 
 
 not exist as officers under the National Bank system. It is only 
 partially true, then, that the money passes through the same 
 hands, under a National Bank, as it would do under the Sub- 
 Treasury. 
 
 It is true that under either system, individuals must be em- 
 ployed as Collectors of the Customs, Receivers at the Land 
 Offices, &c. &c, but the difference is, that under the Bank 
 system, the Receivers of all sorts, receive the money and pay it 
 over to the Bank once a week when the collections are large, and 
 once a month when they are small, whereas, by the Sub-Treasury 
 system, individuals are not only to collect the money, but they 
 are to keep it also, or pay it over to other individuals equally as 
 unsafe as themselves, to be by them kept, until wanted for dis- 
 bursement. It is during the time that it is thus lying idle in their 
 hands, that opportunity is afforded, and temptation held out to 
 them to embezzle and escape with it. By the Bank system, each 
 Collector or Receiver, is to deposit in Bank all the money in his 
 hands at the end of each month at most, and to send the Bank 
 certificates of deposit, to the Secretary of the Treasury. When- 
 ever that certificate of deposit fails to arrive at the proper time, 
 the Secretary knows that the officer thus failing, is acting the 
 knave; and if he is himself disposed to do his duty, he has him im- 
 mediately removed from office, and thereby cuts him off from the 
 possibility of embezzling but little more than the receipts of a 
 single month. But by the Sub-Treasury System, the money is to 
 lie month after month in the hands of individuals; larger amounts 
 are to accumulate in the hands of the Receivers General, and 
 some others, by perhaps ten to one, than ever accumulated in 
 the hands of individuals before; yet during all this time, in rela- 
 tion to this great stake, the Secretary of the Treasury can com- 
 paratively know nothing. Reports, to be sure, he will have; but 
 reports are often false, and always false when made by a knave 
 to cloak his knavery. Long experience has shown, that nothing 
 short of an actual demand of the money will expose an adroit 
 peculator. Ask him for reports and he will give them to your 
 heart's content, send agents to examine and count the money 
 in his hands, and he will borrow of a friend, merely to be counted 
 and then returned, a sufficient sum to make the sum square. Try 
 
HIS SPEECHES AND WRITINGS 101 
 
 what you will, it will all fail till you demand the money — then, 
 and not till then, the truth will come. 
 
 The sum of the whole matter, I take to be this: Under the 
 Bank system, while sums of money, by the law, were permitted 
 to lie in the hands of individuals, for very short periods only, 
 many and very large defalcations occurred by those individuals. 
 Under the Sub-Treasury system, much larger sums are to lie in the 
 hands of individuals for much longer periods, thereby multi- 
 plying temptation in proportion as the sums are larger; and multi- 
 plying opportunity in proportion as the periods are longer to, and 
 for, those individuals to embezzle and escape with the public 
 treasure; and therefore, just in the proportion, that the temptation 
 and the opportunity are greater under the Sub-Treasury than the 
 Bank system, will the peculations and defalcations be greater 
 under the former than they have been under the latter. The truth 
 of this, independent of actual experience, is but little less than 
 self-evident. I, therefore, leave it. 
 
 But it is said, and truly too, that there is to be a Penitentiary 
 Department to the Sub-Treasury. This, the advocates of the 
 system will have it, will be a "king-cure-all." Before I go further, 
 may I not ask if the Penitentiary Department, is not itself an 
 admission that they expect the public money to be stolen? Why 
 build a cage if they expect to catch no birds? But to the question 
 how effectual the Penitentiary will be in preventing defalcations. 
 How effectual have Penitentiaries heretofore been in preventing 
 the crimes they were established to suppress? Has not confine- 
 ment in them long been the legal penalty of larceny, forgery, rob- 
 bery, and many other crimes, in almost all the States? And yet, 
 are not those crimes committed weekly, daily, nay, and even 
 hourly, in every one of those States? Again, the gallows has long 
 been the penalty of murder, and yet we scarcely open a news- 
 paper, that does not relate a new case of crime. If then, the 
 Penitentiary has heretofore failed to prevent larceny, forgery and 
 robbery, and the gallows and halter have likewise failed to pre- 
 vent murder, by what process of reasoning, I ask, is it that we are 
 to conclude the Penitentiary will hereafter prevent the stealing 
 of the public money? But our opponents seem to think they 
 answer the charge, that the money will be stolen, fully, if they 
 
102 ABRAHAM LINCOLN: 
 
 can show that they will bring the offenders to punishment. Not 
 so. Will the punishment of the thief bring back the stolen money? 
 No more so than the hanging of a murderer restores his victim to 
 life. What is the object desired? Certainly not the greatest num- 
 ber of thieves we can catch, but that the money may not be 
 stolen. If, then, any plan can be devised for depositing the public 
 treasure where it will be never stolen, never embezzled, is not 
 that the plan to be adopted? Turn, then, to a National Bank, and 
 you have that plan, fully and completely successful, as tested 
 by the experience of forty years. 
 
 I have now done with the three propositions that the Sub- 
 Treasury would injuriously affect the currency, and would be 
 more expensive and less secure as a depository of the public 
 money than a National Bank. How far I have succeeded in estab- 
 lishing their truth is for others to judge. 
 
 Omitting, for want of time, what I had intended to say as to 
 the effect of the Sub-Treasury, to bring the public money under 
 the more immediate control of the President, than it has ever 
 heretofore been, I now only ask the audience, when Mr. Calhoun 
 shall answer me, to hold him to the questions. Permit him not to 
 escape them. Require him either to show that the Sub-Treasury 
 would not injuriously affect the currency, or that we should in 
 some way receive an equivalent for that injurious effect. Require 
 him either to show that the Sub-Treasury would not be more ex- 
 pensive as a fiscal agent, than a Bank, or that we should, in some 
 way, be compensated for that additional expense. And particu- 
 larly require him to show that the public money would he as 
 secure in the Sub-Treasury as in a National Bank, or that the addi- 
 tional insecurity would be overbalanced by some good result of 
 the proposed change. 
 
 No one of them, in my humble judgment, will he be able to 
 do; and I venture the prediction, and ask that it may be especially 
 noted, that he will not attempt to answer the proposition, that 
 the Sub-Treasury would be more expensive than a National Bank, 
 as a -fiscal agent of the Government. 
 
 As a sweeping objection to a National Bank, and conse- 
 quently an argument in favor of the Sub-Treasury as a substitute 
 for it, it often has been urged, and doubtless will be again, that 
 
HIS SPEECHES AND WRITINGS 103 
 
 such a bank is unconstitutional. We have often heretofore shown, 
 and therefore, need not in detail, do so again, that a majority of 
 the Revolutionary patriarchs, whoever acted officially upon the 
 question, commencing with Gen. Washington, and embracing 
 Gen. Jackson, the larger number of the signers of the Declaration, 
 and of the framers of the Constitution, who were in the Congress 
 of 1791, have decided upon their oaths that such a Bank is consti- 
 tutional. We have also shown that the votes of Congress have 
 more often been in favor of, than against its constitutionality. In 
 addition to all this, we have shown that the Supreme Court — that 
 tribunal which the Constitution has itself established to decide 
 Constitutional questions — has solemnly decided that such a Bank 
 is constitutional. Protesting that these authorities ought to settle 
 the question and ought to be conclusive, I will not urge them 
 further now. I now propose to take a view of the question, which 
 I have not known to be taken by any one before. It is that what- 
 ever objection ever has, or ever can be made to the constitutional- 
 ity of a Bank, will apply with equal force in its whole length, 
 breadth and proportions, to the Sub-Treasury. Our opponents 
 say, there is no express authority in the Constitution to establish 
 a Bank and therefore a Bank is unconstitutional; but we, with 
 equal truth, may say, there is no express authority in the Constitu- 
 tion to establish a Sub-Treasury, and therefore a Sub-Treasury 
 is unconstitutional. Who, then, has the advantage of this "express 
 authority" argument? Does it not cut equally both ways? Does 
 it not wound them as deeply and as deadly as it does us? 
 
 Our position is that both are constitutional. The Constitution 
 enumerates expressly several powers which Congress may ex- 
 ercise, super-added to which is a general authority, "to make all 
 laws necessary and proper," for carrying into effect "all the 
 powers vested by the Constitution of the Government of the 
 United States." One of the express powers given Congress is, "to 
 lay and collect taxes; duties, imposts, and excises; to pay the 
 debts, and provide for the common defence and general welfare 
 of the United States." — Now, Congress is expressly authorized 
 to make all laws necessary and proper for carrying this power 
 into execution. To carry it into execution, it is indispensably 
 necessary to collect, safely keep, transfer, and disburse a revenue. 
 
104 ABRAHAM LINCOLN: 
 
 To do this, a Bank is "necessary and proper." But, say our op- 
 ponents, to authorize the making of a Bank, the necessity must be 
 so great, that the power just recited, would be nugatory without 
 it; and that that necessity is expressly negatived by the fact, that 
 they have got along ten whole years without such a Bank. Im- 
 mediately we turn on them, and say, that that sort of necessity 
 for a Sub-Treasury does not exist, because we have got along forty 
 whole years without one. And this time, it may be observed, that 
 we are not merely equal with them in the argument, but we beat 
 them forty to ten, or which is the same thing, four to one. On 
 examination, it will be found, that the absurd rule, which pre- 
 scribes that before we can constitutionally adopt a National 
 Bank as a fiscal agent, we must show an indispensable necessity 
 for it, will exclude every sort of fiscal agent that the mind of man 
 can conceive. A Bank is not indispensable, because we can take 
 the Sub-Treasury; the Sub-Treasury is not indispensable because 
 we can take the Bank. 
 
 The rule is too absurd to need further comment. Upon the 
 phrase "necessary and proper' in the Constitution, it seems to 
 me more reasonable to say that some fiscal agent is indispensably 
 necessary; but, inasmuch as no particular sort of agent is thus 
 indispensable, because some other sort might be adopted, we are 
 left to choose that sort of agent, which may be most "proper" on 
 grounds of expediency. 
 
 But it is said the Constitution gives no power to Congress 
 to pass acts of incorporation. Indeed!— What is the passing an 
 act of incorporation, but the making of a law? Is any one wise 
 enough to tell? The Constitution expressly gives Congress power 
 "to pass all laws necessary and proper," &c. If, then, the passing 
 of a Bank charter, be the "making a law necessary and proper," 
 is it not clearly within the constitutional power of Congress to 
 do so? 
 
 I now leave the Bank and the Sub-Treasury to try to answer, 
 in a brief way, some of the arguments which, on previous evenings 
 here, have been urged by Messrs. Lamborn and Douglas. Mr. 
 Lamborn admits, that "errors," as he charitably calls them have 
 occurred under the present and late administrations; but he in- 
 sists that as great "errors" have occurred under all administra- 
 
HIS SPEECHES AND WRITINGS 105 
 
 tions. This, we respectfully deny. We admit that errors may have 
 occurred under all administrations: but we insist that there is no 
 parallel between them and those of the two last. If they can 
 show that their errors are no greater in number and magnitude, 
 than those of former times, we call off the dogs. 
 
 But they can do no such thing. To be brief, I will now 
 attempt a contrast of the "errors" of the two latter, with those of 
 former administrations, in relation to the public expenditures only. 
 What I am now about to say, as to the expenditures, will be, 
 in all cases exclusive of payments on the National debt. By an 
 examination of authentic public documents, consisting of the 
 regular series of annual reports, made by all the Secretaries of 
 the Treasury from the establishment of the Government down 
 to the close of the year 1838, the following contrasts will be 
 presented. 
 
 1st. The last ten years under Gen. Jackson and Mr. Van 
 Buren, cost more money than the first twenty-seven did, ( includ- 
 ing the heavy expenses of the late British war,) under Wash- 
 ington, Adams, Jefferson, and Madison. 
 
 2d. The last year of J. Q. Adams' Adminstration cost, in 
 round numbers, thirteen millions, being about one dollar to each 
 soul in the nation; the last ( 1838 ) of Mr. Van Buren's cost forty 
 millions, being about two dollars and fifty cents to each soul; 
 and being larger than the expenditures of Mr. Adams in the 
 proportion of five to two. 
 
 3d. The highest annual expenditure during the late British 
 war, being in 1814, and while he had in actual service rising 
 188,000 militia, together with the whole regular army, swelling 
 the number to greatly over 200,000, and they to be clad, fed, and 
 transported from point to point, with great rapidity and corres- 
 ponding expense, and to be furnished with arms and ammuni- 
 tion, and they to be transported in like manner, and at like ex- 
 pense, was no more in round numbers than thirty millions; 
 whereas the annual expenditure of 1838, under Mr. Van Buren, 
 and while we were at peace with every government in the world, 
 was forty millions; being over the highest year of the late and 
 very expensive war, in the proportion of four to three. 
 
 4th. Gen. Washington administered the government eight 
 
106 ABRAHAM LINCOLN: 
 
 years for sixteen millions; Mr. Van Buren administered it one 
 year (1838) for forty millions; so that Mr. Van Buren expended 
 twice and a half as much in one year, as Gen. Washington did 
 in eight, and being in the proportion of twenty to one — or, in 
 other words, had Gen. Washington administered the Govern- 
 ment twenty years, at the same average expense that he did for 
 eight, he would have carried us through the whole twenty for no 
 more money than Mr. Van Buren has expended in getting us 
 through the single one of 1838. 
 
 Other facts, equally astounding, might be presented from 
 the same authentic document; but I deem the foregoing abun- 
 dantly sufficient to establish the proposition, that there is no 
 parallel between the "errors" of the present and late administra- 
 tions, and those of former times, and that Mr. Van Buren is 
 wholly out of the line of all precedents. 
 
 But, Mr. Douglas, seeing that the enormous expenditure of 
 1838, has no parallel in the olden times, comes in with a long 
 list of excuses for it. This list of excuses, I will rapidly examine, 
 and show, as I think, that the few of them which are true, prove 
 nothing; and that the majority of them are wholly untrue in fact. 
 He first says, that the expenditures of that year were made under 
 the appropriations of Congress — one branch of which was a 
 Whig body. It is true that those expenditures were made under 
 the appropriations of Congress; but it is untrue that either branch 
 of Congress was a Whig body. The Senate had fallen into the 
 hands of the administration, more than a year before, as proven 
 by the passage of the Expunging Resolution; and at the time 
 those appropriations were made, there were too few Whigs in 
 that body, to make a respectable struggle, in point of numbers, 
 upon any question. — This is notorious to all. The House of Repre- 
 sentatives that voted those appropriations, was the same that 
 first assembled at the called session of September, 1838. Although 
 it refused to pass the Sub-Treasury Bill, a majority of its mem- 
 bers were elected as friends of the administration, and proved 
 their adherence to it, by the election of a Van Buren Speaker, 
 and two Van Buren clerks. It is clear then, that both branches 
 of the Congress that passed those appropriations were in the hands 
 of Mr. Van Buren's friends, so that the Whigs had no power to 
 
HIS SPEECHES AND WRITINGS 107 
 
 arrest them, as Mr. Douglas would insist. And is not the charge 
 of extravagant expenditures, equally well sustained, if shown 
 to have been made by a Van Buren Congress, as if shown to 
 have been made in any other way? A Van Buren Congress passed 
 the bills, and Mr. Van Buren himself approved them, and con- 
 sequently the party are wholly responsible for them. 
 
 Mr. Douglas next says, that a portion of the expenditures of 
 that year, was made for the purchase of Public Lands from the 
 Indians. Now it happens that no such purchase was made during 
 that year. It is true, that some money was paid that year in pur- 
 suance of Indian treaties; but no more, or rather not as much, 
 as had been paid on the same account in each of several preced- 
 ing years. 
 
 Next, he says, that the Florida war created many millions of 
 this year's expenditure. This is true, and it is also true, that during 
 that and every other year, that that war has existed, it has cost 
 three or four times as much as it would have done under an 
 honest and judicious administration of the Government. The large 
 sums foolishly, not to say corruptly, thrown away in that war, 
 constitute one of the just causes of complaint against the adminis- 
 tration. Take a single instance. The agents of the Government 
 in connexion with that war, needed a certain Steam boat; the 
 owner proposed to sell it for ten thousand dollars; the agents 
 refused to give that sum, but hired the boat at one hundred dollars 
 per day, and kept it at hire till it amounted to ninety-two thou- 
 sand dollars. This fact is not found in the public reports, but de- 
 pends with me on the verbal statement of an officer of the navy, 
 who said he knew it to be true. 
 
 That the administration ought to be credited for the reason- 
 able expenses of the Florida war, we have never denied. Those 
 reasonable charges, we say, could not exceed one or two millions 
 a year. Deduct such a sum from the forty million expenditure of 
 1838, and the remainder will still be without a parallel as an 
 annual expenditure. 
 
 Again, Mr. Douglas says, that the removal of the Indians to 
 the country west of the Mississippi created much of the expendi- 
 ture of 1838. I have examined the public documents in relation 
 to this matter, and find that less was paid for the removal of In- 
 
108 ABRAHAM LINCOLN: 
 
 dians in that, than in some former years. The whole sum ex- 
 pended on that account in that year, did not much exceed one 
 quarter of a million. For this small sum, altho' we do not think 
 the administration entitled to credit, because large sums have 
 been expended in the same way in former years, we consent it 
 may take one and make the most of it. 
 
 Next, Mr. Douglas says, that five millions of the expenditures 
 of 1838, consisted of the payment of the French indemnity money 
 to its individual claimants. I have carefully examined the public 
 documents, and thereby find this statement to be wholly untrue. 
 Of the forty millions of dollars expended in 1838, I am enabled 
 to say positively, that not one dollar consisted of payments on 
 the French indemnities. So much for that excuse. 
 
 Next comes the Post Office. — He says that five millions were 
 expended during that year to sustain that Department. By a like 
 examination of public documents, I find this also, wholly untrue. 
 Of the so often mentioned forty millions, not one dollar went to 
 the Post Office. I am glad, however, that the Post Office has been 
 referred to, because it warrants me in digressing a little, to en- 
 quire how it is, that that department of the Government has 
 become a charge upon the Treasury, whereas under Mr. Adams 
 and the Presidents before him, it not only, to use a homely phrase, 
 cut its own fodder, but actually threw a surplus into the Treasury. 
 — Although nothing of the forty millions was paid on that ac- 
 count, in 1838; it is true that five millions are appropriated to be 
 so expended in 1839; showing clearly that the department has 
 become a charge upon the Treasury. — How has this happened? 
 
 I account for it in this way — the chief expense of the Post 
 Office Department consists of the payments of Contractors for 
 carrying the mails — contracts for carrying the mails, are, by law, 
 let to the lowest bidders, after advertisement. This plan introduces 
 competition, and insures the transportation of the mails at fair 
 prices, so long as it is faithfully adhered to. It has ever been 
 adhered to until Mr. Barry was made Post Master General. When 
 he came into office, he formed the purpose of throwing the mail 
 contracts into the hands of his friends to the exclusion of his 
 opponents. To effect this, the plan of letting to the lowest bidder 
 must be evaded, and it must be done in this way — The favorite 
 
HIS SPEECHES AND WRITINGS 109 
 
 bid less by perhaps three, or four hundred per cent, than the con- 
 tract could be performed for, and consequently, shutting out all 
 honest competition, became the contractor. The Post Master 
 General would immediately add some slight additional duty to the 
 contract, and under the pretence of extra allowance for extra 
 services, run the contract to double, triple, and often quadruple 
 what honest and fair bidders had proposed to take it at. In 1834 
 the finances of the department had become so deranged, that total 
 concealment was no longer possible, and consequently a com- 
 mittee of the Senate were directed to make a thorough investiga- 
 tion of its affairs. Their report is found in the Senate Documents 
 of 1833 — '34 — vol. 5, Doc. 422 — which Documents may be seen at 
 the Secretary's office, and I presume elsewhere in the State. The 
 report shows numerous cases, of similar import, of one of which 
 I give the substance — The contract for carrying the mail upon a 
 certain route, had expired, and of course was to be let again. The 
 old contractor offered to take it for $300 a year, the mail to be 
 transported thereon three times a week, or for $600 transported 
 daily. One James Reeside, bid $40 for three times a week; or $99 
 daily, and of course received the contract. On the examination 
 of the committee, it was discovered that Reeside had received for 
 the service on this route, which he had contracted to render for 
 less than $100, the enormous sum of $1,999! This is but a single 
 case. — Many similar ones, covering some ten or twenty pages of a 
 large volume, are given in that report. The department was found 
 to be insolvent to the amount of half a million; and to have been 
 so grossly mismanaged, or rather so corruptly managed, in almost 
 every particular, that the best friends of the Post Master General 
 made no defence of his administration of it. They admitted that 
 he was wholly unqualified for that office; but still he was retained 
 in it by the President, until he resigned it voluntarily about a year 
 afterwards. And when he resigned it what do you think became 
 of him? Why, he sunk into obscurity and disgrace, to be sure, you 
 will say. No such thing. Well, then, what did become of him? Why 
 the President immediately expressed his high disapprobation of his 
 almost unequalled incapability and corruption, by appointing him 
 to a foreign mission, with a salary and outfit of $18,000 a year. — 
 The party now attempt to throw Barry off and to avoid the 
 
110 ABRAHAM LINCOLN: 
 
 responsibility of his sins. — Did not the President endorse those 
 sins, when on the very heel of their commission, he appointed their 
 author to the very highest and most honorable office in his gift, 
 and which is but a single step behind the very goal of American 
 political ambition? 
 
 I return to another of Mr. Douglas's excuses for the expendi- 
 tures of 1838, at the same time announcing the pleasing intel- 
 ligence, that this is the last one. He says that ten millions of that 
 year's expenditures, was a contingent appropriation, to prosecute 
 an anticipated war with Great Britain, on the Maine boundary 
 question. Few words will settle this. First: that the ten millions 
 appropriated was not made till 1839, and consequently could not 
 have been expended in 1838, and, second; although it was appro- 
 priated, it has never been expended at all. — Those who heard Mr. 
 Douglas, recollect that he indulged himself in a contemptuous 
 expression of pity for me. "Now he's got me," thought I. — But when 
 he went on to say that five millions of the expenditure of 1838, 
 were payments of the French indemnities, which I knew to be 
 untrue; that five millions had been for the Post Office, which I 
 knew to he untrue, that ten millions had been for the Maine boun- 
 dary war, which I not only knew to be untrue but supremely 
 ridiculous also; and when I saw that he was stupid enough to 
 hope, that I would permit such groundless and audacious asser- 
 tions to go unexposed, I readily consented, that on the score of 
 both veracity and sagacity, the audience should judge whether he 
 or I were the more deserving of the world's contempt. 
 
 Mr. Lamborn insists that the difference between the Van 
 Buren Party, and the Whigs is, that although the former sometimes 
 err in practice, they are always correct in principle — whereas the 
 latter are wrong in principle — and the better to impress this prop- 
 osition, he uses a figurative expression in these words: "The 
 Democrats are vulnerable in the heel, but they are sound in the 
 head and the heart! 9 The first branch of the figure, that is that the 
 Democrats are vulnerable in the heel, I admit is not merely figura- 
 tively, but literally true. Who that looks but for a moment at their 
 Swartwouts, their Prices, their Harringtons, and their hundreds of 
 others, scampering away with the public money to Texas, to 
 Europe, and to every spot of the earth where a villain may hope to 
 
HIS SPEECHES AND WRITINGS 111 
 
 find refuge from justice, can at all doubt that they are most dis- 
 tressingly affected in their heels with a species of "running itch." 
 It seems that this malady of their heels, operates on these sound- 
 headed and honest-hearted creatures, very much like the cork-leg, 
 in the comic song, did on its owner, which, when he had once got 
 started on it, the more he tried to stop it, the more it would run 
 away. At the hazard of wearing this point thread bare, I will relate 
 an anecdote, which seems too strikingly in point to be omitted. A 
 witty Irish soldier, who was always boasting of his bravery, when 
 no danger was near, but who invariably retreated without orders 
 at the first charge of an engagement, being asked by his Captain 
 why he did so, replied: "Captain, I have as brave a heart as Julius 
 Caesar ever had; but somehow or other, whenever danger 
 approaches, my cowardly legs will run away with it." So with Mr. 
 Lamborn's party. They take the public money into their hand for 
 the most laudable purpose, that wise heads and honest hearts 
 can dictate; but before they can possibly get it out again, their 
 rascally "vulnerable heels" will run away with them. 
 
 Seriously: this proposition of Mr. Lamborn is nothing more or 
 less, than a request that his party may be tried by their professions 
 instead of their practices. Perhaps no position that the party 
 assumes is more liable to, or more deserving of exposure, than this 
 very modest request; and nothing but the unwarrantable length to 
 which I have already extended these remarks, forbids me now 
 attempting to expose it. For the reason given, I pass it by. 
 
 I shall advert to but one more point. 
 
 Mr. Lamborn refers to the late elections in the States, and from 
 their results, confidently predicts, that every State in the Union will 
 vote for Mr. Van Buren at the next Presidential election. Address 
 that argument to cowards and to knaves; with the free and the 
 brave it will affect nothing. It may be true, if it must, let it. Many 
 free countries have lost their liberty, and ours may lose hers; but 
 if she shall, be it my proudest plume, not that I was the last to 
 desert, but that I never deserted her. — I know that the great vol- 
 cano at Washington, aroused and directed by the evil spirit that 
 reigns there, is belching forth the lava of political corruption, in a 
 current broad and deep, which is sweeping with frightful velocity 
 over the whole length and breadth of the land, bidding fair to 
 
112 ABRAHAM LINCOLN: 
 
 leave unscathed no green spot or living thing, while on its bosom 
 are riding like demons on the waves of Hell, the imps of that evil 
 spirit, and fiendishly taunting all those who dare resist its destroy- 
 ing course, with the hopelessness of their effort; and knowing this, 
 I cannot deny that all may be swept away. Broken by it, I too, may 
 be; bow to it, I never will. The probability that we may fall in the 
 struggle ought not to deter us from the support of a cause we 
 believe to be just; it shall not deter me. If ever I feel the soul 
 within me elevate and expand to those dimensions not wholly 
 unworthy of its Almighty Architect, it is when I contemplate the 
 cause of my country, deserted by all the world beside, and I 
 standing up boldly alone, and hurling defiance at her victorious 
 oppressors. Here, without contemplating consequences, before 
 High Heaven, and in the face of the world, I swear eternal fidelity 
 to the just cause, as I deem it, of the land of my life, my liberty and 
 my love. — And who, that thinks with me, will not fearlessly adopt 
 the oath that I take. Let none falter, who thinks he is right, and 
 we may succeed. But, if after all, we shall fail, be it so. — We still 
 shall have the proud consolation of saying to our consciences, and 
 to the departed shade of our country's freedom, that the cause 
 approved of our judgment, and adored of our hearts, in disaster, in 
 chains, in torture, in death, we never faltered in defending. 
 
 The text of this speech is that of the pamphlet (Fish 
 518) printed in January or February, 1840, for circulation 
 in the presidential campaign, with some emendations 
 and corrections taken from the text printed in the San- 
 gamo Journal, March 6, 1840. Comparison of these two 
 texts suggests that Lincoln corrected and revised a copy 
 of the pamphlet for publication in the newspaper, for 
 corrections and changes in diction are numerous. The 
 Journal text is, however, marred by typographical errors 
 and omissions. 
 
 The Sub-Treasury has been regarded by many his- 
 torians as a sound experiment. Theodore Calvin Pease 
 (The Frontier State) terms it "the boldest and most states- 
 
HIS SPEECHES AND WRITINGS 113 
 
 manlike measure of his [Van Burens] career," and calls 
 attention to the fact that the Whigs "ignored the nature 
 of the institution' in their attacks upon it. That Lincoln's 
 argument was effective, if occasionally specious, is at- 
 tested by the detailed and equally political defense pub- 
 lished in the Illinois State Register, February 8, 14, 1840. 
 Since this editorial refers specifically to the footnote 
 which Lincoln added, it may be inferred that the pam- 
 phlet was in circulation before February 8, 1840. 
 
 The date on which the speech was delivered has 
 been determined with fair certainty. Although Nicolay 
 and Hay give December 20, 1839, investigations con- 
 ducted by Harry E. Pratt indicate that December 26, 
 1839, is the actual date. 
 
 LETTER TO JOHN T. STUART 
 JANUARY 20, 1841 
 
 Springfield, Jany. 20th. 1841 
 Dear Stuart: 
 
 I have had no letter from you since you left. No matter for 
 that. What I wish now is to speak of our Post-Office. You know I 
 desired Dr. Henry to have that place when you left; I now desire 
 it more than ever. I have within the last few days, been making 
 a most discreditable exhibition of myself in the way of hypo- 
 chondriasm and thereby got an impression that Dr. Henry is 
 necessary to my existence. Unless he gets that place he leaves 
 Springfield. You therefore see how much I am interested in the 
 matter. 
 
 We shall shortly forward you a petition in his favour signed by 
 all or nearly all the Whig members of the Legislature as well as 
 other whigs. 
 
114 ABRAHAM LINCOLN: 
 
 This, together with what you know of the Dr.'s position and 
 merits I sincerely hope will secure him the appointment. My heart 
 is very much set upon it. 
 
 Pardon me for not writing more; I have not sufficient com- 
 posure to write a long letter. 
 
 As ever yours 
 
 A. Lincoln 
 
 Lincoln's mental and physical condition — as referred 
 to here and described in the last paragraph of the next 
 letter, and as numerous references in later letters written 
 in 1841 recur to it — all revolves around the "fatal 1st of 
 January'' when apparently he broke his engagement to 
 Mary Todd. Precisely what happened is not known, but 
 Lincoln's close friends were well aware that his psy- 
 chological unbalance was the result of his misfortune as 
 a lover, and in March his friend Stuart tried, presumably 
 at Lincoln's request, to get him an appointment as Charge 
 d'Affaires at Bogota, on the ancient theory, perhaps, 
 that a change in climate might remedy his condition. 
 Psychoanalysts have indicated repression and complexes; 
 William F. Petersen (Lincoln-Douglas: The Weather 
 as Destiny) has expounded a theory that inclement 
 weather aggravated Lincoln's psychoneurotic affliction; 
 and students of Lincoln in general are agreed that here 
 again, as in his affair with Mary Owens, Lincoln just 
 could not make up his mind. 
 
HIS SPEECHES AND WRITINGS 115 
 
 LETTER TO JOHN T. STUART 
 JANUARY 23, 1841 
 
 Jany. 23rd. 1841— Springfield, Ills. 
 Dear Stuart: 
 
 Yours of trie 3rd. Inst, is reed. & I proceed to answer it as well 
 as I can, tho, from the deplorable state of my mind at this time, 
 I fear I shall give you but little satisfaction About the matter of 
 the congressional election, I can only tell you, that there is a bill 
 now before the Senate adopting the General Ticket system; but 
 whether the party have fully determined on it's adoption is yet 
 uncertain. There is no sign of opposition to you among our friends, 
 and none that I can learn among our enemies; tho, of course, 
 there will be, if the Genl. Ticket be adopted. The Chicago Ameri- 
 can, Peoria Register, & Sangamo Journal, have already hoisted 
 your flag upon their own responsibility, & the other whig papers 
 of the District are expected to follow immediately. On last evening 
 there was a meeting of our friends at Butler's; and I submitted the 
 question to them & found them unanamously [sic] in favor of hav- 
 ing you announced as a candidate. A few of us this morning, 
 however, concluded, that as you were already being announced 
 in the papers, we would delay announcing you, as by your own 
 authority for a week or two. We thought that to appear too keen 
 about it might spur our opponents on about their Genl. Ticket 
 project. Upon the whole, I think I may say with certainty, that 
 your reelection is sure, if it be in the power of the whigs to make 
 it so. 
 
 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 
 
116 ABRAHAM LINCOLN: 
 
 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 bussiness [sic] 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 
 
 Lincoln's reference to a bill before the Senate 
 "adopting the General Ticket system" recalls the fact 
 that the Whigs were still debating the adoption of the 
 convention system — already made a party procedure by 
 the Democrats — and that the "General Ticket project" 
 was intended to draw strict party lines and issues, to 
 eliminate the multiplicity of candidates, and to tie the 
 candidate more tightly to the party program. Lincoln 
 apparently felt Stuart's position to be strong, but that 
 opposition to him would crystallize around some other 
 candidate if the General Ticket bill passed. In any 
 event Stuart won his re-election to Congress in June by a 
 small majority. 
 
 LETTER TO JOSHUA F. SPEED 
 JUNE 19, 1841 
 
 Springfield, June 19th. 1841 
 Dear Speed: 
 
 We have had the highest state of excitement here for a 
 week past that our community has ever witnessed; and although 
 the public feeling is somewhat allayed, the curious affair which 
 aroused it, is very far from being even yet, cleared of mysteiy. It 
 would take a quire of paper to give you anything like a full account 
 
HIS SPEECHES AND WRITINGS 117 
 
 of it, and I therefore only propose a brief outline. The chief 
 personages in the drama, are Archibald Fisher, supposed to be 
 murdered; and Archibald Trailor, Henry Trailor, and William 
 Trailor, supposed to have murdered him. The three Trailors are 
 brothers: the first, Arch., as you know, lives in town; the second, 
 Henry, in Clary's Grove; and the third, Wm., in Warren County; 
 and Fisher, the supposed murderee, being without a family had 
 made his home with William. On Saturday evening, being the 29th 
 May, Fisher and William came to Henry's in a one horse dear- 
 born, and there stayed over Sunday, and on monday all three 
 came to Springfield, Henry on horseback, and joined Archibald 
 at Myers', the Dutch carpenter. That evening at supper Fisher 
 was missing, and so next morning. Some ineffectual search was 
 made for him; and on tuesday, at 1 o'clock P.M., Wm. & Henry 
 started home without him. In a day or so Henry and one or two of 
 his Clary Grove neighbors came back and searched for him again, 
 and advertised his disappearance in the paper. The knowledge 
 of the matter thus far had not been general; and here it dropped 
 entirely till about the 10th. Inst., when Keys received a letter from 
 the Post Master in Warren, stating that Wm. had arrived at home, 
 and was telling a very mysterious and improbable story about 
 the disappearance of Fisher, which induced the community there 
 to suppose he had been disposed of unfairly. Keys made this letter 
 public, which immediately set the whole town and adjoining 
 county agog; and so it has continued until yesterday. The mass of 
 the People commenced a systematic search for the dead body, 
 while Wickersham was dispatched to arrest Henry Trailor at the 
 Grove, and Jim Maxcy to Warren to arrest William. On Monday 
 last Henry was brought in, and showed an evident inclination 
 to insinuate that he knew Fisher to be dead, and that Arch, and 
 Wm. had killed him. He said he guessed the body could be found 
 in Spring Creek between the Beardstown road and Hickoxes mill. 
 Away the people swept like a herd of buffaloes, and cut down 
 Hickoxes mill-dam nolens volens, to draw the water out of the 
 pond; and then went up and down, and down and up the creek, 
 fishing and raking, and ducking, and diving for two days, and after 
 all no dead body found. In the mean time a sort of scuffling ground 
 had been found in the brush in the angle, or point where the road 
 
118 ABRAHAM LINCOLN: 
 
 leading into the woods past the brewery, and the one leading in 
 past the brick-yard join. From the scuffle ground, was the sign of 
 something about the size of a man having been dragged to the 
 edge of the thicket, where it joined the track of some small wheeled 
 carriage which was drawn by one horse, as shown by the horse 
 tracks. The carriage-track led off toward Spring Creek. Near this 
 drag-trail, Dr. Merryman found two hairs, which, after a long 
 scientific examination, he pronounced to be triangular human 
 hairs, which term, he says, includes within it, the whiskers, the 
 hair growing under the arms and on other parts of the body; and 
 he judged that these two were of the whiskers, because the ends 
 were cut, showing that they had flourished in the neighborhood 
 of the razor's operations. On thursday last Jim Maxcy brought 
 in William Trailor from Warren. On the same day Arch, was 
 arrested and put in jail. Yesterday (friday) William was put upon 
 his examining trial before May and Lavely. Archibald and Henry 
 were both present. Lamborn prosecuted, and Logan, Baker, and 
 your humble servant defended* A great many witnesses were 
 introduced and examined; but I shall only mention those whose 
 testimony seemed to be the most important. The first of these 
 was Capt. Ransdell. He swore that when William and Henry left 
 Springfield for home on tuesday before mentioned, they did not 
 take the. direct route, which, you know, leads by the butcher shop, 
 but that they followed the street North until they got opposite, or 
 nearly opposite May's new house, after which he could not see 
 them from where he stood; and it was afterward proven that in 
 about an hour after they started, they came into the street by the 
 butcher's shop from towards the brick-yard. Dr. Merryman and 
 others swore to what is stated about the scuffle-ground, drag-trail, 
 whiskers, and carriage-tracks. Henry was then introduced by the 
 prosecution. He swore that when they started for home, they went 
 out North, as Ransdell stated, and turned down West by the brick- 
 yard into the woods, and there met Archibald; that they pro- 
 ceeded a small distance farther, where he was placed as a sentinel 
 to watch for, and announce the approach of any one that might 
 happen that way; that William and Arch, took the dearborn out of 
 the road a small distance to the edge of the thicket, where they 
 stopped, and he saw them lift the body of a man into it; that they 
 
HIS SPEECHES AND WRITINGS 119 
 
 then moved off with the carriage in the direction of Hickoxes 
 mill, and he loitered about for something like an hour, when 
 William returned with the carriage, but without Arch: and said 
 they had put him in a safe place; that they went some how, he 
 did not know exactly how, into the road close to the brewery, and 
 proceeded on to Clary's Grove. He also stated that sometime dur- 
 ing the day William told him, that he and Arch, had killed Fisher 
 the evening before; that the way they did it was by him (William ) 
 knocking him down with a club, and Arch, then choking him to 
 death. An old man from Warren, called Dr. Gilmore, was then 
 introduced on the part of the defence. He swore that he had 
 known Fisher for several years; that Fisher had resided at his 
 house a long time at each of two different spells; once while he 
 built a barn for him, and once while he was doctored for some 
 chronic disease; that two or three years ago, Fisher had a serious 
 hurt in his head by the bursting of a gun, since which he had been 
 subject to continued bad health, and occasional aberrations of 
 mind. He also stated that on last tuesday, being the same day 
 that Maxcy arrested William Trailor, he (the Dr.) was from 
 home in the early part of the day, and on his return, about 11 
 o clock, found Fisher at his house, in bed, and apparently very 
 unwell; that he asked him how he came from Springfield; that 
 Fisher said he had come by Peoria, and also told several other 
 places he had been at not in the direction of Peoria, which showed 
 that he, at the time of speaking, did not know where he had been, 
 or that he had been wandering about in a state of derangement. 
 He further stated that in about two hours he received a note from 
 one of William Trailor's friends, advising him of his arrest, and 
 requesting him to go on to Springfield as a witness, to testify to 
 the state of Fisher's health in former times; that he immediately 
 set off, calling up two of his neighbors, as company, and, riding 
 all evening and all night, overtook Maxcy and William at Lewis- 
 ton in Fulton County; that Maxcy refusing to discharge Trailor 
 upon his statement, his two neighbors returned and he came on 
 to Springfield. Some question being made whether the doctor's 
 story was not a fabrication, several acquaintances of his among 
 whom was the same Post Master who wrote Keys, as before men- 
 tioned, were introduced as sort of compurgators, who all swore, 
 
120 ABRAHAM LINCOLN: 
 
 that they knew the doctor to be of good character for truth and 
 veracity, and generally of good character in every way. Here the 
 testimony ended and the Trailors were discharged, Arch, and 
 William expressing, both in word and manner, their entire con- 
 fidence that Fisher would be found alive at the doctor's by Gallo- 
 way, Mallory, and Myers, who a day before had been despatched 
 for that purpose; while Henry still protested that no power on 
 earth could ever show Fisher alive. Thus stands this curious 
 affair now. When the doctor's story was first made public, it was 
 amusing to scan and contemplate the countenances, and hear the 
 remarks of those who had been actively engaged in the search for 
 the dead body. Some looked quizzical, some melancholly [sic], 
 and some furiously angry. Porter, who had been very active, swore 
 he always knew the man was not dead, and that he had not stirred 
 an inch to hunt for him; Langford, who had taken the lead in 
 cutting down Hickoxes mill dam, and wanted to hang Hickox 
 for objecting, looked most awfully wobegone [sic] : he seemed the 
 "wictim of hunrequited haffections" as represented in the comic 
 almanic [sic] we used to laugh over; and Hart, the little drayman 
 that hauled Molly home once, said it was too damned bad, to have 
 so much trouble, and no hanging after all. 
 
 I commenced this letter on yesterday, since which I received 
 yours of the 13th. I stick to my promise to come to Louisville. 
 Nothing new here except what I have written. I have not seen 
 Sarah since my long trip, and I am going out there as soon as I 
 mail this letter. 
 
 Yours forever, 
 
 Lincoln. 
 
 For a discussion of the Traitor Case, see the note on 
 "Remarkable Case of Arrest for Murder" April 15, 1846. 
 
 Lincoln's reference to "Sarah" designates Sarah 
 Rickard whom Speed had apparently been courting and 
 from whom he had broken off about the same time as 
 Lincoln's break with Mary Todd. Further references to 
 "Sarah" in Lincoln's letters to Speed are to the same 
 person. For a full account of Speed's, as well as Lincoln's 
 
HIS SPEECHES AND WRITINGS 121 
 
 difficulties in courtship, see Carl Sandburg and Paul M. 
 Angle, Mary Lincoln: Wife and Widow. 
 
 That Speed was undoubtedly the closest friend 
 Lincoln ever had is attested by the several letters 
 included in this volume. It began, according to the story, 
 the day when Lincoln came to Springfield to live and 
 was invited by Speed to share his room, and lasted until 
 Lincoln's death, although in later years they saw less of 
 each other and corresponded infrequently. Robert L. 
 Kincaid's Joshua Fry Speed: Lincoln's Most Intimate 
 Friend is the best recent account of their long friendship. 
 
 LETTER TO MISS MARY SPEED 
 SEPTEMBER 27, 1841 
 
 Bloomington, Illinois. Sept. 27th. 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 & 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 
 
122 ABRAHAM LINCOLN: 
 
 we reached Springfield. We got on board the Steam Boat Leba- 
 non, in the locks of the Canal about 12 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 he thought interesting. By 
 the way, a fine example was presented on board the boat for con- 
 templating the effect of condition upon human happiness. 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 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 trot-line. 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 unrelent- 
 ing than any other where; and yet amid all these distressing cir- 
 cumstances, as we would think them, they were the most cheer- 
 ful and apparently happy creatures on board. One whose offence 
 for which he had been sold was an over-fondness for his wife, 
 played the fiddle almost continually; and the others danced, 
 sung, 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 narative [sic]. When we reached Spring- 
 field, I staid [sic] 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 Kentucky, 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 litterally [sic] 
 "subsisting on savoury remembrances" — that is, being unable 
 
HIS SPEECHES AND WRITINGS 123 
 
 to eat, I am living upon the remembrance of the delicious dishes 
 of peaches and cream we used 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 con- 
 vinced 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 as it is. That is something of a tend- 
 ency to melancholly [sic]. 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" with me; 
 but that 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 according to the truth. 
 
 Give my respects to all your sisters ( including "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, can not satisfy myself 
 with one. I shall be very happy to receive a line from you, soon 
 after you receive this; and, in case you choose to favour me with 
 one, address it to Charleston, Coles County, Ills as I shall be 
 there about the time to receive it. 
 
 Your sincere friend 
 
 A. Lincoln. 
 
 This letter to Joshua Speed's sister was written on 
 Lincoln's return trip from Louisville, Kentucky, to St. 
 Louis. He had made an extended visit in the Speed 
 home near Louisville and had formed a strong attach- 
 ment for his friend's mother and sister. The "present" 
 referred to was an Oxford Bible.. The indelible im- 
 pression which the sight of the manacled slaves made on 
 Lincoln was recalled nearly fourteen years later when 
 he wrote to Speed, who had returned to his home in 
 
124 ABRAHAM LINCOLN: 
 
 Kentucky to live, explaining his stand on the exten- 
 sion of slavery. (See the letter dated August 24, 1855.) 
 
 LETTER TO JOSHUA F. SPEED 
 JANUARY 3, 1842 
 
 My dear Speed: 
 
 Feeling, as you know I do, the deepest solicitude for the 
 success of the enterprise you are engaged in, I adopt this as the 
 last method I can invent to aid you, in case (which God forbid) 
 you shall need any aid. I do not place what I am going to say 
 on paper, because I can say it any better in that way than I 
 could by word of mouth; but because, were I to say it orrally 
 [sic], before we part, most likely you would forget it at the very 
 time when it might do you some good. As I think it reasonable 
 that you will feel very badly some time between this and the 
 final consummation of your purpose, it is intended that you shall 
 read this just at such a time. 
 
 Why I say it is reasonable that you will feel very badly yet, 
 is, because of three special causes, added to the general one 
 which I shall mention. 
 
 The general cause is, that you are naturally of a nervous 
 temperament; and this I say from what I have seen of you per- 
 sonally, and what you have told me concerning your mother at 
 various times, and concerning your brother William at the time 
 his wife died. 
 
 The first special cause is, your exposure to had weather on 
 your journey, which my experience clearly proves to be very 
 severe on defective nerves. The second is, the absence of all 
 business and conversation of friends, which might divert your 
 mind, and give it occasional rest from the intensity of thought, 
 which will sometimes wear the sweetest idea threadbare and 
 turn it to the bitterness of death. 
 
HIS SPEECHES AND WRITINGS 125 
 
 The third is, the rapid and near approach of that crisis on 
 which all your thoughts and feelings concentrate. 
 
 If from all these causes you shall escape and go through 
 triumphantly, without another "twinge of the soul" I shall be most 
 happily, but most egregiously deceived. 
 
 If, on the contrary, you shall, as I expect you will at some 
 time, be agonized and distressed, let me, who have some reason 
 to speak with judgment on such a subject, beseech you, to ascribe 
 it to the causes I have mentioned; and not to some false and 
 ruinous suggestion of the Devil. 
 
 "But" you will say "do not your causes apply to every one 
 engaged in a like undertaking?" 
 
 By no means. The particular causes, to a greater or less 
 extent, perhaps do apply in all cases; but the general one, — 
 nervous debility, which is the key and conductor of all the par- 
 ticular ones, and without which they would be utterly harmless, 
 though it does pertain to you, does not pertain to one in a thou- 
 sand. It is out of this, that the painful difference between you 
 and the mass of the world springs. 
 
 I know what the painful point with you is, at all times when 
 you are unhappy. It is an apprehension that you do not love her 
 as you should. What nonsense!— How came you to court her? 
 Was it because you thought she desired it, and that you had 
 given her reason to expect it? If it was for that, why did not the 
 same reason make you court Ann Todd, and at least twenty others 
 of whom you can think, to whom it would apply with greater 
 force than to her? Did you court her for her wealth? Why, you 
 know she had none. But you say you reasoned yourself into it. 
 What do you mean by that? Was it not, that you found yourself 
 unable to reason yourself out of it? Did you not think, and partly 
 form the purpose, of courting her the first time you ever saw or 
 heard of her? What had reason to do with it, at that early stage? 
 There was nothing at that time for reason to work upon. Whether 
 she was moral, amiable, sensible, or even of good character, you 
 did not, nor could then know; except, perhaps you might infer 
 the last from the company you found her in. All you then did or 
 could know of her, was her personal appearance and deport- 
 
126 ABRAHAM LINCOLN: 
 
 merit; and these, if they impress at all, impress the heart, and not 
 the head. 
 
 Say candidly, were not those heavenly black eyes, the whole 
 basis of all your early reasoning on the subject? 
 
 After you and I had once been at her residence, did you not 
 go and take me all the way to Lexington and back, for no other 
 purpose but to get to see her again, on our return, in that seeming 
 to take a trip for that express object? 
 
 What earthly consideration would you take to find her 
 scouting and despising you, and giving herself up to another? 
 But of this you have no apprehension; and therefore you can 
 not bring it home to your feelings. 
 
 I shall be so anxious about you, that I want you to write 
 every mail. 
 
 Your friend 
 
 Lincoln 
 
 The confidence with which Lincoln diagnoses 
 Speed's emotional state leads one to suspect not 
 only that his own unhappy experience has assumed in 
 retrospect a less formidable aspect, but also that he 
 still loves Mary and that he has reason to believe Mary 
 still loves him. How soon prearranged meetings were 
 resumed by Lincoln and Mary, under the matchmaking 
 guidance of Mrs. Simeon Francis, is not certain. They 
 were seeing each other certainly by the summer of 1842, 
 and one is tempted to suspect that perhaps a few 
 "accidental" meetings had taken place by January, 
 1842. Lincoln's letters to Speed suggest something more 
 than a return to a "rational view"; they suggest an 
 emotional readjustment that can hardly be accounted 
 for unless he has made up his mind, to some extent, 
 about Mary. There is, however, no additional evidence 
 in support of this supposition. 
 
<4t € 
 
 Meserve No. 26. A photograph by Alexander Hesler made 
 in Springfield on June 3, 1860. The purchase of this nega- 
 tive by Mr. George B. Ayres doubtless saved it from loss 
 in the Hesler Gallery, which was burned in the Chicago 
 fire of 1871. 
 
HIS SPEECHES AND WRITINGS 127 
 
 LETTER TO JOSHUA F. SPEED 
 FEBRUARY 3, 1842 
 
 Springfield, Ills. Feby. 3—1842— 
 Dear Speed: 
 
 Your letter of the 25th. Jany. came to hand to-day. You well 
 know that I do not feel my own sorrows much more keenly than 
 I do yours, when I know of them; and yet I assure you I was not 
 much hurt by what you wrote me of your excessively bad feel- 
 ing at the time you wrote. Not that I am less capable of sym- 
 pathising with you now than ever; not that I am less your friend 
 than ever; but because I hope and believe, that your present 
 anxiety and distress about her health and her life, must and will 
 forever banish those horid [sic] doubts, which I know you 
 sometimes felt, as to the truth of your affection for her. If they 
 can be once and forever removed, (and I almost feel a presenti- 
 ment that the Almighty has sent your present affliction expressly 
 for that object) surely, nothing can come in their stead, to fill 
 their immeasurable measure of misery. The death scenes of 
 those we love, are surely painful enough; but these we are pre- 
 pared to, and expect to see. They happen to all, and all know 
 they must happen. Painful as they are, they are not an unlooked- 
 for-sorrow. Should she, as you fear, be destined to an early grave, 
 it is indeed a great consolation to know that she is so well pre- 
 pared to meet it. Her religion, which you once disliked so much, 
 I will venture you now prize most highly. 
 
 But I hope your melancholly [sic] bodings as to her early 
 death, are not well founded. I even hope, that ere this reaches 
 you, she will have returned with improved and still improving 
 health; and that you will have met her, and forgotten the sorrows 
 of the past, in the enjoyment of the present. 
 
 I would say more if I could, but it seems I have said enough. 
 It really appears to me that you yourself ought to rejoice, and 
 not sorrow, at this indubitable evidence of your undying affection 
 
128 ABRAHAM LINCOLN: 
 
 for her. Why Speed, if you did not love her, although you might 
 not wish her death, you would most calmly be resigned to it. 
 Perhaps this point is no longer a question with you, and my per- 
 tinacious dwelling upon it, is a rude intrusion upon your feelings. 
 If so, you must pardon me. You know the Hell I have suffered on 
 that point, and how tender I am upon it. You know I do not mean 
 wrong. 
 
 I have been quite clear of hypo since you left — even better 
 than I was along in the fall. 
 
 I have seen Sarah but once. She seemed verry [sic] cheerful, 
 and so, I said nothing to her about what we spoke of. 
 
 Old Uncle Billy Herndon is dead; and it is said this evening 
 that Uncle Ben Ferguson will not live. This I believe is all the 
 news, and enough at that unless it were better. 
 
 Write me immediately on the receipt of this. 
 
 Your friend as ever 
 
 Lincoln 
 
 EULOGY ON BENJAMIN FERGUSON 
 FEBRUARY 8, 1842 
 
 Mr. President: — 
 
 The solemn duty has been assigned to me, of announcing 
 to this Society, the sudden and melancholy death of its much 
 respected member, benjamin ferguson. 
 
 After an illness of only six days, he closed his mortal exist- 
 ence, at a quarter past seven on the evening of the 3d inst., in 
 the bosom of his family at his residence in this city. 
 
 Mr. Ferguson was one who became a member of this society 
 without any prospect of advantage to himself. He was, though 
 not totally abstinent, strictly temperate before; and he espoused 
 the cause solely with the hope and benevolent design of being 
 able, by his efforts and example, to benefit others. Would to God, 
 
HIS SPEECHES AND WRITINGS 129 
 
 he had been longer spared to the humane work upon which he 
 had so disinterestedly entered. 
 
 In his intercourse with his fellow men, he possessed that 
 rare uprightness of character, which was evidenced by his having 
 no disputes or bickerings of his own, while he was ever the 
 chosen arbiter to settle those of his neighbors. 
 
 In very truth he was, the noblest work of God — an honest 
 man. 
 
 The grateful task commonly vouchsafed to the mournful 
 living, of casting the mantle of charitable forgetfulness over the 
 faults of the lamented dead, is denied to us: for although it is 
 much to say, for any of the erring family of man, we believe we 
 may say, that he whom we deplore was faultless. 
 
 To Almighty God we commend him; and, in his name, im- 
 plore the aid and protection, of his omnipotent right arm, for his 
 bereaved and disconsolate family. 
 
 The "Eulogy" and the "Temperance Address' given 
 two weeks later were both delivered before the Wash- 
 ington Temperance Society. It may be noted that al- 
 though the members were often referred to as "the 
 Washingtonians" the name of the Society was not 
 "Washingtonian" as has generally been supposed. It is 
 not certain that Lincoln was ever a member of the 
 organization. 
 
130 ABRAHAM LINCOLN: 
 
 LETTER TO JOSHUA F. SPEED 
 FEBRUARY 13, 1842 
 
 Springfield, Ills. February 13. 1842— 
 Dear Speed: 
 
 Yours of the 1st. Inst, came to hand three or four days ago. 
 When this shall reach you, you will have been Fanny's husband 
 several days. You know my desire to befriend you is everlasting 
 — that I will never cease, while I know how to do anything. 
 
 But you will always hereafter, be on ground that I have 
 never occupied, and consequently, if advice were needed, I 
 might advise wrong. I do fondly hope, however, that you will 
 never again need any comfort from abroad. But should I be mis- 
 taken in this — should excessive pleasure still be accompanied 
 with a painful counterpart at times, still let me urge you, as I 
 have ever done, to remember, in the depth and even the agony 
 of despondency, that very shortly you are to feel well again. I 
 am now fully convinced that you love her as ardently as you are 
 capable of loving. Your ever being happy in her presence, and 
 your intense anxiety about her health, if there were nothing else, 
 would place this beyond all dispute in my mind. I incline to think 
 it probable, that your nerves will fail you occasionally for a while; 
 but once you get them fairly graded now, that trouble is over 
 forever. I think, if I were you, in case my mind were not exactly 
 right, I would avoid being idle; I would immediately engage in 
 some business, or go to making preparations for it, which would 
 be the same thing. 
 
 If you went through the ceremony calmly, or even with 
 sufficient composure not to excite alarm in any present, you are 
 safe, beyond question, and in two or three months, to say the 
 most, will be the happiest of men. 
 
 I would desire you to give my particular respects to Fanny, 
 but perhaps you will not wish her to know you have received 
 this, lest she should desire to see it. Make her write me an answer 
 
HIS SPEECHES AND WRITINGS 131 
 
 to my last letter to her at any rate. I would set great value upon 
 another letter from her. 
 
 Write me whenever you have leisure. 
 
 Yours forever 
 
 A. Lincoln 
 P. S. I have been quite a man since you left. 
 
 Lincoln s chirography is open to question in the 
 phrase "fairly graded" although it seems clear enough. 
 Nicolay and Hay give "firmly guarded," which fits 
 neither chirography nor sense of the sentence so well 
 as "fairly graded" The editor understands Lincoln to be 
 speaking figuratively of smoothing or leveling a state 
 of ragged nerves. 
 
 The cryptic postscript is open to anyone's guess. 
 The editor's is that Lincoln had met Mary, at least 
 socially, and had managed to "be himself." 
 
 TEMPERANCE ADDRESS DELIVERED BEFORE 
 THE SPRINGFIELD WASHINGTON TEMPERANCE 
 SOCIETY. FEBRUARY 22, 1842 
 
 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 "conquer- 
 ing and to conquer/' The citadels of his great adversary are daily 
 being stormed and dismantled; his temples and his altars, where 
 the rites of his idolatrous worship have long been performed, 
 
132 ABRAHAM LINCOLN: 
 
 and where human sacrifices have long been wont to be made, are 
 daily desecrated and deserted. The trump 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. 
 
 For this new and splendid success, we heartily rejoice. That 
 that success is so much greater now than heretofore, is doubtless 
 owing to rational causes; and if we would have it to continue, we 
 shall do well to enquire what those causes are. The warfare here- 
 tofore waged against the demon of Intemperance, has, some how 
 or other, been erroneous. Either the champions engaged, or the 
 tactics they adopted, have not been the most proper. These cham- 
 pions for the most part, have been Preachers, Lawyers, and hired 
 agents. — Between these and the mass of mankind, there is a 
 want of approachability, if the term be admissible, partially at 
 least, fatal to their success. They are supposed to have no sym- 
 pathy of feeling or interest, with those very persons whom it is 
 their object to convince and persuade. 
 
 And again, it is so easy and so common to ascribe motives 
 to men of these classes, other than those they profess to act 
 upon. The preacher, it is said, advocates temperance because he 
 is a fanatic, and desires a union of the Church and State; the 
 lawyer, from his pride and vanity of hearing himself speak; and 
 the hired agent, for his salary. But when one, who has long been 
 known as a victim of intemperance, bursts the fetters that have 
 bound him, and appears before his neighbors "clothed, and in 
 his right mind," a redeemed specimen of long lost humanity, and 
 stands up with tears of joy trembling in eyes, to tell of the 
 miseries once endured, now to be endured no more forever; of 
 his once naked and starving children, now clad and fed com- 
 fortably; of a wife, long weighed down with woe, weeping, and 
 a broken heart, now restored to health, happiness and renewed 
 affection; and how easily it all is done, once it is resolved to be 
 done; however simple his language, there is a logic, and an 
 eloquence in it, that few, with human feelings, can resist. They 
 cannot say that he desires a union of church and state, for he 
 is not a church member; they can not say he is vain of hearing 
 himself speak, for his whole demeanor shows, he would gladly 
 
HIS SPEECHES AND WRITINGS 133 
 
 avoid speaking at all; they cannot say he speaks for pay for he 
 receives none, and asks for none. Nor can his sincerity in any 
 way be doubted; or his sympathy for those he would persuade to 
 imitate his example, be denied. 
 
 In my judgment, it is to the battles of this new class of 
 champions that our late success is greatly, perhaps chiefly, owing. 
 — But, had the old school champions themselves, been of the 
 most wise selecting, was their system of tactics, the most judi- 
 cious? It seems to me, it was not. Too much denunciation against 
 dram sellers and dram drinkers was indulged in. This, I think, 
 was both impolitic and unjust. It was impolitic, because, it is 
 not much in the nature of man to be driven to any thing; still 
 less to be driven about that which is exclusively his own business; 
 and least of all, where such driving is to be submitted to, at the 
 expense of pecuniary interest, or burning appetite. When the 
 dram-seller and drinker, were incessantly told, not in the accents 
 of entreaty and persuasion, diffidently addressed by erring man 
 to an erring brother, but in the thundering tones of anathema 
 and denunciation, with which the lordly Judge often groups to- 
 gether all the crimes of the felon's life, and thrusts them in his 
 face just ere he passes sentence of death upon him, that they 
 were the authors of all the vice and misery and crime in the 
 land; that they were the manufacturers and material of all the 
 thieves and robbers and murderers that infested the earth; that 
 their houses were the workshops of the devil; and that their per- 
 sons should be shunned by all the good and virtuous, as moral 
 pestilences — I say, when they were told all this, and in this way, 
 it is not wonderful that they were slow, very slow, to acknowl- 
 edge the truth of such denunciations, and to join the ranks of 
 their denouncers, in a hue and cry against themselves. 
 
 To have expected them to do otherwise than as they did — to 
 have expected them not to meet denunciation with denunciation, 
 crimination with crimination, and anathema with anathema, 
 was to expect a reversal of human nature, which is God's decree, 
 and never can be reversed. When the conduct of men is designed 
 to be influenced, persuasion, kind, unassuming persuasion, should 
 ever be adopted. It is an old and a true maxim "that a drop of 
 
134 ABRAHAM LINCOLN: 
 
 honey catches more flies than a gallon of gall." — So with men. 
 If you would win a man to your cause, first convince him that 
 you are his sincere friend. Therein is a drop of honey that catches 
 his heart, which, say what he will, is the great high road to his 
 reason, and which, when once gained, you will find but little 
 trouble in convincing his judgment of the justice of your cause, 
 if indeed that cause really be a just one. On the contrary, assume 
 to dictate to his judgment, or to command his action, or to mark 
 him as one to be shunned and despised, and he will retreat 
 within himself, close all the avenues to his head and his heart; and 
 though your cause be naked truth itself, transformed to the 
 heaviest lance, harder than steel, and sharper than steel can be 
 made, and tho' you throw it with more than Herculean force 
 and precision, you shall be no more able to pierce him, than to 
 penetrate the hard shell of a tortoise with a rye straw. 
 
 Such is man, and so must he be understood by those who 
 would lead him, even to his own best interest. 
 
 On this point, the Washingtonians greatly excel the temper- 
 ance advocates of former times. Those whom they desire to con- 
 vince and persuade, are their old friends and companions. They 
 know they are not demons, nor even the worst of men. They 
 know that generally, they are kind, generous, and charitable, even 
 beyond the example of their more staid and sober neighbors. 
 They are practical philanthropists; and they glow with a generous 
 and brotherly zeal, that mere theorizers are incapable of feeling. 
 — Benevolence and charity possess their hearts entirely; and out 
 of the abundance of their hearts, their tongues give utterance. 
 "Love through all their actions runs, and all their words are mild." 
 In this spirit they speak and act, and in the same, they are heard 
 and regarded. And when such is the temper of the advocate, 
 and such of the audience, no good cause can be unsuccessful. 
 
 But I have said that denunciations against dram-sellers and 
 dram-drinkers are unjust, as well as impolitic. Let us see. 
 
 I have not enquired at what period of time the use of in- 
 toxicating drinks commenced; nor is it important to know. It is 
 sufficient that to all of us who now inhabit the world, the practice 
 of drinking them, is just as old as the world itself, — that is, we 
 have seen the one, just as long as we have seen the other. When 
 
HIS SPEECHES AND WRITINGS 135 
 
 all such of us, as have now reached the years of maturity, first 
 opened our eyes upon the stage of existence, we found intoxicat- 
 ing liquor, recognized by every body, used by every body, and 
 repudiated by nobody. It commonly entered into the first draught 
 of the infant, and the last draught of the dying man. From the 
 sideboard of the parson, down to the ragged pocket of the house- 
 less loafer, it was constantly found. Physicians prescribed it in 
 this, that, and the other disease. Government provided it for its 
 soldiers and sailors; And to have a rolling or raising, a husking or 
 hoe-down, any where without it was positively insufferable. 
 
 So too, it was every where a respectable article of manufac- 
 ture and of merchandize. The making of it was regarded as an 
 honorable livelihood; and he who could make most, was the 
 most enterprising and respectable. Large and small manufac- 
 tories of it were every where erected, in which all the earthly 
 goods of their owners were invested. Wagons drew it from town 
 to town — boats bore it from clime to clime, and the winds wafted 
 it from nation to nation; and merchants bought and sold it, by 
 wholesale and by retail, with precisely the same feelings, on the 
 part of the seller, buyer, and by-stander as are felt at the selling 
 and buying of flour, beef, bacon, or any other of the real neces- 
 saries of life. Universal public opinion not only tolerated, but 
 recognized and adopted its use. 
 
 It is true, that even then, it was known and acknowledged, 
 that many were greatly injured by it; but none seemed to 
 think the injury arose from the use of a bad thing, but from the 
 abuse of a very good thing. — The victims to it were pitied, and 
 compassionated, just as now are, the heirs of consumptions, and 
 other hereditary diseases. Their failing was treated as a mis- 
 fortune, and not as a crime, or even as a disgrace. 
 
 If, then, what I have been saying be true, is it wonderful that 
 some should think and act now, as all thought and acted twenty 
 years ago? And is it just to assail, contemn, or despise them, for 
 doing so? The universal sense of mankind, on any subject, is an 
 argument, or at least an influence, not easily overcome. The suc- 
 cess of the argument in favor of the existence of an overruling 
 Providence, mainly depends upon that sense; and men ought 
 not, in justice, to be denounced for yielding to it in any case, or 
 
136 ABRAHAM LINCOLN: 
 
 for giving it up slowly, especially, where they are backed by in- 
 terest, fixed habits, or burning appetites. 
 
 Another error, as it seems to me, into which 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 temperance 
 might abound to the temperate then, and to all mankind some 
 hundred years thereafter. — There is in this something so repug- 
 nant to humanity, so uncharitable, so cold-blooded and feeling- 
 less, 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 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 mani- 
 fest meanness of the thing. 
 
 And besides this, the benefits of a reformation to be effected 
 by such a system, were too remote in point of time, to warmly 
 engage many in its behalf. Few can be induced to labor ex- 
 clusively for posterity; and none will do it enthusiastically. 
 Posterity has done nothing for us; and theorise 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 greater 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're stealing, Paddy, 
 
HIS SPEECHES AND WRITINGS 137 
 
 — if you don't you'll pay for it at the day of judgment." "By the 
 powers, if ye'll credit me so long, I'll take another, jist." 
 
 By the Washingtonians, this system of consigning the 
 habitual drunkard to hopeless ruin, is repudiated. They adopt a 
 more enlarged philanthropy. They go for present as well as future 
 good. They labor for all now living, as well as all hereafter to 
 live. — They teach hope to all — despair to none. As applying to 
 their cause, they deny the doctrine of unpardonable sin. As in 
 Christianity it is taught, so in this they teach, that 
 
 "While the lamp holds out to burn, 
 The vilest sinner may return." 
 
 And, what is a matter of the most profound gratulation, 
 they, by experiment upon experiment, and example upon example, 
 prove the maxim to be no less true in the one case than in the 
 other. On every hand we behold those, who but yesterday, were 
 the chief of sinners, now the chief apostles of the cause. Drunken 
 devils are cast out by ones, by sevens, and by legions; and their 
 unfortunate victims, like the poor possessed, who was redeemed 
 from his long and lonely wanderings in the tombs, are publish- 
 ing to the ends of the earth how great things have been done 
 for them. 
 
 To these new champions, and this new system of tactics, our 
 late success is mainly owing; and to them we must chiefly look for 
 the final consummation. The ball is now rolling gloriously on, and 
 none are so able as they to increase its speed and its bulk — to 
 add to its momentum, and its magnitude. — Even though unlearned 
 in letters, for this task, none others are so well educated. To fit 
 them for this work, they have been taught in the true school. 
 They have been in that gulf, from which they would teach others 
 the means of escape. They have passed that prison wall, which 
 others have long declared impassable; and who that has not, 
 shall dare to weigh opinions with them, as to the mode of passing? 
 
 But if it be true, as I have insisted, that those who have 
 suffered by intemperance personally, and have reformed, are 
 the most powerful and efficient instruments to push the reforma- 
 tion to ultimate success, it does not follow, that those who have 
 not suffered, have no part left them to perform. Whether or not 
 
138 ABRAHAM LINCOLN: 
 
 the world would be vastly benefitted by a total and final banish- 
 ment from it of all intoxicating drinks, seems to me not now to be 
 an open question. Three-fourths of mankind confess the affirma- 
 tive with their tongues, and, I believe, all the rest acknowledge it 
 in their hearts. 
 
 Ought any, then, to refuse their aid in doing what the good 
 of the whole demands? — Shall he, who cannot do much, be for 
 that reason, excused if he do nothing? "But," says one, "what 
 good can I do by signing the pledge? I never drink even without 
 signing." This question has already been asked and answered 
 more than millions of times. Let it be answered once more. For 
 the man to suddenly, or in any other way, to break off from the 
 use of drams, who has indulged in them for a long course of 
 years, and until his appetite for them has become ten or a hundred 
 fold stronger, and more craving, than any natural appetite can 
 be, requires a most powerful moral effort. In such an undertaking, 
 he needs every moral support and influence, that can possibly 
 be brought to his aid, and thrown around him. And not only so; 
 but every moral prop, should be taken from whatever argument 
 might rise in his mind to lure him to his backsliding. When he 
 casts his eyes around him, he should be able to see, all that he 
 respects, all that he admires, and all that [he?] loves, kindly and 
 anxiously pointing him onward; and none beckoning him back, 
 to his former miserable "wallowing in the mire." 
 
 But it is said by some, that men will think and act for them- 
 selves; that none will disuse spirits or anything else, merely be- 
 cause his neighbors do; and that moral influence is not that power- 
 ful engine contended for. Let us examine this. Let me ask the 
 man who would maintain this position most stiffly, what compen- 
 sation he will accept to go to church some Sunday and sit during 
 the sermon with his wife's bonnet upon his head? Not a trifle, 
 I'll venture. And why not? There would be nothing irreligious in 
 it: nothing immoral, nothing uncomfortable. — Then why not? 
 Is it not because there would be something egregiously unfashion- 
 able in it? Then it is the influence of fashion; and what is the in- 
 fluence of fashion, but the influence that other people's actions 
 have on our actions, the strong inclination each of us feels to do 
 as we see all our neighbors do? Nor is the influence of fashion 
 
HIS SPEECHES AND WRITINGS 139 
 
 confined to any particular thing or class of things. It is just as 
 strong on one subject as another. Let us make it as unfashionable 
 to withhold our names from the temperance pledge as for hus- 
 bands to wear their wives* bonnets to church, and instances will 
 be just as rare in the one case as the other. 
 
 "But," say some, "we are no drunkards; and we shall not 
 acknowledge ourselves such by joining a reformed drunkards' 
 society, whatever our influence might be." Surely no Christian 
 will adhere to this objection. — If they believe, as they profess, 
 that Omnipotence condescended 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 condescension, for the temporal, and perhaps eternal salva- 
 tion, of a large, erring, and unfortunate class of their own fellow 
 creatures. Nor is the condescension very great. 
 
 In my judgment, such of us as have never fallen victims, have 
 been spared more from the absence of appetite, than from any 
 mental or moral superiority over those who have. Indeed, I be- 
 lieve, 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 the 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 dear 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, com- 
 missioned 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. To all the living every where, we 
 cry, "come sound the moral resurrection trump, that these may 
 rise and stand up, an exceeding great army" — "Come from the 
 four winds, O breath! and breathe upon these slain, that they 
 may live." 
 
 If the relative grandeur of revolutions shall be estimated 
 
140 ABRAHAM LINCOLN: 
 
 by the great amount of human misery they alleviate, and the 
 small amount they inflict, then indeed, will this be the grandest 
 the world shall ever have seen. — Of our political revolution of 
 76 we all are justly proud. It has given us a degree of political 
 freedom, far exceeding that of any other of the nations of the 
 earth. In it the world has found a solution of the long mooted 
 problem, as to the capability of man to govern himself. In it 
 was the germ which has vegetated, and still is to grow and ex- 
 pand into the universal liberty of mankind. 
 
 But with all these glorious results, past, present, and to 
 come, it had its evils too. — It breathed forth famine, swam in 
 blood and rode on fire; and long, long after, the orphan's cry, 
 and the widow's wail, continued to break the sad silence that 
 ensued. These were the price, the inevitable price, paid for the 
 blessings it bought. 
 
 Turn now, to the temperance revolution. In it we shall find 
 a stronger bondage broken; a viler slavery manumitted; a greater 
 tyrant deposed. In it, more of want supplied, more disease healed, 
 more sorrow assuaged. By it no orphans starving, no widows 
 weeping. By it, none wounded in feeling, none injured in in- 
 terest. Even the dram maker and dram seller, will have glided 
 into other occupations so gradually, as never to have felt the 
 shock of change; and will stand ready to join all others in the 
 universal song of gladness. 
 
 And what a noble ally this, to the cause of political freedom. 
 With such an aid, its march cannot fail to be on and on, till every 
 son of earth shall drink in rich fruition, the sorrow quenching 
 draughts of perfect liberty. Happy day, when, all appetites con- 
 trolled, all passions subdued, all matters subjected, mind, all con- 
 quering mind, shall live and move the monarch of the world. 
 Glorious consummation! Hail, fall of Fury! Reign of Reason, all 
 hail! 
 
 And when the victory shall be complete — when there shall 
 be neither a slave nor a drunkard on the earth — how proud 
 the title of that Land, which may truly claim to be the birth- 
 place and the cradle of both those revolutions, that shall have 
 ended in that victory. How nobly distinguished that People, who 
 
HIS SPEECHES AND WRITINGS 141 
 
 shall have planted, and nurtured to maturity, both the political 
 and moral freedom of their species. 
 
 This is the one hundred and tenth anniversary of the birth- 
 day of Washington. — We are met to celebrate this day. Washing- 
 ton is the mightiest name of earth — long since mightiest in the 
 cause of civil liberty; still mightiest in moral reformation. On that 
 name an eulogy is expected. It cannot be. To add brightness to 
 the sun, or glory to the name of Washington, is alike impossible. 
 Let none attempt it. In solemn awe pronounce the name, and in 
 its naked deathless splendor, leave it shining on. 
 
 LETTER TO JOSHUA F. SPEED 
 FEBRUARY 25, 1842 
 
 Springfield, Feby. 25 1842— 
 Dear Speed: 
 
 Yours of the 16th. Inst., announcing that Miss Fanny and 
 you are "no more twain, but one flesh," reached me this morn- 
 ing. I have no way of telling you how much happiness I wish you 
 both; tho I believe 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. My acquaint- 
 ance with Miss Fanny (I call her this, lest you should think I 
 am speaking of your mother) was too short for me to reasonably 
 hope to long be remembered by her; and still, I am sure I shall 
 not forget her soon. Try if you can not remind her of that debt 
 she owes me; and be sure you do not interfere to prevent her 
 paying it. 
 
 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 
 
142 ABRAHAM LINCOLN: 
 
 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 in- 
 sist. You owe obligations to her, ten thousand times more sacred 
 than any 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 any where; she would have them in 
 abundance here. 
 
 Give my kind rememberance [sic] to Mr. Williamson and his 
 family, particularly Miss Elizabeth. Also to your Mother, brothers, 
 and sisters. Ask little Eliza Davis if she will ride to town with 
 me if I come there again. And finally, give Fanny a double recip- 
 rocation of all the love she sent me. Write me often, and be- 
 lieve me 
 
 Yours forever, 
 
 Lincoln. 
 
 P. S. Poor Eastham is gone at last. He died awhile before 
 day this morning. They say he was very loth to die. 
 No clerk is appointed yet. 
 
 L 
 
 As indicated by the context of the second of the 
 two letters bearing this date, both were sent together 
 and the second was for Speed's eyes only. Lincoln's 
 analysis of his friend is indubitably as much self-analysis 
 as it is analysis of Speed, and, although it lacks a good 
 deal of penetrating the unconscious for the spectres 
 which psychoanalysis reveals, it is an adequate job of 
 rationalizing the inevitable. 
 
 The postscript to the first letter refers to the Clerk 
 of Sangamon County Court. 
 
HIS SPEECHES AND WRITINGS 143 
 
 LETTER TO JOSHUA F. SPEED 
 FEBRUARY 25, 1842 
 
 Springfield, Feb: 25—1842— 
 Dear Speed: 
 
 I received yours of the 12th. written the day you went down 
 to William's place, some days since; but delayed answering it, till 
 I should receive the promised one, of the 16th., which came last 
 night. I opened the latter, with intense anxiety and trepidation — 
 so much, that although it turned out better than I expected, I 
 have hardly yet, at the distance of ten hours, become calm. 
 
 I tell you, Speed, our forebodings, for which you and I are 
 rather peculiar, are all the worst sort of nonsense. I fancied, from 
 the time I received your letter of Saturday, that the one of Wednes- 
 day was never to come; and yet it did come, and what is more, it 
 is perfectly clear, both from its tone and handwiiting, that you 
 were much happier, or, if you think the term preferable, less 
 miserable, when you wrote it than when you wrote the last one 
 before. You had so obviously improved, at the very time I so much 
 feared, you would have grown worse. You say that "something 
 indescribably horrible and alarming still haunts you. You will not 
 say that three months from now, I will venture. When your nerves 
 once get steady now, the whole trouble will be over forever. Nor 
 should you become impatient at their being even very slow in be- 
 coming steady. Again; you say you much fear that that Elysium of 
 which you have dreamed so much is never to be realized. Well, 
 if it shall not, I dare swear it will not be the fault of her who is 
 now your wife. I now have no doubt that it is the peculiar misfor- 
 tune of both you and me, to dream dreams of Elysium far exceed- 
 ing all that anything earthly can realize. Far short of your dreams 
 as you may be, no woman could do more to realize them, than 
 that same black eyed Fanny. If you could but contemplate her 
 through my imagination, it would appear ridiculous to you that 
 any one should for a moment think of being unhappy with her. 
 
144 ABRAHAM LINCOLN: 
 
 My old Father used to have a saying that "If you make a bad 
 bargain, hug it all the tighter", and it occurs to me, that if the 
 bargain you have just closed can possibly be called a bad one, it 
 is certainly the most pleasant one for applying that maxim to, 
 which my fancy can, by any effort, picture. 
 
 I write another letter enclosing this, which you can show her, 
 if she desires it. I do this because, she would think strangely per- 
 haps, should you tell her that you received no letters from me; 
 or, telling her you do, should refuse to let her see them. 
 
 I close this, entertaining the confident hope, that every suc- 
 cessive letter I shall have from you, (which I here pray may not 
 be few, nor far between, ) may show you possessing a more steady 
 hand, and cheerful heart than the last preceding it. 
 
 As ever, your friend 
 
 Lincoln 
 
 LETTER TO JOSHUA F. SPEED 
 MARCH 27, 1842 
 
 Springfield, March 27th., 1842 
 Dear Speed: 
 
 Yours of the 10th. Inst, was received three or four days since. 
 You know I am sincere, when I tell you, the pleasure it's contents 
 gave me was and is inexpressible. As to your farm matter, I have 
 no sympathy with you. I have no farm, nor ever expect to have; 
 and, consequently, have not studied the subject enough to be much 
 interested with it. I can only say that I am glad you are satisfied 
 and pleased with it. 
 
 But on that other subject, to me of the most intense interest, 
 whether in joy or sorrow, I never had the power to withhold my 
 sympathy from you. It can not be told, how it now thrills me 
 with joy, to hear you say you are "far happier than you ever 
 
 
HIS SPEECHES AND WRITINGS 145 
 
 expected to be." That much I know is enough. I know you too 
 well to suppose your expectations were not, at least sometimes, 
 extravagant; and if the reality exceeds them all, I say, enough 
 dear Lord. I am not going beyond the truth, when I tell you, that 
 the short space it took me to read your last letter, gave me more 
 pleasure, than the total sum of all I have enjoyed since that fatal 
 first Jany. '41. Since then, it seems to me, I should have been 
 entirely happy, but for the never-absent idea, that there is one 
 still unhappy whom I have contributed to make so. That still kills 
 my soul. I can not but reproach myself, for ever wishing to be 
 happy while she is otherwise. She accompanied a large party on 
 the Rail Road cars, to Jacksonville last Monday; and on her return, 
 spoke, so that I heard of it, of having enjoyed the trip exceedingly. 
 God be praised for that. 
 
 You know with what sleepless vigilance I have watched you, 
 ever since the commencement of your affair; and altho I am now 
 almost confident it is useless, I can not forbear once more to 
 say that I think it is even yet possible for your spirits to flag down 
 and leave you miserable. If they should, don't fail to remember 
 that they can not long remain so. 
 
 One thing I can tell you which I know you will be glad to 
 hear; and that is, that I have seen Sarah, and scrutinized her 
 feelings as well as I could, and am fully convinced, she is far 
 happier now, than she has been for the last fifteen months past. 
 
 You will see by the last Sangamo Journal that I made a 
 Temperance speech on the 22 — of Feb. which I claim Fanny 
 and you shall read as an act of charity to me; for I can not learn 
 that any body else has read it, or is likely to. Fortunately, it is 
 not very long; and I shall deem it a sufficient compliance with my 
 request, if one of you listens while the other reads it. As to your 
 Lockridge matter, it is only necessary to say that there has been 
 no court since you left, and that the next commences to-morrow 
 morning, during which I suppose we can not fail to get a judge- 
 ment. 
 
 I wish you would learn of Everett what he will take, over and 
 above a discharge for all trouble we have been at, to take his 
 business out of our hands and give it to some body else. It is 
 impossible to collect money on that or any other claim here now; 
 
146 ABRAHAM LINCOLN: 
 
 and altho you know I am not a very petulant man, I declare I 
 am almost out of patience with Mr. Everett's endless impor- 
 tunity. It seems like he not only writes all the letters he can him- 
 self; but gets every body else in Louisville and vicinity to be 
 constantly writing to us about his claim. I have always said that 
 Mr. Everett is a very clever fellow, and I am very sorry he can 
 not be obliged; but it does seem to me he ought to know we are 
 interested to collect his money, and therefore would do it if we 
 could. I am neither joking nor in a pet when I say we would 
 thank him to transfer his business to some other, without any 
 compensation for what we have done, provided he will see the 
 court cost paid, for which we are security. 
 
 The sweet violet you enclosed, came safely to hand, but it 
 was so dry, and mashed so flat, that it crumbled to dust at the 
 first attempt to handle it. The juice that mashed out of it, stained 
 a place on the letter, which I mean to preserve and cherish for 
 the sake of her who procured it to be sent. My renewed good 
 wishes to her in particular, and generally to all such of your rela- 
 tives as know me. 
 
 As ever 
 
 Lincoln 
 
 LETTER TO JOSHUA F. SPEED 
 JULY 4, 1842 
 
 Springfield, Ills— July 4th. 1842— 
 Dear Speed: 
 
 Yours of the 16th. June was received only a day or two since. 
 It was not mailed at Louisville till the 25th. You speak of the great 
 time that has elapsed since I wrote you. Let me explain that. Your 
 letter reached here a day or two after I started on the circuit; I 
 was gone five or six weeks, so that I got the letter only a few 
 weeks before Butler started to your country. I thought it scarcely 
 
HIS SPEECHES AND WRITINGS 147 
 
 worth while to write you the news, which he could and would 
 tell you more in detail. On his return, he told me you would write 
 me soon; and so I waited for your letter. As to my having been 
 displeased with your advice, surely you know better than that. 
 I know you do; and therefore I 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 regain my confidence in my own 
 ability to keep my resolves when they are made. In that ability, 
 you know, I once prided myself as the only, or at least the chief, 
 gem of my character; that gem I lost — how, and where, you too 
 well know. I have not yet regained it; and until I do, I can not 
 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 afterwards, by the aid you would have given me, I should 
 have sailed through clear; but that does not now afford me suffi- 
 cient 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 acknowledg- 
 ment; 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 as by fate; if I 
 would, I could not have done less than I did. I always was super- 
 stitious; and as part of my superstition, 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 
 reference to our friend here. Let her seeing it, depend upon 
 whether she has ever known anything of my affair; 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 rowing. I should 
 like to visit you again. I should like to see that "Sis" of yours, 
 
148 ABRAHAM LINCOLN: 
 
 that was absent when I was there; tho I suppose she would run 
 away again, if she were to hear I was coming. * 
 
 About your collecting business. We have sued Branson; and 
 will sue the others to the next court, unless they give deeds of 
 trust as you require. Col Allen happened in the office since I com- 
 menced this letter, and promises to give a deed of trust. He says 
 he had made the arrangement to pay you, and would have done it, 
 but for the going down of the Shawnee money. We did not get 
 the note in time to sue Hall at the last Tazewell court. Lock- 
 ridge's property is levied on for you. John Irwin has done nothing 
 with that Baker & Van Bergen matter. We will not fail to bring 
 the suits for your use, where they are in the name of James Bell 
 & Co. I have made you a suscriber to the Journal; and also sent 
 the number containing the temperance speech. My respect and 
 esteem to all your friends there; and, by your permission, my love 
 to your Fanny. 
 
 Ever yours — 
 
 Lincoln 
 
 A LETTER FROM THE LOST TOWNSHIPS 
 AUGUST 27, 1842 
 
 Lost Townships, August 27, 1842. 
 Dear Mr. Printer: 
 
 I see you printed that long letter I sent you a spell ago. I'm 
 quite encouraged by it, and can't keep from writing again. I think 
 the printing of my letters will be a good thing all round, — it will 
 give me the benefit of being known by the world, and give the 
 world the advantage of knowing what's going on in the Lost 
 Townships, and give your paper respectability besides. So here 
 comes another. — Yesterday afternoon I hurried through cleaning 
 
 up the dinner dishes, and stepped over to neighbor S to see 
 
 if his wife Peggy was as well as mought be expected, and hear 
 
 
HIS SPEECHES AND WRITINGS 149 
 
 what they called the baby. Well, when I got there, and just turned 
 round the corner of his log cabin, there he was, setting on the 
 door-step reading a newspaper. 
 
 'How are you, Jeff?' says I. He sorter started when he heard 
 me, for he hadn't seen me before. 'Why/ says he, I'm mad as the 
 devil, aunt Becca!' 
 
 'What about?' says I; 'ain't its hair the right color? None of that 
 nonsense, Jeff — there ain't an honester woman in the Lost Town- 
 ship than — ' 
 
 'Than who?' says he; 'what the mischief are you about?' 
 
 I began to see I was running the wrong trail, and so says I, 
 'O! nothing, I guess I was mistaken a little, that's all. But what is 
 it you're mad about?' 
 
 'Why,' says he, 'I've been tugging ever since harvest getting 
 out wheat and hauling it to the river to raise State Bank paper 
 enough to pay my tax this year, and a little school debt I owe; 
 and now just as I've got it, here I open this infernal Extra Register, 
 expecting to find it full of "glorious democratic victories," and 
 "High Comb'd Cocks," when, lo and behold! I find a set of fellows, 
 calling themselves officers of State, have forbidden the tax col- 
 lectors and school commissioners to receive State paper at all; 
 and so here it is, dead on my hands. I don't now believe all the 
 plunder I've got will fetch ready cash enough to pay my taxes 
 and that school debt.' 
 
 I was a good deal thunderstruck myself; for that was the first 
 I had heard of the proclamation, and my old man was pretty 
 much in the same fix with Jeff. We both stood a moment, staring 
 at one another without knowing what to say. At last says I, 'Mr. 
 
 S let me look at that paper.' He handed it to me, when I read 
 
 the proclamation over. 
 
 'There now,' says he, 'did you ever see such a piece of impu- 
 dence and imposition as that?' I saw Jeff was in a good tune for 
 saying some ill-natured things, and so I tho't I would just argue a 
 little on the contrary side, and make him rant a spell if I could. 
 
 'Why,' says I, looking as dignified and thoughtful as I could, 
 'it seems pretty tough to be sure, to have to raise silver where 
 there's none to be raised; but then, you see, "there will be danger 
 of loss" if it ain't done.' 
 
150 ABRAHAM LINCOLN: 
 
 'Loss, damnation!' says he. 1 defy Daniel Webster, I defy 
 King Solomon, I defy the world, — I defy — I defy — yes, I defy even 
 you, aunt Becca, to show how the people can lose any thing by 
 paying their taxes in State paper.' 'Well,' says I, you see what the 
 officers of State say about it, and they are a desarnin set of men.' 
 'But,' says I, 'I guess you're mistaken about what the proclama- 
 tion says; it don't say the people will lose any thing by the paper 
 money being taken for taxes. It only says "there will be danger of 
 loss," and though it is tolerable plain that the people can't lose 
 by paying their taxes in something they can get easier than silver, 
 instead of having to pay silver; and though it is just as plain, that 
 the State can't lose by taking State Bank paper, however low it 
 may be, while she owes the Bank more than the whole revenue, 
 and can pay that paper over on her debt, dollar for dollar; still 
 there is danger of loss to the "officers of State"; and you know, 
 Jeff, we can't get along without officers of State' 
 
 'Damn officers of State,' says he; 'that's what you whigs are 
 always hurraing for/ 'Now don't swear so, Jeff,' says I, 'you know 
 I belong to the meetin, and swearin hurts my feelins.' 'Beg pardon, 
 aunt Becca/ says he, *but I do say it's enough to make Dr. Goddard 
 swear, to have tax to pay in silver, for nothing only that Ford may 
 get his two thousand a year, and Shields his twenty four hundred 
 a year, and Carpenter his sixteen hundred a year, and all without 
 "danger of loss" by taking it in State paper. Yes, yes, it's plain 
 enough now what these officers of State mean by "danger of loss." 
 Wash, I 'spose, actually lost fifteen hundred dollars out of the 
 three thousand that two of these "officers of State" let him steal 
 from the Treasury, by being compelled to take it in State paper. — 
 Wonder if we don't have a proclamation before long, commanding 
 us to make up this loss to Wash in silver.' 
 
 And so he went on, till his breath run out, and he had to stop. 
 I couldn't think of anything to say just then: and so I begun to 
 look over the paper again. 'Aye! here's another proclamation, or 
 something like it.' 'Another!' says Jeff, 'and whose egg is it, pray?' 
 I looked to the bottom of it, and read aloud, 
 
 'Your obedient servant, 
 
 'Jas. Shields, Auditor.' 
 
HIS SPEECHES AND WRITINGS 151 
 
 'Aha!' says Jeff, 'one of them same three fellows again. Well, read 
 it, and let's hear what of it/ I read on till I came to where it says, 
 'The object of this measure is to suspend the collection of the 
 revenue for the current year* 'Now stop, now stop/ says he, 'that's 
 a lie aready, and I don't want to hear of it/ 'O, may be not/ says I. 
 
 'I say it — is — a — lie. — Suspend the collection, indeed! Will 
 the collectors that have taken their oaths to make the collection, 
 dare to suspend it? Is there any thing in the law requiring them 
 to perjure themselves at the bidding of Jas. Shields? Will the 
 greedy gullet of the penitentiary be satisfied with swallowing him 
 instead of all them if they should venture to obey him? And would 
 he not discover some "danger of loss," and be off, about the time 
 it came to taking their places?' 
 
 'And suppose the people attempt to suspend by refusing to 
 pay, what then? The collectors would just jerk up their horses, 
 and cows, and the like, and sell them to the highest bidder for 
 silver in hand, without valuation or redemption. Why, Shields 
 didn't believe that story himself — it was never meant for the truth. 
 If it was true, why was it not writ till five days after the proclama- 
 tion? Why didn't Carlin and Carpenter sign it as well as Shields? 
 Answer me that, aunt Becca. I say it's a lie, and not a well told 
 one at that. It grins out like a copper dollar. Shields is a fool 
 as well as a liar. With him truth is out of the question, and as 
 for getting a good bright passable lie out of him, you might as 
 well try to strike fire from a cake of tallow. I stick to it, it's all an 
 infernal whig lie/ 
 
 'A whig lie,— Highty! Tighty!!' 
 
 'Yes, a whig lie; and it's just like every thing the cursed British 
 whigs do. First they'll do some divilment, and then they'll tell a lie 
 to hide it. And they don't care how plain a lie it is; they think 
 they can cram any sort of a one down the throats of the ignorant 
 loco focos, as they call the democrats/ 
 
 'Why, Jeff, you're crazy — you don't mean to say Shields is a 
 whig.' 
 
 'Yes, I do.' 
 
 'Why, look here, the proclamation is in your own democratic 
 paper as you call it.' 
 
152 ABRAHAM LINCOLN: 
 
 1 know it, and what of that? They only printed it to let us 
 democrats see the deviltry the whigs are at.' 
 
 'Well, but Shields is the Auditor of this loco — I mean this 
 democratic State/ 
 
 'So he is, and Tyler appointed him to office/ 
 
 'Tyler appointed him?' 
 
 'Yes (if you must chaw it over) Tyler appointed him, or if it 
 wasn't him it was old granny Harrison, and that's all one. I tell 
 you, aunt Becca, there's no mistake about his being a whig — why, 
 his very looks shows it — every thing about him shows it — if I was 
 deaf and blind I could tell him by the smell. I seed him when I 
 was down in Springfield last winter. They had a sort of a gatherin 
 there one night, among the grandees, they called a fair. All the 
 galls about town was there, and all the handsome widows, and 
 married women, finickin about, trying to look like galls, tied as 
 tight in the middle, and puffed out at both ends like bundles of 
 fodder that hadn't been stacked yet, but wanted stackin pretty 
 bad. And then they had tables all round the house kivered over 
 with baby caps, and pin-cushions, and ten thousand such little 
 nick-nacks, tryin to sell 'em to the fellows that were bowin, and 
 scrapin and kungeerin about 'em. They wouldn't let no democrats 
 in, for fear they'd disgust the ladies, or scare the little galls, or 
 dirty the floor. I looked in at the window, and there was this same 
 fellow Shields floatin about on the air, without heft or earthly 
 substance, just like a lock of cat-fur where cats had been fightin. 
 
 'He was paying his money to this one and that one, and 
 tother one, and sufferin great loss because it wasn't silver instead 
 of State paper; and the sweet distress he seemed to be in, — his 
 very features, in the exstatic agony of his soul, spoke audibly 
 and distinctly — 'Dear girls, it is distressing, but I cannot marry 
 you all. Too well I know how much you suffer; but do, do remem- 
 ber, it is not my fault that I am so handsome and so interesting/ 
 
 'As this last was expressed by a most exquisite contortion of 
 his face, he seized hold of one of their hands and squeezed, and 
 held on to it about a quarter of an hour. O, my good fellow, says I 
 to myself, if that was one of our democratic galls in the Lost 
 Township, the way you'd get a brass pin let into you, would be 
 about up to the head. He a democrat! Fiddle-sticks! I tell you, aunt 
 
HIS SPEECHES AND WRITINGS 153 
 
 Becca, he's a whig, and no mistake: nobody but a whig could 
 make such a conceity dunce of himself/ 
 
 'Well, says I, may be he is, but if he is, I'm mistaken the 
 worst sort/ 
 
 'May be so; may be so; but, if I am, I'll suffer by it; I'll be a 
 democrat if it turns out that Shields is a whig; considerin you 
 shall be a whig if he turns out a democrat/ 
 
 'A bargain, by jingoes,' says he; 'but how will we find out/ 
 
 'Why,' says I, 'we'll just write and ax the printer/ 'Agreed 
 again,' says he, 'and by thunder if it does turn out that Shields is 
 a democrat, I never will ' 
 
 'Jefferson, — Jefferson — ' 
 
 'What do you want, Peggy?' 
 
 'Do get through your everlasting clatter some time, and bring 
 me a gourd of water; the child's been crying for a drink this 
 livelong hour/ 
 
 'Let it die, then, it may as well die for water as to be taxed to 
 death to fatten officers of State' 
 
 Jeff run off to get the water though, just like he hadn't been 
 sayin any thing spiteful; for he's a raal good-hearted fellow, after 
 all, once you get at the foundation of him. 
 
 I walked into the house, and, 'why, Peggy,' says I, 'I declare, 
 we like to forgot you altogether/ 'Oh, yes,' says she, 'when a body 
 can't help themselves, every body soon forgets 'em; but thank God 
 by day after to-morrow I shall be well enough to milk the cows, 
 and pen the calves, and wring the contrary one's tails for 'em, 
 and no thanks to nobody/ 'Good evening, Peggy,' says I, and so I 
 sloped, for I seed she was mad at me, for making Jeff neglect her 
 so long. 
 
 And now, Mr. Printer, will you be sure to let us know in your 
 next paper whether this Shields is a whig or a democrat? I don't 
 care about it for myself, for I know well enough how it is already, 
 but I want to convince Jeff. It may do some good to let him, and 
 others like him, know who and what these officers of State are. It 
 may help to send the present hypocritical set to where they 
 belong, and to fill the places they now disgrace with men who 
 will do more work, for less pay, and take a fewer airs while they 
 are doing it. It ain't sensible to think that the same men who get 
 
154 ABRAHAM LINCOLN: 
 
 us into trouble will change their course; and yet it's pretty plain, 
 if some change for the better is not made, it's not long that neither 
 Peggy, or I, or any of us, will have a cow left to milk, or a calf s 
 tail to wring. 
 
 Yours truly, 
 Rebecca . 
 
 The several "Rebecca" letters, Lincoln s unfortunate 
 entanglement with James A. Shields which ensued, and 
 the correspondence leading up to the duel which never 
 came off, have never been adequately studied by any 
 biographer of Lincoln whose work is known to the editor. 
 Beveridge gives perhaps the most adequate treatment, 
 but also contributes considerable confusion and inac- 
 curacy to the facts as well as to the interpretation of 
 this material. The reader who may be interested in a 
 special study of the style of the various letters should see 
 "The Authorship of the 'Rebecca* Letters" The Abraham 
 Lincoln Quarterly, June, 1942. 
 
 To summarize the essential facts of the whole affair, 
 the first of these letters, dated August 10, 1842, purport- 
 ing to come from "Lost Township" and signed "Rebecca," 
 was published in the Sangamo Journal of August 19, 
 1842. It was largely a lament for the sad predicament in 
 which the people of Illinois found themselves following 
 the failure of the State Bank in February, 1842. Several 
 allusions to the financial tangle which involved all busi- 
 ness appear in Lincoln's letters to Speed. The worthless 
 State Bank currency had driven good money out of cir- 
 culation and such transactions as were carried on were 
 largely by barter. Of course, "Rebecca" blamed the 
 Democratic office-holders and commented on the report 
 circulating throughout the state that "the Governor was 
 going to send instructions to collectors, not to take any- 
 thing but gold and silver for taxes." This was the peak of 
 perfidy — the State refusing to honor the currency of its 
 own institution. 
 
HIS SPEECHES AND WRITINGS 155 
 
 Such instructions were sent out in a circular letter 
 dated August 20, 1842, and signed by the State Auditor, 
 James A. Shields, which letter was published in the Jour- 
 ' nal of August 26, 1842. The furor which ensued was an 
 opportunity tJiat Whig politicians took care not to negjiect, 
 and first among them was Lincoln, avid for the political 
 scalp of James A. Shields. Perhaps Lincoln disliked 
 Shields personally, but even if he had not disliked him, 
 the implications of personal corruption and chicanery 
 which he proceeded to heap upon the unfortunate 
 Auditor were more or less to be expected as part of a 
 political technique long practiced by politicians of both 
 parties. 
 
 The second "Rebecca" letter, which Lincoln later 
 admitted writing, dated August 27, 1842 (the day after 
 the publication of Shields' s circular letter), was published 
 in the Journal of September 2, 1842. Unlike the first 
 letter, which contained only a mild condemnation of 
 Democratic office-holders in general, the second letter 
 made Shields as State Auditor the butt of ridicule and 
 contumely. 
 
 A third brief letter from "Rebecca" dated August 
 29, 1842, inclosing a letter purporting to come from her 
 sister, appeared in the Journal of September 9, 1842. The 
 two communications were mild in nature and apparently 
 of the same vintage as the first letter, but in the same 
 issue of the Journal appeared a fourth letter dated Sep- 
 tember 8, 1842, also signed "Rebecca" which in attack- 
 ing Shields's personal courage exceeded the second in 
 contumely but was childishly amateurish in execution. 
 Then, in the Journal of September 16, 1842, appeared 
 some doggerel signed "Cathleen," again ridiculing the 
 "Irish" blarney of Shields. 
 
 Upon learning from Simeon Francis, the editor of the 
 Journal, that Lincoln was responsible for these anony- 
 mous screeds directed against himself, Shields wrote 
 Lincoln a letter that assumed Lincoln to be the sole 
 author, demanded a retraction of "all offensive allusions" 
 
156 ABRAHAM LINCOLN: 
 
 in all the letters, and concluded with the following sen- 
 tence: "This may prevent consequences which no one 
 will regret more than myself." To this letter Lincoln 
 replied in a note which took particular notice of the 
 threat implied in the concluding sentence, and pointed 
 out that there was in Shields' s letter "so much assumption 
 of facts, and so much menace as to consequences" that 
 he could not "submit to answer that note any fur- 
 ther . . ." 
 
 From this point onward the whole affair was so 
 "honorably" mismanaged by Shields's friend, Whiteside, 
 and Lincoln's friend, Merryman, that a duel seemed 
 imminent. Fortunately, however, Lincoln finally made, 
 and Shields accepted, the admission: "I did write the 
 'Lost Township' letter which appeared in the Journal of 
 the 2d inst., but had no participation in any form, in any 
 other article alluding to you." 
 
 CORRESPONDENCE ABOUT THE LINCOLN-SHIELDS 
 DUEL. SEPTEMBER 17, 1842 
 
 Tremont, Sept. 17th, 1842. 
 A. Lincoln, Esq. 
 
 I regret that my absence on public business compelled me to 
 postpone a matter of private consideration a little longer than I 
 could have desired. It will only be necessary, however, to account 
 for it by informing you that I have been to Quincy on business 
 that would not admit of delay. I will now state briefly the reasons 
 of my troubling you with this communication, the disagreeable 
 nature of which I regret — as I had hoped to avoid any difficulty 
 with any one in Springfield, while residing there, by endeavoring 
 to conduct myself in such a way amongst both my political friends 
 and opponents, as to escape the necessity of any. Whilst thus 
 
HIS SPEECHES AND WRITINGS 157 
 
 abstaining from giving provocation, I have become the object of 
 slander, vituperation and personal abuse, which were I capable 
 of submitting to, I would prove myself worthy of the whole of it. 
 
 In two or three of the last numbers of The Sangamo Journal, 
 articles of the most personal nature and calculated to degrade me, 
 have made their appearance. On enquiring I was informed by the 
 editor of that paper, through the medium of my friend, Gen. 
 Whiteside, that you are the author of those articles. This infor- 
 mation satisfies me that I have become by some means or other, 
 the object of your secret hostility. I will not take the trouble of 
 enquiring into the reason of all this, but I will take the liberty of 
 requiring a full, positive and absolute retraction of all offensive 
 allusions used by you in these communications, in relation to my 
 private character and standing as a man, as an apology for the 
 insults conveyed in them. 
 
 This may prevent consequences which no one will regret 
 more than myself. 
 
 Your ob't serv't, 
 
 Jas. Shields. 
 
 Tremont, Sept. 17, 1842. 
 Jas. Shields, Esq. 
 
 Your note of to-day was handed me by Gen. Whiteside. In 
 that note you say you have been informed, through the medium 
 of the editor of the Journal, that I am the author of certain 
 articles in that paper which you deem personally abusive of you: 
 and without stopping to inquire whether I really am the author, 
 or to point out what is offensive in them, you demand an unquali- 
 fied retraction of all that is offensive; and then proceed to hint 
 at consequences. 
 
 Now, sir, there is in this so much assumption of facts, and so 
 much of menace as to consequences, that I cannot submit to 
 answer that note any farther than I have, and to add, that the 
 consequence to which I suppose you allude, would be matter of 
 as great regret to me as it possibly could to you. 
 
 Respectfully, 
 
 A. Lincoln. 
 
158 ABRAHAM LINCOLN: 
 
 Tremont, Sept. 17, 1842. 
 A. Lincoln, Esq. 
 
 In reply to my note of this date, you intimate that I assume 
 facts and menace consequences, and that you cannot submit to 
 answer it further. As now, sir, you desire it, I will be a little more 
 particular. The editor of the Sangamo Journal gave me to under- 
 stand that you are the author of an article which appeared I 
 think in that paper of the 2d Sept. inst, headed the Lost Town- 
 ships, and signed Rebecca or Becca. I would therefore take the 
 liberty of asking whether you are the author of said article or any 
 other over the same signature, which has appeared in any of the 
 late numbers of that paper. If so, I repeat my request of an abso- 
 lute retraction of all offensive allusion contained therein in relation 
 to my private character and standing. If you are not the author of 
 any of the articles, your denial will be sufficient. I will say further, 
 it is not my intention to menace, but to do myself justice. 
 
 Your obd't serv't, 
 
 Jas. Shields. 
 
 These letters were printed in the Sangamo Journal, 
 October 14, 1842, by E. H. Merryman, Lincoln's second, 
 in reply to a version of the affair which had been pub- 
 lished by General Whiteside, Shields' s second, and which 
 had presented Lincoln's position and actions with con- 
 siderable bias. Merryman's account relates that, after 
 reading Shields's second note, Lincoln returned it to 
 Whiteside "telling him verbally, that he did not think 
 it consistent with his honor to negociate for peace with 
 Mr. Shields, unless Mr. Shields would withdraw his 
 former offensive letter." The letter which Lincoln thus 
 refused, as may be seen, did in effect in the last sentence, 
 withdraw the threat. The statement which Lincoln 
 finally made, and which Shields finally accepted, would 
 have been equally acceptable at this earlier point, it 
 would seem. Why Lincoln did not at this time make a 
 
HIS SPEECHES AND WRITINGS 159 
 
 frank statement is not quite clear, even if one assumes 
 that Lincoln was standing rather stiffly on what he con- 
 sidered "consistent with his honor'' Mary Todd's involve- 
 ment as author of the fourth "Rebecca" letter, in which 
 there were implications of Shields' s femininity, may have 
 caused Lincoln hesitation in admitting that he had not 
 written all the letters. Whiteside's personality may have 
 irritated Lincoln, and Lincoln's friend Merryman may 
 have "backed him up" a little too strenuously. In any 
 event, Lincoln seems here to have missed an excellent 
 opportunity to avoid an unpleasant episode which he was 
 to regret for the rest of his life. 
 
 MEMORANDUM OF INSTRUCTIONS 
 
 TO E. H. MERRYMAN, LINCOLN'S SECOND 
 
 SEPTEMBER 19, 1842 
 
 In case Whiteside shall signify a wish to adjust this affair 
 without further difficulty, let him know that if the present papers 
 be withdrawn, and a note from Mr. Shields asking to know if I am 
 the author of the articles of which he complains, and asking that 
 I shall make him gentlemanly satisfaction, if I am the author, and 
 this without menace, or dictation as to what that satisfaction shall 
 be, a pledge is made that the following answer shall be given: 
 
 "I did write the 'Lost Townships' letter which appeared in the 
 Journal of the 2d inst., but had no participation in any form, in 
 any other article alluding to you. I wrote that, wholly for political 
 effect. I had no intention of injuring your personal or private char- 
 acter or standing as a man or a gentleman; and I did not then think, 
 and do not now think that that article could produce or has pro- 
 duced that effect against you; and had I anticipated such an effect 
 would have forborne to write it. And I will add that your conduct 
 
160 ABRAHAM LINCOLN: 
 
 toward me, so far as I knew, had always been gentlemanly; and 
 that I had no personal pique against you, and no cause for any." 
 
 If this should be done, I leave it with you to manage what 
 shall and what shall not be published. 
 
 If nothing like this is done, the preliminaries of the fight are 
 to be — 
 
 1st. weapons — Cavalry broad swords of the largest size 
 precisely equal in all respects — and such as now used by the 
 cavalry company at Jacksonville. 
 
 2d. position — A plank ten feet long, and from nine to 
 twelve inches broad, to be firmly fixed on edge, on the ground, as 
 the line between us, which neither is to pass his foot over upon 
 forfeit of his life. Next a line drawn on the ground on either side 
 of said plank and parallel with it, each at the distance of the whole 
 length of the sword and three feet additional from the plank; and 
 the passing of his own such line by either party during the fight, 
 shall be deemed a surrender of the contest. 
 
 3d. time — On Thursday evening at 5 o'clock if you can get 
 it so; but in no case to be at a greater distance of time than Friday 
 evening, at 5 o'clock. 
 
 4th. place — Within three miles of Alton, on the opposite 
 side of the river, the particular spot to be agreed on by you. 
 
 Any preliminary details coming within the above rules, you 
 are at liberty to make at your discretion, but you are in no case to 
 swerve from these rules or to pass beyond their limits. 
 
 While Lincoln's biographers differ in their rendering 
 of the account of the duel chiefly in the degree to which 
 they seem ashamed of, or actually condemn, Lincoln's 
 part in it, all seem to overlook the possibility that Lin- 
 coln's sense of the ridiculous may have motivated his ac- 
 tions no less than a possible sense of chivalry (Mary Todd 
 was involved as author of the fourth letter), and a per- 
 sonal pique at Shields's punctilio. The instructions for the 
 duel, when carefully studied, are hard to reconcile with a 
 serious purpose, inasmuch as, because of disparity in the 
 stature of the two men, Lincoln could stand back far 
 
HIS SPEECHES AND WRITINGS 161 
 
 enough to prevent Shields 's getting at him very effec- 
 tively, while Shields could not possibly retreat far enough 
 to avoid a blow without stepping behind his line. 
 Although one is suspicious of travesty, the respective 
 accounts given by General Whiteside and Dr. Merryman 
 in the Journal, October 7, 1842, seem unaware of it. 
 There is no hint of physical cowardice in Lincoln's life 
 elsewhere, and to suppose that he drew up these rules 
 purely as a matter of taking advantage of a smaller man 
 who had a shorter reach, is certainly incompatible with 
 everything else that we know of Lincoln. The sup- 
 position that Merryman, rather than Lincoln, drew up 
 the instructions is another possibility, which, however, 
 does not seem too plausible to the editor. 
 
 LETTER TO JOSHUA F. SPEED 
 OCTOBER 5, 1842 
 
 Springfield, Oct. 5 1842— 
 Dear Speed: 
 
 You have heard of my duel with Shields, and I have now to 
 inform you that the duelling business still rages in this city. Day 
 before yesterday Shields challenged Butler, who accepted, and 
 proposed fighting next morning at sunrising in Bob Allen's mea- 
 dow, one hundred yards distance with rifles. To this, Whitesides 
 [sic], Shields's second, said "No" because of the law. Thus ended, 
 duel No. 2. Yesterday, Whitesides [sic] chose to consider himself 
 insulted by Dr. Merryman, and so, sent him a kind of quasi chal- 
 lenge, inviting him to meet him at the planter's House in St. Louis 
 on the next friday to settle their difficulty. Merryman made me his 
 friend, and sent W. a note enquiring to know if he meant his note 
 as a challenge, and if so, that he would, according to the law in such 
 case made and provided, prescribe the terms of the meeting. W. 
 
162 ABRAHAM LINCOLN: 
 
 returned for answer, that if M. would meet him at the Planter's 
 House as desired, he would challenge him. M. replied in a note, 
 that he denied W's right to dictate time and place; but that he 
 M. would waive the question of time, and meet him at Louisiana 
 Missouri. Upon my presenting this note to W. and stating, verbally, 
 its contents, he declined receiving it, saying he had business at 
 St, Louis, and it was as near as Louisiana. Merryman then directed 
 me to notify Whitesides, that he should publish the corres- 
 pondence between them with such comments as he thought fit. 
 This I did. Thus it stood at bed time last night. This morning 
 Whitesides, by his friend Shields, is praying for a new-trial, on 
 the ground that he was mistaken in Merrymans proposition to 
 meet him at Louisiana Missouri thinking it was the State of 
 Louisiana. This Merryman hoots at, and is preparing his publica- 
 tion — while the town is in a ferment and a street fight somewhat 
 anticipated. 
 
 But I began this letter not for what I have been writing; but 
 to say something on that subject which you know to be of such 
 infinite solicitude to me. The immense suffering you endured 
 from the first days of September till the middle of February you 
 never tried to conceal from me, and I well understood. You have 
 now been the husband of a lovely woman nearly eight months. 
 That you are happier now than you were the day you married her 
 I well know; for without, you would not be living. But I have 
 your word for it too; and the returning elasticity of spirits which 
 is manifested in your letters. But I want to ask a closer question. 
 "Are you now in feeling as well as judgement, glad that you are 
 married as you are?" From anybody but me, this would be an 
 impudent question not to be tolerated; but I know you will 
 pardon it in me. Please answer it quickly as I feel impatient to 
 know. 
 
 I have sent my love to your Fanny so often I fear she is get- 
 ting tired of it; however, I venture to tender it again. 
 
 Yours forever, 
 
 Lincoln 
 
HIS SPEECHES AND WRITINGS 163 
 
 William Butler, who apparently caught the duelling 
 contagion from acting as friend of Lincoln, was a close 
 friend of Speed's. He married Elizabeth Richard, sister 
 of the "Sarah" mentioned in Lincoln's letters of June 19, 
 1841, and February 3, 1842, whom Speed had courted 
 and broken off with at about the same time as Lincoln's 
 "fatal 1st of January." Butler later named a son "Speed" 
 in honor of his friend. 
 
 LETTER TO JAMES S. IRWIN 
 NOVEMBER 2, 1842 
 
 Springfield, Nov. 2 1842. 
 Jas. S. Irwin Esq. 
 
 Owing to my absence, yours of the 22nd. ult. was not re- 
 ceived till this moment. 
 
 Judge Logan & myself are willing to attend to any business 
 in the Supreme Court you may send us. As to fees, it is impossible 
 to establish a rule that will apply in all, or even a great many 
 cases. We believe we are never accused of being very unreason- 
 able in this particular; and we would always be easily satisfied, 
 provided we could see the money — but whatever fees we earn 
 at a distance, if not paid before, we have noticed we never hear 
 of after the work is done. We therefore, are growing a little sen- 
 sitive on that point. 
 
 Yours &c 
 A. Lincoln 
 
 According to information furnished by Mr. Oliver 
 R. Barrett, owner of the original of this letter, James S. 
 Irwin was a native of Woodford County, Kentucky, a 
 
164 ABRAHAM LINCOLN: 
 
 graduate of Center College, and a classmate of John C. 
 Breckinridge. Upon removing to Jacksonville, Illinois, 
 Irwin studied law in the office of Brown 6- McClure and 
 received his license to practice January 1, 1842. He 
 moved to Mt. Sterling in Brown County the same year, 
 and, if one may draw inferences from Lincoln's letter, 
 entertained highly optimistic hopes for his future in ar- 
 guing cases before the Illinois Supreme Court. Perhaps 
 Lincoln's jocular caution in specifying payment in ad- 
 vance may he attributed to his suspicion of the young 
 lawyer's overoptimism and willingness to take cases 
 which promised little in the way of fees. 
 
 LETTER TO SAMUEL D. MARSHALL 
 NOVEMBER 11, 1842 
 
 Springfield, Nov. 11th. 1842— 
 Dear Sam 
 
 Yours of trie 10th. Oct. enclosing five dollars was taken from 
 the office in my absence by Judge Logan who neglected to hand 
 it to me till about a week ago, and just an hour before I took a 
 wife. Your other of the 3rd. Inst, is also received. The Forbes & 
 Hill case, of which you speak has not been brought up as yet. 
 
 I have looked into the Dorman & Lane case, till I believe 
 I understand the facts of it; and I also believe we can reverse it. 
 In the last I may be mistaken, but I think the case, at least worth 
 the experiment; and if Dorman will risk the cost, I will do my best 
 for the "biggest kind of a fee" as you say, if we succeed, and 
 nothing if we fail. I have not had a chance to consult Logan since 
 I read your letters, but if the case comes up, I can have the use 
 of him if I need him. 
 
 I would advise you to procure the Record and send it up 
 
HIS SPEECHES AND WRITINGS 165 
 
 immediately. Attend to the making out of the Record yourself, or 
 most likely, the clerk will not get it all together right. 
 
 Nothing new here, except my marrying, which to me, is 
 matter of profound wonder. 
 
 Yours forever 
 
 A. Lincoln 
 
 Marshall was a Shawneetown lawyer handling the 
 case, which involved the attempt of Mrs. Dorman to 
 recover property that her guardian John Lane had ob- 
 tained during her minority (Carl Sandburg, in The Prairie 
 Years, uses the phrase "cheated out of). Lincoln did win 
 the case in the Supreme Court and finally settled his fee 
 more than ten years later, on April 8, 1853, for one hun- 
 dred dollars (Harry E. Pratt, Personal Finances of Abra- 
 ham Lincoln, p. 31). 
 
 LETTER TO JOSHUA F. SPEED 
 MARCH 24, 1843 
 
 Springfield, March 24. 1843— 
 Dear Speed: 
 
 Hurst tells me that Lockridge has redeemed the land in your 
 case, & paid him the money; and that he has written you about it. 
 I now have the pleasure of informing you that Walters has paid 
 me $703.25 (in gold) for you. There is something still due you 
 from him, — I think near a hundred dollars, for which I promised 
 him a little additional time. The gold, (except the toll) we hold 
 subject to your order. 
 
 We had a meeting of the whigs of the county here on last 
 Monday to appoint delegates to a district convention, and Baker 
 
166 ABRAHAM LINCOLN: 
 
 beat me & got the delegation instructed to go for him. The meet- 
 ing, in spite of my attempt to decline it, appointed me one of the 
 delegates; so that in getting Baker the nomination, I shall be 
 "fixed" a good deal like a fellow who is made groomsman to the 
 man what has cut him out, and is marrying his own dear "gal". 
 About the prospect of your having a namesake at our house cant 
 say, exactly yet. 
 
 [No signature] 
 
 Lincoln's "cant say exactly yet" concerning his 
 prospects for becoming a father, and his seeming resent- 
 ment toward his friend Butler for spreading the news to 
 Speed, as expressed in the next letter, May 18, may seem 
 strange in view of the fact that the child was born on 
 August 1. Lincoln certainly knew, and his intimacy with 
 Speed certainly justified Speed's solicitous inquiries. Can 
 the supposed reticence of the Victorian era account for 
 this, or was Lincoln a bit touchy on the question? 
 
 The child was born within a scant nine months after 
 the marriage, and it may have been that Lincoln's acute 
 awareness of local tongue-wagging over his erratic court- 
 ship and marriage made him unusually sensitive con- 
 cerning the "coming event." On the other hand, one may 
 suppose, but with less satisfaction, that Lincoln merely 
 kept his fingers crossed in the next letter when he 
 claimed that he "had not heard one word" and that he 
 is merely joking with Speed throughout. 
 
HIS SPEECHES AND WRITINGS 167 
 
 LETTER TO JOSHUA F. SPEED 
 
 MAY 18, 1843 
 
 Springfield, May 18th. 1843— 
 Dear Speed: 
 
 Yours of the 9th. Inst, is duly received, which I do not meet 
 as a "bore," but as a most welcome visiter [sic]. I will answer the 
 business part of it first. The note you enclosed on Cannan & Har- 
 lan, I have placed in Moffett's hands according to your directions. 
 Harvey is the Constable to have it. I have called three times to 
 get the note, you mention, on B. C. Webster & Co; but did not 
 find Hurst. I will yet get it, and do with it, as you bid. At the 
 April court at Tazewell, I saw Hall; and he then gave me an order 
 on Jewett to draw of him, all rent which may fall due, after the 
 12th. day of Jany. last, till your debt shall be paid. The rent is for 
 the house Ranson did live in just above the Globe; and is $222 per 
 year payable quarterly, so that one quarter fell due the 12th. April. 
 I presented the order to Jewett, since the 12th. and he said it was 
 right, and he would accept it, which, however, was not done in 
 writing for want of pen & ink at the time & place. He 
 acknowledged that the quarter's rent was due, and said he would 
 pay it in a short time but could not at the moment. He also said 
 that he thought, by some former arrangement, a portion of that 
 quarter would have to be paid to the Irwins. Thus stands the Hall 
 matter. I think we will get the money on it, in the course of this 
 year. You ask for the amount of interest on your Van Bergen note 
 of $572.32, and also upon the judgement against Van assigned by 
 Baker. The note drew 12 per cent from date, and bore date Oct. 
 1st. 1841. 1 suppose the 12 per cent ceased, at the time we bought 
 in Walter's house which was on the 23rd. Deer. 1842. If I count 
 right, the interest up to that time, was $78.69 cents, which added 
 to the principal makes $651.01. On this aggregate sum you are 
 entitled to interest at 6 per cent only, from the said 23rd. Deer. 
 1842 until paid. What that will amount to, you can calculate for 
 
168 ABRAHAM LINCOLN: 
 
 yourself. The judgement assigned by Baker to you for $219.80, 
 was so assigned on the 2nd. of April 1841, and of course draws 6 
 per cent from that time until paid. This too you can calculate for 
 yourself. About the 25th. of March 1843 (the precise date I dont 
 now remember) Walters paid $703.25. This, of course must be 
 remembered on counting interest. According to my count, there 
 was due you of principal & interest on both claims on the 25th. of 
 March 1843— $906.70. Walters then paid $703.25— which leaves 
 still due you, $203.45, drawing 6 per cent from that date. Walters 
 is promising to pay the ballance [sic] every day, but still has not 
 done it. I think he will do it soon. Allen has gone to nothing, as 
 Butler tells you. There are 200 acres of the tract I took the deed 
 of trust on. The improvements I should suppose you remember as 
 well as I. It is the stage stand on the Shelbyville road, where you 
 always said I wouldn't pay Baker's tavern bill. It seems to me it 
 must be worth much more than the debt; but whether any body 
 will redeem it in these hard times, I can not say. 
 
 In relation to our Congress matter here, you were right in 
 supposing I would support the nominee. Neither Baker or I, 
 however is the man; but Hardin. So far as I can judge from 
 present appearances, we shall have no split or trouble about the 
 matter; all will be harmony. In relation to the "coming events" 
 about which Butler wrote you, I had not heard one word before I 
 got your letter; but I have so much confidence in the judgment 
 of a Butler on such a subject, that I incline to think there may be 
 some reality in it. What day does Butler appoint? By the way, 
 how do "events" of the same sort come on in your family? Are 
 you possessing houses and lands, and oxen and asses, and men- 
 servants and maid-servants, and begetting sons and daughters? 
 We are not keeping house; but boarding at the Globe Tavern, 
 which is very well kept now by a widow lady of the name of Beck. 
 Our room (the same Dr. Wallace occupied there) and boarding 
 only costs four dollars a week. Ann Todd was married something 
 more than a year since to a fellow by the name of Campbell, and 
 who Mary says, is pretty much of a "dunce" though he has a little 
 money & property. They live in Boonville, Mo. and have not been 
 heard from lately enough to enable me to say anything about her 
 health. I reckon it will scarcely be in our power to visit Kentucky 
 
HIS SPEECHES AND WRITINGS 169 
 
 this year. Besides poverty, and the necessity of attending to busi- 
 ness, those "coming events" I suspect would be somewhat in the 
 way. I most heartily wish you and your Fanny would not fail to 
 come. Just let us know the time a week in advance, and we will 
 have a room provided for you at our house, and all be merry 
 together for a while. Be sure to give my respects to your mother 
 and family. Assure her, that if I ever come near her I will not fail 
 to call and see her. Mary joins in sending love to your Fanny 
 and you. 
 
 Yours as ever, 
 
 A. Lincoln 
 
 P. S. Since I wrote the above I saw Hurst and discovered that the 
 note on B. C. Webster & Co. does not fall due till the 9th. June. 
 Hurst says it will be paid when due. 
 
 LETTER TO WILLIAMSON DURLEY 
 OCTOBER 3, 1845 
 
 Springfield, Oct. 3. 1845 
 Friend Durley: 
 
 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 county. I was glad to hear you say that 
 you intend to attempt to bring about, at the next election in Put- 
 nam, 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 
 any thing 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 ascendent, and 
 Texas not annexed; whereas by the division, all that either had at 
 
170 ABRAHAM LINCOLN: 
 
 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 so cast 
 their votes as to prevent it, even to me seemed wonderful. What 
 was 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 may come." This general 
 proposition is doubtless correct; but did it apply? If by your votes 
 you could have prevented the extention [sic], &c, 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 slave- 
 holder? By the fruit the tree is to be known. An evil tree can not 
 bring forth good fruit. If the fruit of electing Mr. Clay would 
 have been to prevent the extension of slavery, could the act of 
 electing have been evil? 
 
 But I will not argue farther. I perhaps ought to say that 
 individually I never was much interested in the Texas question. 
 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 an- 
 nexation 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 an- 
 nexation, still there would be just so many the fewer left, where 
 they were taken from. It is possibly true, to some extent, that with 
 annexation, 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 know- 
 ingly 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. 
 
HIS SPEECHES AND WRITINGS 171 
 
 To recur to the Texas question, I understand the Liberty 
 men to have viewed annexation as a much greater evil than I ever 
 did; and I would like to convince you if I could, that they could 
 have prevented it, without violation of principle 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 
 
 This letter is significant for its exposition of Lincoln s 
 position on the extension of slavery. The resolutions 
 which he drew up with Dan Stone and placed before 
 the Legislature in 1837 anticipate, but do not define, the 
 position taken here, which Lincoln was to maintain until 
 elected President. 
 
 Durley, a Whig of Hennepin, Putnam County, was 
 an ardent supporter of Lincoln's candidacy for Congress 
 the following year. 
 
 LETTER TO HENRY E. DUMMER 
 NOVEMBER 18, 1845 
 
 Springfield, Nov: 18th. 1845 
 Friend Dummer: 
 
 Before Baker left, he said to me, in accordance with what had 
 long been an understanding between him and me, that the track 
 for the next congressional race was clear to me, so far as he was 
 concerned; and that he would say so publicly in any manner and 
 at any time I might desire. I said, in reply, that as to the manner 
 and time, I would consider a while and write him. I understand 
 
172 ABRAHAM LINCOLN: 
 
 friend Delahay to have already informed you of the substance of 
 the above. 
 
 I now wish to say to you that if it be consistent with your feel- 
 ings, you would set a few stakes for me. I do not certainly know, 
 but I strongly suspect, that Genl. Hardin wishes to run again. 
 I know of no argument to give me a preference over him, unless 
 it be "Turn about is fair play." 
 
 The Pekin paper has lately nominated or suggested Hardin's 
 name for Governor, and the Alton paper, noticing that, indirectly 
 nominates him for Congress. I wish you would, if you can, see 
 that, while these things are bandied about among the papers, the 
 Beardstown paper takes no stand that may injure my chance, 
 unless the conductor really prefers Genl. Hardin, in which case, 
 I suppose it would be fair. 
 
 Let this be confidential, and please write me in a few days. 
 
 Yours as ever 
 
 A. Lincoln 
 
 Henry E. Dummer was the law partner of Lincoln's 
 friend, John T. Stuart, from 1833 to 1837, when he moved 
 to Beardstown, Illinois, and Lincoln became Stuart's 
 partner. For an account of Lincoln's long friendship 
 with Dummer, see Paul M. Angle, "The Record of a 
 Friendship," in the Journal of the Illinois State Historical 
 Society. 
 
HIS SPEECHES AND WRITINGS 173 
 
 LETTER TO B. F. JAMES 
 FEBRUARY 9, 1846 
 
 Springfield, Feb. 9. 1846 
 Dear James: 
 
 You have seen, or will see what I am inclined to think you 
 will regard as rather an extraordinary communication in the 
 Morgan Journal. The "excessive modesty" of it's tone is certainly 
 admirable. As an excuse for getting before the public, the writer 
 sets out with a pretence of answering an article which I believe 
 appeared in the Lacon paper some time since; taking the ground 
 that the Pekin convention had settled the rotation principle. Now 
 whether the Pekin convention did or did not settle that principle, 
 I care not. If I am not, in what I have done, and am able to do, 
 for the party, near enough the equal of Genl. Hardin, to entitle 
 me to the nomination, now that he has one, I scorn it on any and 
 all other grounds. 
 
 So far then, as this Morgan Journal communation [sic] may 
 relate to the Pekin convention, I rather prefer that your paper 
 shall let it "stink and die" unnoticed. 
 
 There is, however, as you will see, another thing in the 
 communication which is, an attempt to injure me because of my 
 declining to reccommend [sic] the adoption of a new plan, for the 
 selecting a candidate. The attempt is to make it appear that I am 
 unwilling to have a fair expression of the whigs of the District 
 upon our respective claims. Now, nothing can be more false in 
 fact; and if Genl. Hardin, had chosen, to furnish his friend with 
 my written reason for declining that part of his plan; and that 
 friend had chosen to publish that reason, instead of his own con- 
 struction of the act, the falsehood of his insinuation would have 
 been most apparent. That written reason was as follows, to wit: 
 
 "As to your proposals that a poll shall be opened in every 
 precinct, and that the whole shall take place on the same day, I 
 do not personally object. They seem to me to not be unfair; and 
 
174 ABRAHAM LINCOLN: 
 
 I forbear to join in proposing them, only because I rather choose 
 to leave the decision in each county, to the whigs of the county, 
 to be made as their own judgment and convenience may dictate." 
 
 I send you this as a weapon with which to demolish, what I 
 can not but regard as a mean insinuation against me. You may 
 use it as you please; I prefer however that you should show it to 
 some of our friends, and not publish it, unless in your judgement 
 it becomes rather urgently necessary. 
 
 The reason I want to keep all points of controversy out of the 
 papers, so far as possible, is, that it will be just all we can do, to 
 keep out of a quarrel — and I am resolved to do my part to keep 
 peace. 
 
 Yours truly 
 
 A. Lincoln 
 
 This is one of the most interesting letters written by 
 Lincoln during his maneuvering for the Whig nomina- 
 tion for Congress. An earlier agreement between Lin- 
 coln and Edward D. Baker that Baker would not seek 
 re-election had been arrived at, and Lincoln sought to 
 have General John J. Hardin, another chief contender, 
 stand aside. Hardin sought the nomination but with- 
 drew in Lincoln's favor in a letter written February 16. 
 
 James, who was editor of the Tazewell Whig at 
 Tremont, had been actively supporting Lincoln. He 
 published Hardin s letter of withdrawal on February 21, 
 and editorialized in behalf of Lincoln's "worth, energy 
 and patriotic exertions!' 
 
HIS SPEECHES AND WRITINGS 175 
 
 REMARKABLE CASE OF ARREST FOR MURDER 
 APRIL 15, 1846 
 
 (The following narrative has been handed us for publication 
 by a member of the Bar. There is no doubt of the truth of every 
 fact stated; and the whole affair is of so extraordinary a character 
 as to entitle it to publication, and commend it to the attention of 
 those at present engaged in discussing reforms in criminal juris- 
 prudence, and the abolition of capital punishment.) ed. whig. 
 
 In the year 1841, there resided, at different points in the State 
 of Illinois, three brothers by the name of Trailor. Their christian 
 names were William, Henry and Archibald. Archibald resided at 
 Springfield, then as now the Seat of Government of the State. 
 He was a sober, retiring and industrious man, of about thirty 
 years of age; a carpenter by trade, and a bachelor, boarding with 
 his partner in business — a Mr. Myers. Henry, a year or two older, 
 was a man of like retiring and industrious habits; had a family 
 and resided with it on a farm at Clary's Grove, about twenty miles 
 distant from Springfield in a Northwesterly direction. — William, 
 still older, and with similar habits, resided on a farm in Warren 
 county, distant from Springfield something more than a hundred 
 miles in the same North-westerly direction. He was a widower, 
 with several children. In the neighborhood of William's residence, 
 there was, and had been for several years, a man by the name of 
 Fisher, who was somewhat above the age of fifty; had no family, 
 and no settled home; but who boarded and lodged a while here, 
 and a while there, with the persons for whom he did little jobs of 
 work. His habits were remarkably economical, so that an impres- 
 sion got about that he had accumulated a considerable amount of 
 money. In the latter part of May in the year mentioned, William 
 formed the purpose of visiting his brothers at Clary's Grove, and 
 Springfield; and Fisher, at the time having his temporary resi- 
 dence at his house, resolved to accompany him. They set out 
 together in a buggy with a single horse. On Sunday evening they 
 
176 ABRAHAM LINCOLN: 
 
 reached Henry's residence, and staid [sic] over night. On Monday 
 Morning, being the first Monday of June, they started on to 
 Springfield, Henry accompanying them on horseback. They 
 reached town about noon, met Archibald, went with him to his 
 boarding house, and there took up their lodgings for the time 
 they should remain. After dinner, the three Trailors and Fisher 
 left the boarding house in company, for the avowed purpose of 
 spending the evening together in looking about the town. At 
 supper, the Trailors had all returned, but Fisher was missing, and 
 some inquiry was made about him. After supper, the Trailors 
 went out professedly in search of him. One by one they returned, 
 the last coming in after late tea time, and each stating that he had 
 been unable to discover anything of Fisher. The next day, both 
 before and after breakfast, they went professedly in search again, 
 and returned at noon, still unsuccessful. Dinner again being had, 
 William and Henry expressed a determination to give up the 
 search and start for their homes. This was remonstrated against 
 by some of the boarders about the house, on the ground that 
 Fisher was somewhere in the vicinity, and would be left without 
 any conveyance, as he and William had come in the same buggy. 
 The remonstrance was disregarded, and they departed for their 
 homes respectively. Up to this time, the knowledge of Fisher's 
 mysterious disappearance, had spread very little beyond the few 
 boarders at Myers', and excited no considerable interest. After 
 the lapse of three or four days, Henry returned to Springfield, 
 for the ostensible purpose of making further search for Fisher. 
 Procuring some of the boarders, he, together with them and 
 Archibald, spent another day in ineffectual search, when it was 
 again abandoned, and he returned home. No general interest was 
 yet excited. On the Friday, week after Fisher's disappearance, 
 the Postmaster at Springfield received a letter from the Postmaster 
 nearest William's residence in Warren county, stating that 
 William had returned home without Fisher, and was saying, 
 rather boastfully, that Fisher was dead, and had willed him his 
 money, and that he had got about fifteen hundred dollars by it. 
 The letter further stated that William's story and conduct seemed 
 strange; and desired the Postmaster at Springfield to ascertain 
 and write what was the truth in the matter. The Postmaster at 
 
HIS SPEECHES AND WRITINGS 177 
 
 Springfield made the letter public, and at once, excitement 
 became universal and intense. Springfield, at that time had a 
 population of about 3500, with a city organization. The Attorney 
 General of the State resided there. A purpose was forthwith 
 formed to ferret out the mystery, in putting which into execution, 
 the Mayor of the city, and the Attorney General took the lead. 
 To make search for, and, if possible, find the body of the man 
 supposed to be murdered, was resolved on as the first step. In 
 pursuance of this, men were formed into large parties, and 
 marched abreast, in all directions, so as to let no inch of ground 
 in the vicinity, remain unsearched. Examinations were made of 
 cellars, wells, and pits of all descriptions, where it was thought 
 possible the body might be concealed. All the fresh, or tolerably 
 fresh graves in the grave-yard, were pried into, and dead horses 
 and dead dogs were disinterred, where, in some instances, they 
 had been buried by their partial masters. This search, as has 
 appeared, commenced on Friday. It continued until Saturday 
 afternoon without success, when it was determined to despatch 
 officers to arrest William and Henry at their residences respec- 
 tively. The officers started on Sunday morning, meanwhile, the 
 search for the body was continued, and rumors got afloat of the 
 Trailors having passed, at different times and places, several gold 
 pieces, which were readily supposed to have belonged to Fisher. 
 On Monday, the officers sent for Henry, having arrested him, 
 arrived with him. The Mayor and Attorney Gen'l took charge of 
 him, and set their wits to work to elicit a discovery from him. 
 He denied, and denied, and persisted in denying. They still plied 
 him in every conceivable way, till Wednesday, when, protesting 
 his own innocence, he stated that his brothers, William and 
 Archibald had murdered Fisher; that they had killed him, with- 
 out his (Henry's) knowledge at the time, and made a temporary 
 concealment of his body; that immediately preceding his and 
 William's departure from Springfield for home, on Tuesday, the 
 day after Fisher's disappearance, William and Archibald com- 
 municated the fact to him, and engaged his assistance in making 
 a permanent concealment of the body; that at the time he and 
 William left professedly for home, they did not take the road 
 directly, but meandering their way through the streets, entered 
 
178 ABRAHAM LINCOLN: 
 
 the woods at the North West of the city, two or three hundred 
 yards to the right of where the road where they should have 
 travelled entered them; that penetrating the woods some few 
 hundred yards, they halted and Archibald came a somewhat 
 different route, on foot, and joined them; that William and Archi- 
 bald then stationed him (Henry) on an old and disused road that 
 ran near by, as a sentinel, to give warning of the approach of any 
 intruder; that William and Archibald then removed the buggy 
 to the edge of a dense brush thicket, about forty yards distant 
 from his (Henry's) position, where, leaving the buggy, they en- 
 tered the thicket, and in a few minutes returned with the body 
 and placed it in the buggy; that from his station, he could and 
 did distinctly see that the object placed in the buggy was a dead 
 man, of the general appearance and size of Fisher; that William 
 and Archibald then moved off with the buggy in the direction of 
 Hickox's mill pond, and after an absence of half an hour returned, 
 saying they had put him in a safe place; that Archibald then left 
 for town, and he and William found their way to the road, and 
 made for their homes. At this disclosure, all lingering credulity 
 was broken down, and excitement rose to an almost inconceivable 
 height. Up to this time, the well known character of Archibald 
 had repelled and put down all suspicions as to him. Till then, 
 those who were ready to swear that a murder had been com- 
 mitted, were almost as confident that Archibald had had no part 
 in it. But now, he was seized and thrown into jail; and, indeed, 
 his personal security rendered it by no means objectionable to 
 him. And now came the search for the brush thicket, and the 
 search of the mill pond. The thicket was found, and the buggy 
 tracks at the point indicated. At a point within the thicket the 
 signs of a struggle were discovered, and a trail from thence to 
 the buggy track was traced. In attempting to follow the track of 
 the buggy from the thicket, it was found to proceed in the direc- 
 tion of the mill pond, but could not be traced all the way. At the 
 pond, however, it was found that a buggy had been backed down 
 to, and partially into the water's edge. Search was now to be 
 made in the pond; and it was made in every imaginable way. 
 Hundreds and hundreds were engaged in raking, fishing, and 
 draining. After much fruitless effort in this way, on Thursday 
 
HIS SPEECHES AND WRITINGS 179 
 
 Morning, the mill dam was cut down, and the water of the pond 
 partially drawn off, and the same processes of search again gone 
 through with. About noon of this day, the officer sent for William, 
 returned having him in custody; and a man calling himself Dr. 
 Gilmore, came in company with them. It seems that the officer 
 arrested William at his own house early in the day on Tuesday, 
 and started to Springfield with him; that after dark awhile, they 
 reached Lewiston in Fulton county, where they stopped for the 
 night; that late in the night this Dr. Gilmore arrived, stating that 
 Fisher was alive at his house; and that he had followed on to 
 give the information, so that William might be released without 
 further trouble; that the officer, distrusting Dr. Gilmore, refused 
 to release William, but brought him on to Springfield, and the 
 Dr. accompanied them. On reaching Springfield, the Dr. re- 
 asserted that Fisher was alive, and at his house. At this the multi- 
 tude for a time, were utterly confounded. Gilmore's story was 
 communicated to Henry Trailor, who, without faltering, re- 
 affirmed his own story about Fisher's murder. Henry's adherence 
 to his own story was communicated to the crowd, and at once the 
 idea started, and became nearly, if not quite universal that Gil- 
 more was a confederate of the Trailors, and had invented the tale 
 he was telling, to secure their release and escape. Excitement was 
 again at its zenith. About 3 o'clock the same evening, Myers, 
 Archibald's partner, started with a two horse carriage, for the 
 purpose of ascertaining whether Fisher was alive, as stated by 
 Gilmore, and if so, of bringing him back to Springfield with him. 
 On Friday a legal examination was gone into before two Justices, 
 on the charge of murder against William and Archibald. Henry 
 was introduced as a witness by the prosecution, and on oath, re- 
 affirmed his statements, as heretofore detailed; and, at the end 
 of which, he bore a thorough and rigid cross-examination without 
 faltering or exposure. The prosecution also proved by a respect- 
 able lady, that on the Monday evening of Fisher's disappearance, 
 she saw Archibald whom she well knew, and another man whom 
 she did not then know, but whom she believed at the time of 
 testifying to be William, (then present,) and still another, answer- 
 ing the description of Fisher, all enter the timber at the North 
 West of town, (the point indicated by Henry,) and after one or 
 
180 ABRAHAM LINCOLN: 
 
 two hours, saw William and Archibald return without Fisher. 
 Several other witnesses testified, that on Tuesday, at the time 
 William and Henry professedly gave up the search for Fisher's 
 body and started for home, they did not take the road directly, 
 but did go into the woods, as stated by Henry. By others also, it 
 was proved, that since Fisher's disappearance, William and Archi- 
 bald had passed rather an unusual number of gold pieces. The 
 statements heretofore made about the thicket, the signs of a 
 struggle, the buggy tracks, &c, were fully proven by numerous 
 witnesses. At this the prosecution rested. Dr. Gilmore was then 
 introduced by the defendants. He stated that he resided in War- 
 ren county about seven miles distant from William's residence; 
 that on the morning of William's arrest, he was out from home 
 and heard of the arrest, and of its being on a charge of the murder 
 of Fisher; that on returning to his own house, he found Fisher 
 there; that Fisher was in very feeble health, and could give no 
 rational account as to where he had been during his absence; 
 that he (Gilmore) then started in pursuit of the officer as before 
 stated, and that he should have taken Fisher with him only that 
 the state of his health did not permit. Gilmore also stated that he 
 had known Fisher for several years, and that he had understood 
 he was subject to temporary derangement of mind, owing to an 
 injury about his head received in early life. There was about 
 Dr. Gilmore so much of the air and manner of truth, that his 
 statement prevailed in the minds of the audience and of the 
 court, and the Trailors were discharged, although they attempted 
 no explanation of the circumstances proven by the other wit- 
 nesses. On the next Monday, Myers arrived in Springfield, bring- 
 ing with him the now famed Fisher, in full life and proper person. 
 Thus ended this strange affair; and while it is readily conceived 
 that a writer of novels could bring a story to a more perfect 
 climax, it may well be doubted, whether a stranger affair ever 
 really occurred. Much of the matter remains in mystery to this 
 day. The going into the woods with Fisher, and returning without 
 him, by the Trailors; their going into the woods at the same place 
 the next day, after they professed to have given up the search; 
 the signs of a struggle in the thicket, the buggy tracks at the edge 
 of it; and the location of the thicket and the signs about it, 
 
HIS SPEECHES AND WRITINGS 181 
 
 corresponding precisely with Henry's story, are circumstances 
 that have never been explained. 
 
 William and Archibald have both died since — William in less 
 than a year, and Archibald in about two years after the supposed 
 murder. Henry is still living, but never speaks of the subject. 
 
 It is not the object of the writer of this, to enter into the many 
 curious speculations that might be indulged upon the facts of this 
 narrative; yet he can scarcely forbear a remark upon what would, 
 almost certainly have been the fate of William and Archibald, 
 had Fisher not been found alive. It seems he had wandered away 
 in mental derangement, and, had he died in this condition, and 
 his body been found in the vicinity, it is difficult to conceive 
 what could have saved the Trailors from the consequence of hav- 
 ing murdered him. Or, if he had died, and his body never found, 
 the case against them, would have been quite as bad, for, although 
 it is a principle of law that a conviction for murder shall not be 
 had, unless the body of the deceased be discovered, it is to be 
 remembered, that Henry testified he saw Fishers dead body. 
 
 Andrew Johnston was a lawyer who served as Clerk 
 of the Illinois Senate in 1839, when Lincoln probably 
 made his acquaintance, and was editor of the Quincy 
 Whig. He may have solicited the narrative from Lincoln's 
 pen as a result of having heard Lincoln recount the story 
 orally. Their "literary" friendship and correspondence 
 had been of some duration prior to the writing of the 
 article, as is indicated in the letter to Johnston, April 
 18, 1846. That Lincoln is the "member of the bar" men- 
 tioned as author by the editor of the Whig in the prefa- 
 tory note seems obvious from the circumstances of the ex- 
 change between Lincoln and Johnston of other "literary" 
 compositions and from the fact that the story was 
 reprinted in the Sangamo Journal, April 23, 1846. The 
 readers should compare the general narrative with Lin- 
 coins "Letter to Joshua F. Speed," June 19, 1841, which 
 was written the day following the "examining trial" held 
 in a justice of peace court, at which Lincoln was one of 
 
182 ABRAHAM LINCOLN: 
 
 the attorneys representing William Trailor. A plausible 
 solution to the mystery has been worked out by Mr. 
 Roger W. Barrett, who edited the piece in a brochure 
 entitled A Strange Affair (19SS). With Mr. Barrett's per- 
 mission the following paragraphs, including in the first 
 paragraph part of an earlier solution proposed by Alex- 
 ander Shields, who had attended Archibald Trailor s 
 last illness, are reproduced herewith: 
 
 x 'The result was that Archibald Trayler s /"sicj use- 
 fulness was destroyed, and he wandered about like a 
 person in a dream. About two years after, a messenger 
 came for me at twelve o'clock at night, to see Trayler, 
 who was very sick; when I saw him he was exhausted, 
 and in a few hours departed this life. The plain, natural 
 and just solution of this mysterious affair appears to be 
 simply this. Wm. Trayler had a great fancy for Copt. 
 Ransdell's niece, and she had a fancy for him, and the 
 Captain was intensely opposed to it. Trayler was deter- 
 mined to steal the girl, and she was willing to be stolen, 
 and in order to be prepared for the theft, the three men 
 went down into the timber to find if there were any by- 
 roads that would lead into the Beardstown road; then 
 Fisher is sent home on foot, and arrangements made with 
 the girl to meet him in the timber. When he departed 
 from home he took that direction, and the girl being un- 
 able to escape the vigilance of the Captain and his spies, 
 did not appear; after waiting a reasonable time, he then 
 went to the Beardstown road on his way home.' 
 
 "The statement of Dr. Shields, instead of solving, 
 seems only to cast the shadow of a new mystery. It is 
 improbable that Henry Trailor would charge his brothers 
 with an atrocious murder merely to avoid the mention 
 of a girl in whom one of his brothers was interested. 
 
 "The real mystery of the case is why Archibald and 
 William Trailor would never reveal what occurred, nor 
 the circumstances under which they parted from Fisher, 
 nor tell why, after leaving the searching party on the 
 
HIS SPEECHES AND WRITINGS 183 
 
 following day ostensibly to go to their homes, they again 
 returned to the thicket and remained there for an hour 
 or so while Henry stood guard. In the silence of the three 
 brothers, these questions have remained unanswered for 
 almost a century and there is no voice that can 'provoke 
 the silent dust' to reveal their secret. 
 
 "But, subject to information that may yet be dis- 
 covered, and to any more plausible explanation which 
 may be suggested, the following is offered as a solution 
 which is consistent with all the facts and circumstances 
 of the case as now known. 
 
 "Lincoln, in his letter to Speed, relates that 'Fisher 
 had a serious hurt in his head by the bursting of a gun, 
 since which he had been subject to continued bad health 
 and occasional aberration of mind.' Such an injury may 
 cause mental aberration or epileptic fit, followed by 
 catalepsy, leaving the sufferer in a state closely resem- 
 bling, and occasionally mistaken for death. 
 
 "Entering the thicket — either to meet the young lady 
 or with a premonition of the impending attack — Fisher, 
 seized with a fit, or mental aberration, may have strug- 
 gled with the brothers, or, if he went in alone, may in 
 falling, have sustained some visible mark of injury be- 
 fore the Trailors followed him into the thicket. The 
 brothers, mistaking the unconscious or cataleptic state 
 of Fisher for the sign of death, and fearing that because 
 of the evidence of the struggle, or the possession of his 
 money, they would be suspected of foul play, concealed 
 the body in order to gain time to determine what course 
 to pursue. Fisher may have turned his money over to 
 them, or they may have taken it from his person to safe- 
 guard it. 
 
 "Returning the following day and finding the body 
 as they had left it, they apparently determined to dis- 
 pose of it in the mill pond, so that when found it would 
 be supposed that Fisher had accidentally drowned. 
 Presumably the Trailors drove hastily away and Fisher, 
 regaining consciousness through the effect of his sudden 
 
184 ABRAHAM LINCOLN: 
 
 immersion, escaped drowning to wander in a daze over 
 the prairies. 
 
 "The Traitors must have been puzzled when the 
 pond was drained and no body found, and bewildered 
 when Fisher turned up alive. After their acquittal and 
 vindication at the town meeting, it is not to be wondered 
 that Archibald and William would never reveal their 
 part in this strange affair." 
 
 LETTER TO ANDREW JOHNSTON 
 APRIL 18, 1846 
 
 Tremont, April 18, 1846. 
 Friend Johnston: 
 
 Your letter, written some six weeks since, was received in due 
 course, and also the paper with the parody. It is true, as suggested 
 it might be, that I have never seen Poe's "Raven"; and I very well 
 know that a parody is almost entirely dependent for its interest 
 upon the reader's acquaintance with the original. Still there is 
 enough in the polecat, self-considered, to afford one several hearty 
 laughs. I think four or five of the last stanzas are decidedly funny, 
 particularly where Jeremiah "scrubbed and washed, and prayed 
 and fasted." 
 
 I have not your letter now before me; but, from memory, I 
 think you ask me who is the author of the piece I sent you, and 
 that you do so ask as to indicate a slight suspicion that I myself 
 am the author. Beyond all question, I am not the author. I would 
 give all I am worth, and go in debt, to be able to write so fine a 
 piece as I think that is. Neither do I know who is the author. I 
 met it in a straggling form in a newspaper last summer, and I 
 remember to have seen it once before, about fifteen years ago, 
 and this is all I know about it. The piece of poetry of my own 
 which I alluded to, I was led to write under the following cir- 
 cumstances. In the fall of 1844, thinking I might aid some to carry 
 
HIS SPEECHES AND WRITINGS 185 
 
 the State of Indiana for Mr. Clay, I went into the neighborhood 
 in that State in which I was raised, where my mother and only 
 sister were buried, and from which I had been absent about fif- 
 teen years. That part of the country is, within itself, as unpoetical 
 as any spot of the earth; but still, seeing it and its objects and 
 inhabitants aroused feelings in me which were certainly poetry; 
 though whether my expression of those feelings is poetry is quite 
 another question. When I got to writing, the change of subject 
 divided the thing into four little divisions or cantos, the first only 
 of which I send you now, and may send the others hereafter. 
 
 Yours truly, 
 
 A. Lincoln. 
 
 The poem to which Lincoln refers in the second 
 paragraph was William Knox's "Mortality," Lincoln's 
 favorite poem at this time. 
 
 The first ten stanzas of "My Childhood Home I See 
 Again" were apparently inclosed with this letter. The 
 rest of this poem, which Lincoln calls "the second canto" 
 was included in his next "Letter to Andrew Johnston" 
 September 6, 1846. The manuscript of this poem which 
 is in the Library of Congress contains two stanzas (the 
 two last as printed in this volume) not included in either 
 letter, and the manuscript of the letter of September 6 
 contains one stanza which is not in the Library of Con- 
 gress manuscript (the third from the last stanza as printed 
 in this volume). The other "cantos," if there ever were 
 any, have apparently been lost. Although the name 
 "Johnston" is correct, Lincoln spells it "Johnson" in the 
 letter of September 6. 
 
 Lincoln's admission that he had not read Foe's "The 
 Raven" is not surprising, since it had appeared for the 
 first time in N. P. Willis's Evening Mirror in January, 
 1845. Later, possibly as a result of Johnston's parody, 
 "The Raven" seems to have been read and memorized 
 by Lincoln, as indicated by Albert J. Beveridge (Abra- 
 ham Lincoln: 1809-1858, Vol. II, p. 228). 
 
186 ABRAHAM LINCOLN: 
 
 RELIGIOUS VIEWS: LETTER TO THE EDITOR OF 
 THE ILLINOIS GAZETTE. AUGUST 11, 1846 
 
 Springfield, August 11th, 1846. 
 Mr. Ford:—- 
 
 I see in your paper of the 8th inst. a communication in 
 relation to myself, of which it is perhaps expected of me to take 
 some notice. 
 
 Shortly before starting on my tour through yours, and the 
 other Northern counties of the District, I was informed by letter 
 from Jacksonville that Mr. Cartwright was whispering the charge 
 of infidelity against me in that quarter. — I at once wrote a con- 
 tradiction of it, and sent it to my friends there, with the request 
 that they should publish it or not, as in their discretion they might 
 think proper, having in view the extent of the circulation of the 
 charge, as also the extent of credence it might be receiving. They 
 did not publish it. After my return from your part of the District, 
 I was informed that he had been putting the same charge in 
 circulation against me in some of the neighborhoods in our own, 
 and one or two of the adjoining counties. — I believe nine persons 
 out of ten had not heard the charge at all; and, in a word, its 
 extent of circulation was just such as to make a public notice of 
 it appear uncalled for; while it was not entirely safe to leave it 
 unnoticed. After some reflection, I published the little hand-bill, 
 herewith enclosed, and sent it to the neighborhoods above re- 
 ferred to. 
 
 I have little doubt now, that to make the same charge — to 
 slyly sow the seed in select spots — was the chief object of his 
 mission through your part of the District, at a time when he 
 knew I could not contradict him, either in person or by letter 
 before the election. And, from the election returns in your county, 
 being so different from what they are in parts where Mr. Cart- 
 wright and I are both well known, I incline to the belief that he 
 has succeeded in deceiving some honest men there. 
 
HIS SPEECHES AND WRITINGS 187 
 
 As to Mr. Woodward, "our worthy commissioner from 
 Henry," spoken of by your correspondent, I must say it is a little 
 singular that he should know so much about me, while, if I ever 
 saw him, or heard of him, save in the communication in your 
 paper, I have forgotten it. If Mr. Woodward has given such assur- 
 ance of my character as your correspondent asserts, I can still 
 suppose him to be a worthy man; he may have believed what he 
 said; but there is, even in that charitable view of his case, one 
 lesson in morals which he might, not without profit, learn of even 
 me — and that is, never to add the weight of his character to a 
 charge against his fellow man, without knowing it to be true. — I 
 believe it is an established maxim in morals that he who makes 
 an assertion without knowing whether it is true or false, is guilty 
 of falsehood; and the accidental truth of the assertion, does not 
 justify or excuse him. This maxim ought to be particularly held 
 in view, when we contemplate an attack upon the reputation of 
 our neighbor. I suspect it will turn out that Mr. Woodward 
 got his information in relation to me, from Mr. Cartwright; and I 
 here aver, that he, Cartwright, never heard me utter a word in any 
 way indicating my opinions on religious matters, in his life. 
 
 It is my wish that you give this letter, together with the ac- 
 companying hand-bill, a place in your paper. 
 
 Yours truly, 
 
 A. Lincoln 
 
 TO THE VOTERS OF THE SEVENTH CONGRESSIONAL DISTRICT. 
 
 Fellow Citizens: 
 
 A charge having got into circulation in some of the neigh- 
 borhoods of this District, in substance that I am an open scoffer 
 at Christianity, I have by the advice of some friends concluded 
 to notice the subject in this form. That I am not a member of any 
 Christian Church, is true; but I have never denied the truth of 
 the Scriptures; and I have never spoken with intentional dis- 
 respect of religion in general, or of any denomination of Chris- 
 tians in particular. It is true that in early life I was inclined to 
 believe in what I understand is called the "Doctrine of Necessity" 
 — that is, that the human mind is impelled to action, or held in 
 
188 ABRAHAM LINCOLN: 
 
 rest by some power, over which the mind itself has no control; 
 and I have sometimes (with one, two or three, but never publicly) 
 tried to maintain this opinion in argument — the habit of arguing 
 thus however, I have, entirely left off for more than five years — 
 And I add here, I have always understood this same opinion to be 
 held by several of the Christian denominations. The foregoing, is 
 the whole truth, briefly stated, in relation to myself, upon this 
 subject. 
 
 I do not think I could myself, be brought to support a man 
 for office, whom I knew to be an open enemy of, and scoffer at, 
 religion. — Leaving the higher matter of eternal consequences, 
 between him and his Maker, I still do not think any man has the 
 right thus to insult the feelings, and injure the morals, of the 
 community in which he may live. — If, then, I was guilty of such 
 conduct, I should blame no man who should condemn me for it; 
 but I do blame those, whoever they may be, who falsely put such 
 a charge in circulation against me. 
 
 A Lincoln. 
 
 July 31, 1846. 
 
 Allen N. Ford, editor of the Illinois Gazette, had 
 written Lincoln of the charges being circulated against 
 him by the Reverend Peter Cartwright and followers. 
 Lincoln's answer came too late to influence the election 
 results in Marshall County, but was 'published after- 
 wards. Cartwright came off a poor second in the con- 
 troversy as well as in the election. In the same issue of the 
 Gazette Ford editorialized that it was "quite bad 
 enough" for a minister "to meddle with politics at all; 
 but when in the canvass he descends from the arena of 
 honorable warfare to revel in the filth of defamation and 
 falsehood, what shall we say of his character as a man, 
 and what the world of religion he professes?" 
 
 Another letter appears following Lincoln's, signed 
 "D." which calls attention to the fact that Lincoln's 
 supposed infidelity "has been well endorsed by probably 
 1000 of a majority" and undertakes to show that "it was 
 
HIS SPEECHES AND WRITINGS 189 
 
 owing to Atheists, and Deists in the convention that 
 formed our Constitution that Religious liberty was se- 
 cured to the citizens of the Union . . . and I do know 
 that religious sects denounced the Constitution, because 
 'it did not begin with and made no provision for re- 
 gion. 
 
 As a curious footnote to the tactics of Cartwright in 
 this election, there came a time when Lincoln defended 
 Cartwrighfs grandson, Quinn Harrison, for murder and 
 gained his acquittal after one of his bitterest legal battles. 
 (See Emanuel Hertz, editor, The Hidden Lincoln, pp. 
 106-108). 
 
 LETTER TO ANDREW JOHNSTON 
 SEPTEMBER 6, 1846 
 
 Springfield, Sept. 6th. 1846 
 Friend Johnson [sic]: 
 
 You remember when I wrote you from Tremont last spring, 
 sending you a little canto of what I called poetry, I promised to 
 bore you with another some time. I now fulfil the promise. The 
 subject of the present one is an insane man. His name is Matthew 
 Gentry. He is three years older than I, and when we were boys 
 we went to school together. He was rather a bright lad, and the 
 son of the rich man of our very poor neighbourhood. At the age 
 of nineteen he unaccountably became furiously mad, from which 
 condition he gradually settled down into harmless insanity. 
 When, as I told you in my other letter I visited my old home in 
 the fall of 1844, I found him still lingering in this wretched con- 
 dition. In my poetizing mood I could not forget the impressions 
 his case made upon me. Here is the result. 
 
 [Here follows the second half, excepting the last two stanzas, 
 of the poem which is printed next in order.] 
 
190 ABRAHAM LINCOLN: 
 
 If I should ever send another, the subject will be a "Bear- 
 hunt." Yours as ever 
 
 A. Lincoln 
 
 MY CHILDHOOD HOME I SEE AGAIN. 1846 
 
 [I] 
 
 My childhood-home I see again, 
 And gladden with the view; 
 
 And still as mem'ries crowd my brain, 
 There's sadness in it too. 
 
 O memory! thou mid- way world 
 'Twixt Earth and Paradise, 
 
 Where things decayed, and loved ones lost 
 In dreamy shadows rise. 
 
 And freed from all that's gross or vile, 
 Seem hallowed, pure, and bright, 
 
 Like scenes in some enchanted isle, 
 All bathed in liquid light. 
 
 As distant mountains please the eye, 
 When twilight chases day — 
 
 As bugle-tones, that, passing by, 
 In distance die away — 
 
 As leaving some grand water-fall 
 
 We ling'ring, list it's roar, 
 So memory will hallow all 
 
 We've known, but know no more. 
 
 Now twenty years have passed away, 
 
 Since here I bid farewell 
 To woods, and fields, and scenes of play 
 
 And school-mates loved so well. 
 
HIS SPEECHES AND WRITINGS 191 
 
 Where many were, how few remain 
 
 Of old familiar things! 
 But seeing these 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 lone survivors tell 
 
 How nought 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 (companions of the dead) 
 
 I'm living in the tombs. 
 
 [in 
 
 A[nd] here's an object more of dread, 
 Than aught the grave contains — 
 
 A human-form, with reason fled, 
 While wretched life remains. 
 
 Poor Matthew! Once of genius bright, — 
 
 A fortune-favored child — 
 Now locked for aye, in mental night, 
 
 A haggard mad-man wild. 
 
 Poor Matthew! I have ne'er forgot 
 When first with maddened will, 
 
 Yourself you maimed, your father fought, 
 And mother strove to kill; 
 
192 ABRAHAM LINCOLN: 
 
 And terror spread, and neighbors ran, 
 
 Your dang'rous strength to bind; 
 And soon a howling crazy man, 
 
 Your limbs were fast confined. 
 
 How then you writhed and shrieked aloud, 
 
 Your bones and sinews bared; 
 And fiendish on the gaping crowd, 
 
 With burning eye-balls glared* 
 
 And begged, and swore, and wept, and prayed, 
 
 With maniac laughter joined — 
 How fearful are the signs displayed, 
 
 By pangs that kill the mind! 
 
 And when at length, the drear and long 
 
 Time soothed your fiercer woes — 
 How plaintively your mournful song, 
 
 Upon the still night rose. 
 
 IVe heard it oft, as if I dreamed, 
 
 Far-distant, sweet, and lone; 
 The funeral dirge it ever seemed 
 
 Of reason dead and gone. 
 
 To drink its strains, IVe stole away, 
 
 All silently and still, 
 Ere yet the rising god of day 
 
 Had streaked the Eastern hill. 
 
 Air held his breath; the trees all still 
 
 Seemed sorrwing angels round. 
 Their swelling tears in dew-drops fell 
 
 Upon the listening ground. 
 
 But this is past, and naught remains 
 
 That raised you o'er the brute. 
 Your madning shrieks, and soothing strains 
 
 Are like forever mute. 
 
HIS SPEECHES AND WRITINGS 193 
 
 Now fare thee well: more thou the cause 
 
 Than subject now of woe. 
 All mental pangs, by time's kind laws, 
 
 Hast lost the power to know. 
 
 O death! thou awe-inspiring prince, 
 
 That keepst the world in fear; 
 Why dost thou tear more blest ones hence, 
 
 And leave him ling'ring here? — 
 
 And now away to seek some scene 
 
 Less painful than the last — 
 With less of horror mingled in 
 
 The present and the past. 
 
 The very spot where grew the bread 
 
 That formed my bones, I see. 
 How strange, old field, on thee to tread 
 
 And feel I'm part of thee! 
 
 The stanza third from the last does not appear in 
 the manuscript in the Library of Congress, but is in- 
 cluded in the text as it appears in the manuscript 
 enclosed by Lincoln with the "Letter to Andrew John- 
 ston" September 6, 1846. 
 
 THE BEAR HUNT. [1846] 
 
 A wild-bear chace, didst never see? 
 
 Then hast thou lived in vain. 
 Thy richest bump of glorious glee, 
 
 Lies desert in thy brain. 
 
 When first my father settled here, 
 
 'Twas then the frontier line: 
 The panther's scream, filled night with fear 
 
 And bears preyed on the swine. 
 
194 ABRAHAM LINCOLN: 
 
 But wo for Bruin's short lived fun, 
 
 When rose the squealing cry; 
 Now man and horse, with dog and gun, 
 
 For vengeance, at him fly. 
 
 A sound of danger strikes his ear; 
 
 He gives the breeze a snuff: 
 Away he bounds, with little fear, 
 
 And seeks the tangled rough. 
 
 On press his foes, and reach the ground, 
 Where's left his half munched meal; 
 
 The dogs, in circles, scent around, 
 And find his fresh made trail. 
 
 With instant cry, away they dash, 
 
 And men as fast pursue; 
 O'er logs they leap, through water splash, 
 
 And shout the brisk halloo. 
 
 Now to elude the eager pack, 
 Bear shuns the open ground; 
 
 Though [sic] matted vines, he shapes his track 
 And runs it, round and round. 
 
 The tall fleet cur, with deep-mouthed voice, 
 
 Now speeds him, as the wind; 
 While half-grown pup, and short-legged fice, 
 
 Are yelping far behind. 
 
 And fresh recruits are dropping in 
 
 To join the merry corps: 
 With yelp and yell, — a mingled din — 
 
 The woods are in a roar. 
 
 And round, and round the chace now goes, 
 The world's alive with fun; 
 
HIS SPEECHES AND WRITINGS 195 
 
 Nick Carter's horse, his rider throws, 
 And more, Hill drops his gun. 
 
 Now sorely pressed, bear glances back, 
 
 And lolls his tired tongue; 
 When is, to force him from his track, 
 
 An ambush on him sprung. 
 
 Across the glade he sweeps for flight, 
 
 And fully is in view. 
 The dogs, new-fired, by the sight, 
 
 Their cry, and speed, renew. 
 
 The foremost ones, now reach his rear, 
 
 He turns, they dash away; 
 And circling now, the wrathful bear, 
 
 They have him full at bay. 
 
 At top of speed, the horse-men come, 
 All screaming in a row. 
 • "Whoop! Take him Tiger — Seize him Drum" — 
 Bang, — Bang — the rifles go. 
 
 And furious now, the dogs he tears, 
 
 And crushes in his ire — 
 Wheels right and left, and upward rears, 
 
 With eyes of burning fire. 
 
 But leaden death is at his heart, 
 
 Vain all the strength he plies — 
 And, spouting blood from every part, 
 
 He reels, and sinks, and dies. 
 
 And now a dinsome clamor rose, 
 
 'Bout who should have his skin; 
 Who first draws blood, each hunter knows, 
 
 This prize must always win. 
 
196 ABRAHAM LINCOLN 
 
 But who did this, and how to trace 
 What's true from what's a lie, 
 
 Like lawyers, in a murder case 
 They stoutly argufy. 
 
 Aforesaid fice, of blustering mood, 
 
 Behind, and quite forgot, 
 Just now emerging from the wood, 
 
 Arrives upon the spot. 
 
 With grinning teeth, and up-turned hair — 
 Brim full of spunk and wrath, 
 
 He growls, and seizes on dead bear, 
 And shakes for life and death. 
 
 And swells as if his skin would tear, 
 And growls and shakes again; 
 
 And swears, as plain as dog can swear, 
 That he has won the skin. 
 
 Conceited whelp! we laugh at the< 
 
 Nor mind, that not a few 
 Of pompous, two-legged dogs there be. 
 
 Conceited quite as you. 
 
 LETTER TO JOSHUA F. SPEED 
 OCTOBER 22, 1846 
 
 Springfield, Octr. 22nd 1846 
 Dear Speed: 
 
 Owing to my absence, yours of the 10th. Inst, was not re- 
 ceived until yesterday. Since then I have been devoting myself to 
 arive [sic] at a correct conclusion upon your matter of business. 
 
HIS SPEECHES AND WRITINGS 197 
 
 It may be that you do not precisely understand the nature and 
 result of the suit against you and Bell's estate. It is a chancery suit, 
 and has been brought to a final decree, in which, you are treated 
 as a nominal party only. The decree is, that Bell's administration 
 pay the Nelson Fry debt out of the proceeds of Bell's half of the 
 store. So far, you are not injured; because you are released from 
 the debt, without having paid any thing, and Hurst is in no way 
 left liable to you, because the debt he and Bell undertook to pay, 
 is, or will be, paid without your paying it, or any part of it. The 
 question then, is, "How are you injured?" — By diverting so much 
 of the assets of Bell's estate, to the payment of the Fry debt, the 
 general assets are lessened, and so, will pay a smaller dividend to 
 general creditors; one of which creditors I suppose you are, in 
 effect, as assignor of the note to W. P. Speed. It incidentally 
 enlarges your liability to W. P. Speed; and to that extent, you are 
 injured. How much will this be? I think, $100 — or $120 — being 
 the dividend of 25 or 30 per cent, that Hurst's half of the Fry 
 debt, would pay on the W. P. S. debt. Hurst's undertaking was, 
 in effect, that he would pay the whole of the Fry debt, if Bell did 
 not pay any part of it; but it was not his undertaking, that if Bell 
 should pay the whole of it, he would refund the whole, so that Bell 
 should be the better able to pay his other debts. You are not losing 
 on the Fry debt, because that is, or will be paid; but your loss 
 will be on the W. P. S. debt, — a debt that Hurst is under no obliga- 
 tion to indemnify you against. Hurst is bound to account to Bell's 
 estate, for one half of the Fry debt; because he owed half, and 
 Bell's estate pays all; and if, upon such accounting any thing is 
 due the estate from Hurst, it will swell the estate, and so far 
 enlarge the dividend to the W. P. S. debt. But when Bell's estate 
 shall call Hurst to account, he will I am informed show that the 
 estate, after paying the whole of the Fry debt is still indebted to 
 him. If so, not much, if any thing can come from that quarter — 
 nothing, unless it can be turned, as to compel him [to?] pay all he 
 owes the estate, and take a dividend only, upon what the estate 
 owes him. If you had paid the Fry debt yourself, you could then 
 turn on Hurst and make him refund you; but this would only 
 bring [you?] where you started from, excepting it would leave 
 Bell's estate able to pay a larger dividend; and Hurst would then 
 
198 ABRAHAM LINCOLN: 
 
 turn upon the estate to contribute one half, which would enlarge 
 the indebtedness of the estate in the same proportion, and so re- 
 duce the dividend again. I believe the only thing that can be done 
 for your advantage in the matter, is for Bell's administrator to call 
 Hurst to account for one half the Fry debt, and then fight off, 
 the best he can, Hurst's claim of indebtedness against the estate. 
 
 I should be much pleased to see [you?] here again; but I 
 must, in candour, say I do not perceive how your personal 
 presence would do any good in the business matter. 
 
 You, no doubt, assign the suspension of our correspondence 
 to the true philosophical cause, though it must be confessed, by 
 both of us, that this is rather a cold reason for allowing a friend- 
 ship, such as ours, to die out by degrees. I propose now, that, 
 upon receipt of this, you shall be considered in my debt, and 
 under obligation to pay soon, and that neither shall remain long 
 in arrears hereafter. Are you agreed? 
 
 Being elected to Congress, though I am very grateful to our 
 friends, for having done it, has not pleased me as much as I 
 expected. 
 
 We have another boy, born the 10th of March last. He is 
 very much such a child as Bob was at his age — rather of a longer 
 order. Bob is "short and low," and, I expect, always will be. He 
 talks very plainly — almost as plainly as any body. He is quite 
 smart enough. I sometimes fear he is one of the little rare-ripe 
 sort, that are smarter at about five than ever after. He has a great 
 deal of that sort of mischief that is the offspring of such animal 
 spirits. Since I began this letter, a messenger came to tell me, 
 Bob was lost; but by the time I reached the house, his mother had 
 found him, and had him whipped — and, by now, very likely he 
 is run away again. 
 
 Mary has read your letter, and wishes to be remembered to 
 Mrs. S. and you, in which I most sincerely join her. 
 
 As ever yours 
 
 A. Lincoln 
 
HIS SPEECHES AND WRITINGS 199 
 
 LETTER TO WILLIAM H. HERNDON 
 DECEMBER 12, 1847 
 
 Washington, Dec. 12. 1847 
 Dear William: 
 
 As soon as the Congressional Globe and Appendix begins to 
 issue, I shall send you a copy of it regularly. I wish you to read it, 
 or as much of it as you please, and be careful to preserve all the 
 numbers, so that we can have a complete file of it 
 
 There is nothing new here, but what you see in the papers. 
 
 Yours as ever — 
 
 A. Lincoln 
 
 RESOLUTIONS IN THE UNITED STATES HOUSE 
 OF REPRESENTATIVES. DECEMBER 22, 1847 
 
 whereas the President of the United States, in his message 
 of May 11, 1846, has declared that "the Mexican Government not 
 only refused to receive him, [the envoy of the United States,] or 
 listen to his propositions, but, after a long-continued series of 
 menaces, has at last invaded our territory and shed the blood of 
 our fellow-citizens on our own soil:" 
 
 And again, in his message of December 8, 1846, that "we had 
 ample cause of war against Mexico long before the breaking out 
 of hostilities; but even then we forbore to take redress into our 
 own hands until Mexico herself became the aggressor, by invad- 
 ing our soil in hostile array, and shedding the blood of our citi- 
 zens:" 
 
 And yet again, in his message of December 7, 1847, that "the 
 
200 ABRAHAM LINCOLN: 
 
 Mexican Government refused even to hear the terms of adjust- 
 ment which he [our minister of peace] was authorized to propose, 
 and finally, under wholly unjustifiable pretexts, involved the two 
 countries in war, by invading the territory of the State of Texas, 
 striking the first blow, and shedding the blood of our citizens on 
 our own soil." 
 
 And whereas this House is desirous to obtain a full knowl- 
 edge of all the facts which go to establish whether the particular 
 spot on which the blood of our citizens was so shed was or was 
 not at that time our own soil: Therefore, 
 
 Resolved By the House of Representatives, That the Presi- 
 dent of the United States be respectfully requested to inform 
 this House — 
 
 1st . Whether the spot on which the blood of our citizens was 
 shed, as in his messages declared, was or was not within the 
 territory of Spain, at least after the treaty of 1819, until the 
 Mexican revolution. 
 
 2d. Whether that spot is or is not within the territory which 
 was wrested from Spain by the revolutionary Government of 
 Mexico. 
 
 3d. Whether that spot is or is not within a settlement of peo- 
 ple, which settlement has existed ever since long before the Texas 
 revolution, and until its inhabitants fled before the approach of 
 the United States army. 
 
 4th. Whether that settlement is or is not isolated from any and 
 all other settlements by the Gulf and the Rio Grande on the south 
 and west, and by wide uninhabited regions on the north and east. 
 
 5th. Whether the people of that settlement, or a majority of 
 them, or any of them, have ever submitted themselves to the gov- 
 ernment or laws of Texas or of the United States, by consent or 
 by compulsion, either by accepting office, or voting at elections, 
 or paying tax, or serving on juries, or having process served upon 
 them, or in any other way. 
 
 6th. Whether the people of that settlement did or did not flee 
 from the approach of the United States army, leaving unprotected 
 their homes and their growing crops, before the blood was shed, 
 as in the messages stated; and whether the first blood, so shed, 
 
HIS SPEECHES AND WRITINGS 201 
 
 was or was not shed within the enclosure of one of the people 
 who had thus fled from it. 
 
 7 th. Whether our citizens, whose blood was shed, as in his 
 message declared, were or were not, at that time, armed officers 
 and soldiers, sent into that settlement by the military order of the 
 President, through the Secretaiy of War. 
 
 Sth. Whether the military force of the United States was or 
 was not so sent into that settlement after General Taylor had more 
 than once intimated to the War Department that, in his opinion, 
 no such movement was necessary to the defence or protection of 
 Texas. 
 
 Although the work of modern historians has in gen- 
 eral sustained President Polk's course in the events lead- 
 ing up to the War tenth Mexico, the position taken by 
 the Whigs in Congress was not without its justification. 
 For the anti-slavery men, the whole situation was re- 
 garded as the direct result of Democratic efforts to ex- 
 tend the bounds of the slave-holding portion of the 
 United States through the annexation of Texas. But with 
 the fact of annexation accomplished, many others, South 
 as well as North, felt that Polk's action in sending United 
 States troops into an area which was still open to dispute 
 as to sovereignty was provocative of war. The question 
 of boundary had not been settled to the satisfaction of 
 both countries and was open to settlement by treaty at 
 the time the first blood was shed on a "spot" in the dis- 
 puted territory. Polk's assumption that the "spot" was 
 American territory is the occasion of Lincoln's "Resolu- 
 tions." 
 
 The interesting thing about Lincoln's "Resolutions" 
 is that they were introduced by a new Congressman 
 who had taken his seat only a few weeks earlier. As 
 Beveridge observes, "few new members of Congress, 
 during a first term, have been so active as Lincoln was; 
 but he made practically no impression on anybody, and 
 
202 ABRAHAM LINCOLN: 
 
 such impression as he did make was not favorable." Al- 
 though the second half of the comment is a hit over- 
 stated, it is true that the chief result of Lincoln's activities 
 was the alienation of the electorate back home. The "Res- 
 olutions" raised no new points which had not been re- 
 iterated time and again by Folk's opponents in Congress 
 for months past, and Lincoln's object in submitting them 
 seems to have been little more than his means of going 
 on record with his party. 
 
 The brackets appearing in the "Resolutions" and in 
 both speeches delivered in the United States House of 
 Representatives — January 12, 1848, and July 27, 1848 — 
 are not the editor's, but the text's. 
 
 THE WAR WITH MEXICO: SPEECH IN THE UNITED 
 STATES HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES. 
 JANUARY 12, 1848 
 
 Mr. Chairman: 
 
 Some, if not all, the gentlemen on the other side of the House, 
 who have addressed the committee within the last two days, have 
 spoken rather complainingly, if I have rightly understood them, 
 of the vote given a week or ten days ago, declaring that the war 
 with Mexico was unnecessarily and unconstitutionally commenced 
 by the President. I admit that such a vote should not be given in 
 mere party wantonness, and that the one given is justly censurable, 
 if it have no other or better foundation. I am one of those who 
 joined in that vote; and I did so under my best impression of the 
 truth of the case. How I got this impression, and how it may pos- 
 sibly be removed, I will now try to show. When the war began, 
 it was my opinion that all those who, because of knowing too little, 
 or because of knowing too much, could not conscientiously ap- 
 prove the conduct of the President, (in the beginning of it,) 
 
HIS SPEECHES AND WRITINGS 203 
 
 should, nevertheless, as good citizens and patriots, remain silent 
 on that point, at least till the war should be ended. Some leading 
 Democrats, including ex-President Van Buren, have taken this 
 same view, as I understand them; and I adhered to it and acted 
 upon it, until since I took my seat here; and I think I should still 
 adhere to it, were it not that the President and his friends will not 
 allow it to be so. Besides, the continual effort of the President to 
 argue every silent vote given for supplies into an endorsement of 
 the justice and wisdom of his conduct; besides that singularly 
 candid paragraph in his late message, in which he tells us that 
 Congress, with great unanimity, (only two in the Senate and 
 fourteen in the House dissenting,) had declared that "by the act 
 of the Republic of Mexico a state of war exists between that Gov- 
 ernment and the United States;" when the same journals that in- 
 formed him of this, also informed him that, when that declaration 
 stood disconnected from the question of supplies, sixty-seven in 
 the House, and not fourteen, merely, voted against it; besides 
 this open attempt to prove by telling the truth, what he could not 
 prove by telling the whole truth, demanding of all who will not 
 submit to be misrepresented, in justice to themselves, to speak 
 out; besides all this, one of my colleagues, [mr. richardson,] 
 at a very early day in the session, brought in a set of resolutions, 
 expressly indorsing the original justice of the war on the part of 
 the President. Upon these resolutions, when they shall be put on 
 their passage, I shall be compelled to vote; so that I cannot be 
 silent if I would. Seeing this, I went about preparing myself to 
 give the vote understandingly, when it should come. I carefully 
 examined the President's messages, to ascertain what he himself 
 had said and proved upon the point. The result of this examina- 
 tion was to make the impression, that, taking for true all the Presi- 
 dent states as facts, he falls far short of proving his justification; 
 and that the President would have gone further with his proof, if 
 it had not been for the small matter that the truth would not per- 
 mit him. Under the impression thus made, I gave the vote before 
 mentioned. I propose now to give, concisely, the process of the 
 examination I made, and how I reached the conclusion I did. 
 
 The President, in his first message of May, 1846, declares that 
 the soil was ours on which hostilities were commenced by Mexico; 
 
204 ABRAHAM LINCOLN: 
 
 and he repeats that declaration, almost in the same language, in 
 each successive annual message — thus showing that he esteems 
 that point a highly essential one. In the importance of that point, 
 I entirely agree with the President. To my judgment, it is the very 
 point upon which he should be justified or condemned. In his 
 message of December, 1846, it seems to have occurred to him, as 
 is certainly true, that title, ownership to soil or anything else, is 
 not a simple fact, but is a conclusion following one or more sim- 
 ple facts; and that it was incumbent upon him to present the facts 
 from which he concluded the soil was ours on which the first 
 blood of the war was shed. 
 
 Accordingly, a little below the middle of page twelve, in the 
 message last referred to, he enters upon that task; forming an 
 issue and introducing testimony, extending the whole to a little 
 below the middle of page fourteen. Now, I propose to try to show 
 that the whole of this— issue and evidence — is, from beginning 
 to end, the sheerest deception. The issue, as he presents it, is in 
 these words: "But there are those who, conceding all this to be 
 true, assume the ground that the true western boundary of Texas 
 is the Nueces, instead of the Rio Grande; and that, therefore, in 
 marching our army to the east bank of the latter river, we passed 
 the Texan line, and invaded the territory of Mexico." Now, this 
 issue is made up of two affirmatives and no negative. The main 
 deception of it is, that it assumes as true that one river or the 
 other is necessarily the boundary, and cheats the superficial 
 thinker entirely out of the idea that possibly the boundary is some- 
 where between the two, and not actually at either. A further 
 deception is, that it will let in evidence which a true issue would 
 exclude. A true issue made by the President would be about as 
 follows: "I say the soil was ours on which the first blood was shed; 
 there are those who say it was not." 
 
 I now proceed to examine the President's evidence, as ap- 
 plicable to such an issue. When that evidence is analyzed, it is all 
 included in the following propositions: 
 
 1. That the Rio Grande was the western boundary of Loui- 
 siana, as we purchased it of France in 1803. 
 
 2. That the Republic of Texas always claimed the Rio Grande 
 as her western boundary. 
 
HIS SPEECHES AND WRITINGS 205 
 
 3. That, by various acts, she had claimed it on paper. 
 
 4. That Santa Anna, in his treaty with Texas, recognized the 
 Rio Grande as her boundary. 
 
 5. That Texas before, and the United States after annexation, 
 had exercised jurisdiction beyond the Nueces, between the two 
 rivers. 
 
 6. That our Congress understood the boundary of Texas to ex- 
 tend beyond the Nueces. 
 
 Now for each of these in its turn: 
 
 His first item is, that the Rio Grande was the western boun- 
 dary of Louisiana, as we purchased it of France in 1803; and, 
 seeming to expect this to be disputed, he argues over the amount 
 of nearly a page to prove it true; at the end of which, he lets us 
 know that, by the treaty of 1819, we sold to Spain the whole coun- 
 try, from the Rio Grande eastward to the Sabine. Now, admitting, 
 for the present, that the Rio Grande was the boundary of Loui- 
 siana, what, under heaven, had that to do with the present boun- 
 dary between us and Mexico? How, Mr. Chairman, the line that 
 once divided your land from mine can still be the boundary be- 
 tween us after I have sold my land to you, is, to me, beyond all 
 comprehension. And how any man, with an honest purpose only 
 of proving the truth, could ever have thought of introducing such 
 a fact to prove such an issue, is equally incomprehensible. The 
 outrage upon common right, of seizing as our own what we 
 have once sold, merely because it was ours before we sold it, is 
 only equalled by the outrage on common sense of any attempt 
 to justify it. 
 
 The President's next piece of evidence is, that "the Republic 
 of Texas always claimed this river (Rio Grande) as her western 
 boundary." That is not true, in fact. Texas has claimed it, but she 
 has not always claimed it. There is, at least, one distinguished ex- 
 ception. Her State constitution — the Republic's most solemn and 
 well-considered act; that which may, without impropriety, be 
 called her last will and testament, revoking all others — makes no 
 such claim. But suppose she had always claimed it. Has not Mexico 
 always claimed the contrary? So that there is but claim against 
 claim, leaving nothing proved until we get back of the claims, 
 and find which has the better foundation. 
 
206 ABRAHAM LINCOLN: 
 
 Though not in the order in which the President presents his 
 evidence, I now consider that class of his statements, which are, 
 in substance, nothing more than that Texas has, by various acts 
 of her Convention and Congress, claimed the Rio Grande as her 
 boundary — on paper. I mean here what he says about the fixing 
 of the Rio Grande as her boundary, in her old constitution, (not 
 her State constitution,) about forming congressional districts, 
 counties, &c. Now, all of this is but naked claim; and what I have 
 already said about claims is strictly applicable to this. If I should 
 claim your land by word of mouth, that certainly would not make 
 it mine; and if I were to claim it by a deed which I had made 
 myself, and with which you had had nothing to do, the claim 
 would be quite the same in substance, or rather in utter nothing- 
 ness. 
 
 I next consider the President's statement that Santa Anna, in 
 his treaty with Texas, recognized the Rio Grande as the western 
 boundary of Texas. Besides the position so often taken that Santa 
 Anna, while a prisoner of war — a captive — could not bind Mexico 
 by a treaty, which I deem conclusive; besides this, I wish to say 
 something in relation to this treaty,* so called by the President, 
 with Santa Anna. If any man would like to be amused by a sight 
 at that little thing, which the President calls by that big name, he 
 can have it by turning to Niles's Register, volume 50, page 336. 
 And if any one should suppose that Niles's Register is a curious 
 repository of so mighty a document as a solemn treaty between 
 nations, I can only say that I learned, to a tolerable degree of cer- 
 tainty, by inquiry at the State Department, that the President him- 
 self never saw it anywhere else. By the way, I believe I should not 
 err if I were to declare, that during the first ten years of the exist- 
 ence of that document, it was never by anybody called a treaty; 
 that it was never so called till the President, in his extremity, at- 
 tempted, by so calling it, to wring something from it in justification 
 of himself in connection with the Mexican war. It has none of the 
 distinguishing features of a treaty. It does not call itself a treaty. 
 Santa Anna does not therein assume to bind Mexico; he assumes 
 only to act as the President, Commander-in-chief of the Mexican 
 army and navy; stipulates that the then present hostilities should 
 
 * For the text of this "treaty" see note following this speech. 
 
HIS SPEECHES AND WRITINGS 207 
 
 cease, and that he would not himself take up arms, nor influence 
 the Mexican people to take up arms, against Texas, during the 
 existence of the war of independence. He did not recognize the 
 independence, of Texas; he did not assume to put an end to the 
 war, but clearly indicated his expectation of its continuance; he 
 did not say one word about boundary, and most probably never 
 thought of it. It is stipulated therein that the Mexican forces should 
 evacuate the territory of Texas, passing to the other side of the Rio 
 Grande; and in another article it is stipulated, that to prevent 
 collisions between the armies, the Texan army should not approach 
 nearer than within five leagues — of what is not said — but clearly, 
 from the object stated, it is of the Rio Grande. Now, if this is a 
 treaty recognizing the Rio Grande as the boundary of Texas, it 
 contains the singular feature of stipulating that Texas shall not go 
 within five leagues of her own boundary. 
 
 Next comes the evidence of Texas before annexation, and the 
 United States afterwards, exercising jurisdiction beyond the 
 Nueces, and between the two rivers. This actual exercise of juris- 
 diction is the very class or quality of evidence we want. It is ex- 
 cellent so far as it goes; but does it go far enough? He tells us it 
 went beyond the Nueces, but he does not tell us it went to the Rio 
 Grande. He tells us jurisdiction was exercised between the two 
 rivers, but he does not tell us it was exercised over all the territory 
 between them. Some simple-minded people think it possible to 
 cross one river and go beyond it, without going all the way to the 
 next; that jurisdiction may be exercised between two rivers with- 
 out covering all the country between them. I know a man, not 
 very unlike myself, who exercises jurisdiction over a piece of land 
 between the Wabash and the Mississippi; and yet so far is this 
 from being all there is between those rivers, that it is just one 
 hundred and fifty-two feet long by fifty wide, and no part of it 
 much within a hundred miles of either. He has a neighbor be- 
 tween him and the Mississippi — that is, just across the street, in 
 that direction — whom, I am sure, he could neither persuade nor 
 force to give up his habitation; but which, nevertheless, he could 
 certainly annex, if it were to be done, by merely standing on his 
 own side of the street and claiming it, or even sitting down and 
 writing a deed for it. 
 
208 ABRAHAM LINCOLN: 
 
 But next, the President tells us, the Congress of the United 
 States understood the State of Texas they admitted into the Union 
 to extend beyond the Nueces. Well, I suppose they did — I cer- 
 tainly so understand it — but how far beyond? That Congress did 
 not understand it to extend clear to the Rio Grande, is quite cer- 
 tain by the fact of their joint resolutions for admission expressly 
 leaving all questions of boundary to future adjustment. And, it 
 may be added, that Texas herself is proved to have had the same 
 understanding of it that our Congress had, by the fact of the exact 
 conformity of her new constitution to those resolutions. 
 
 I am now through the whole of the President's evidence; and 
 it is a singular fact, that if any one should declare the President 
 sent the army into the midst of a settlement of Mexican people, 
 who had never submitted, by consent or by force to the authority 
 of Texas or of the United States, and that there, and thereby, the 
 first blood of the war was shed, there is not one word in all the 
 President has said which would either admit or deny the declara- 
 tion. In this strange omission chiefly consists the deception of the 
 President's evidence — an omission which, it does seem to me, 
 could scarcely have occurred but by design. My way of living 
 leads me to be about the courts of justice; and there I have 
 sometimes seen a good lawyer, struggling for his client's neck, in 
 a desperate case, employing every artifice to work round, befog, 
 and cover up with many words some position pressed upon him 
 by the prosecution, which he dared not admit, and yet could not 
 deny. Party bias may help to make it appear so; but, with all the 
 allowance I can make for such bias, it still does appear to me 
 that just such, and from just such necessity, is the President's 
 struggles in this case. 
 
 Some time after my colleague [mr. richabdson] intro- 
 duced the resolutions I have mentioned, I introduced a preamble, 
 resolution, and interrogatories, intended to draw the President 
 out, if possible, on this hitherto untrodden ground. To show their 
 relevancy, I propose to state my understanding of the true rule for 
 ascertaining the boundary between Texas and Mexico. It is, that 
 wherever Texas was exercising jurisdiction was hers; and wher- 
 ever Mexico was exercising jurisdiction was hers; and that what- 
 ever separated the actual exercise of jurisdiction of the one from 
 
HIS SPEECHES AND WRITINGS 209 
 
 that of the other, was the true boundary between them. If, as is 
 probably true, Texas was exercising jurisdiction along the western 
 bank of the Nueces, and Mexico was exercising it along the east- 
 ern bank of the Rio Grande, then neither river was the boundary, 
 but the uninhabited country between the two was. The extent of 
 our territory in that region depended, not on any treaty-fixed 
 boundary, (for no treaty had attempted it,) but on revolution. Any 
 people anywhere, being inclined and having the power, have the 
 right to rise up and shake off the existing government, and form a 
 new one that suits them better. This is a most valuable, a most 
 sacred right — a right which, we hope and believe, is to liberate 
 the world. Nor is this right confined to cases in which the whole 
 people of an existing government may choose to exercise it. Any 
 portion of such people that can may revolutionize, and make their 
 own of so much of the territory as they inhabit. More than this, a 
 majority of any portion of such people may revolutionize, putting 
 down a minority, intermingled with, or near about them, who may 
 oppose their movements. Such minority was precisely the case of 
 the Tories of our own Revolution. It is a quality of revolutions not 
 to go by old lines, or old laws; but to break up both, and make 
 new ones. As to the country now in question, we bought it of 
 France in 1803, and sold it to Spain in 1819, according to the Presi- 
 dent's statement. After this, all Mexico, including Texas, revolu- 
 tionized against Spain; and still later, Texas revolutionized against 
 Mexico. In my view, just so far as she carried her revolution, by 
 obtaining the actual, willing or unwilling, submission of the peo- 
 ple, so far the country was hers, and no farther. 
 
 Now, sir, for the purpose of obtaining the very best evidence 
 as to whether Texas had actually carried her revolution to the 
 place where the hostilities of the present war commenced, let the 
 President answer the interrogatories I proposed, as before men- 
 tioned, or some other similar ones. Let him answer fully, fairly, 
 and candidly. Let him answer with facts, and not with arguments. 
 Let him remember he sits where Washington sat; and, so remem- 
 bering, let him answer as Washington would answer. As a nation 
 should not, and the Almighty will not, be evaded, so let him at- 
 tempt no evasion, no equivocation. And if, so answering, he can 
 show that the soil was ours where the first blood of the war was 
 
210 ABRAHAM LINCOLN: 
 
 shed — that it was not within an inhabited country, or, if within 
 such, that the inhabitants had submitted themselves to the civil 
 authority of Texas, or of the United States, and that the same is 
 true of the site of Fort Brown — then I am with him for his justifi- 
 cation. In that case, I shall be most happy to reverse the vote I 
 gave the other day. I have a selfish motive for desiring that the 
 President may do this; I expect to give some votes, in connection 
 with the war, which, without his so doing, will be of doubtful 
 propriety, in my own judgment, but which will be free from the 
 doubt, if he does so. But if he cannot or will not do this — if, on 
 any pretence, or no pretence, he shall refuse or omit it — then I 
 shall be fully convinced, of what I more than suspect already, that 
 he is deeply conscious of being in the wrong; that he feels the 
 blood of this war, like the blood of Abel, is crying to Heaven 
 against him; that he ordered General Taylor into the midst of a 
 peaceful Mexican settlement, purposely to bring on a war; that 
 originally having some strong motive — what I will not stop now 
 to give my opinion concerning — to involve the two countries in a 
 war, and trusting to escape scrutiny by fixing the public gaze 
 upon the exceeding brightness of military glory — -that attractive 
 rainbow that rises in showers of blood — that serpent's eye that 
 charms to destroy — he plunged into it, and has swept on and on, 
 till, disappointed in his calculation of the ease with which Mexico 
 might be subdued, he now finds himself he knows not where. 
 How like the half -insane mumbling of a fever dream is the whole 
 war part of the late message! At one time telling us that Mexico 
 has nothing whatever that we can get but territory; at another, 
 showing us how we can support the war by levying contributions 
 on Mexico. At one time urging the national honor, the security of 
 the future, the prevention of foreign interference, and even the 
 good of Mexico herself, as among the objects of the war; at an- 
 other, telling us that, "to reject indemnity, by refusing to accept a 
 cession of territory, would be to abandon all our just demands, 
 and to wage the war, bearing all its expenses, without a purpose 
 or definite object." So, then, the national honor, security of the 
 future, and everything but territorial indemnity, may be consid- 
 ered the no-purposes and indefinite objects of the war! But, having 
 
HIS SPEECHES AND WRITINGS 211 
 
 it now settled that territorial indemnity is the only object, we are 
 urged to seize, by legislation here, all that he was content to take 
 a few months ago, and the whole province of Lower California to 
 boot, and to still carry on the war — to take all we are fighting for, 
 and still fight on. Again, the President is resolved, under all cir- 
 cumstances, to have full territorial indemnity for the expenses of 
 the war; but he forgets to tell us how we are to get the excess after 
 those expenses shall have surpassed the value of the whole of the 
 Mexican territory. So, again, he insists that the separate national 
 existence of Mexico shall be maintained; but he does not tell us 
 how this can be done after we shall have taken all her territory. 
 Lest the questions I here suggest be considered speculative merely, 
 let me be indulged a moment in trying to show they are not. 
 
 The war has gone on some twenty months; for the expenses 
 of which, together with an inconsiderable old score, the President 
 now claims about one half of the Mexican territory, and that by 
 far the better half, so far as concerns our ability to make anything 
 out of it. It is comparatively uninhabited; so that we could estab- 
 lish land offices in it, and raise some money in that way. But the 
 other half is already inhabited, as I understand it, tolerably densely 
 for the nature of the country; and all its lands, or all that are val- 
 uable, already appropriated as private property. How, then, are 
 we to make anything out of these lands with this encumbrance on 
 them, or how remove the encumbrance? I suppose no one will say 
 we should kill the people, or drive them out, or make slaves of 
 them, or even confiscate their property? How, then, can we make 
 much out of this part of the territory? If the prosecution of the 
 war has, in expenses, already equaled the better half of the coun- 
 try, how long its future prosecution will be in equaling the less 
 valuable half is not a speculative, but a practical question, press- 
 ing closely upon us; and yet it is a question which the President 
 seems never to have thought of. 
 
 As to the mode of terminating the war and securing peace, 
 the President is equally wandering and indefinite. First, it is to be 
 done by a more vigorous prosecution of the war in the vital parts 
 of the enemy's country; and, after apparently talking himself tired 
 on this point, the President drops down into a half despairing 
 
212 ABRAHAM LINCOLN: 
 
 tone, and tells us, that "with a people distracted and divided by 
 contending factions, and a Government subject to constant 
 changes, by successive revolutions, the continued success of our 
 arms may fail to obtain a satisfactory peace." Then he suggests the 
 propriety of wheedling the Mexican people to desert the counsels 
 of their own leaders, and, trusting in our protection, to set up a 
 Government from which we can secure a satisfactory peace, tell- 
 ing us that "this may become the only mode of obtaining such a 
 peace" But soon he falls into doubt of this too, and then drops 
 back on to the already half-abandoned ground of "more vigorous 
 prosecution." All this shows that the President is in no wise satis- 
 fied with his own positions. First, he takes up one, and, in at- 
 tempting to argue us into it, he argues himself out of it; then seizes 
 another, and goes through the same process; and then, confused 
 at being able to think of nothing new, he snatches up the old one 
 again, which he has some time before cast off. His mind, tasked 
 beyond its power, is running hither and thither, like some tortured 
 creature on a burning surface, finding no position on which it can 
 settle down and be at ease. 
 
 Again, it is a singular omission in this message, that it no- 
 where intimates when the President expects the war to terminate. 
 At its beginning, General Scott was, by this same President, driven 
 into disfavor, if not disgrace, for intimating that peace could not 
 be conquered in less than three or four months. But now, at the 
 end of about twenty months, during which time our arms have 
 given us the most splendid successes — every department, and 
 every part, land and water, officers and privates, regulars and 
 volunteers, doing all that men could do, and hundreds of things 
 which it had ever before been thought men could not do; after all 
 this, this same President gives us a long message without showing 
 us that, as to the end, he has himself even an imaginary concep- 
 tion. As I have before said, he knows not where he is. He is a 
 bewildered, confounded, and miserably-perplexed man. God grant 
 he may be able to show there is not something about his con- 
 science more painful than all his mental perplexity! 
 
HIS SPEECHES AND WRITINGS 213 
 
 The so-called "Treaty" referred to in this speech, as 
 printed in the Congressional Globe, is as follows: 
 
 ARTICLES OF AGREEMENT ENTERED INTO BETWEEN HIS 
 EXCELLENCY DAVDD G. BURNET, PRESIDENT OF THE REPUBLIC 
 OF TEXAS, OF THE ONE PART, AND HIS EXCELLENCY GENERAL 
 SANTA ANNA, PRESIDENT-GENERAL-IN-CHIEF OF THE MEXI- 
 CAN ARMY, OF THE OTHER PART. 
 
 Article 1. General Antonio Lopez de Santa Anna 
 agrees that he will not take up arms, nor will he exercise 
 his influence to cause them to be taken up, against the 
 people of Texas, during the present war of independence. 
 
 Art. 2. All hostilities between the Mexican and 
 Texan troops will cease immediately, both by land and 
 water. 
 
 Art. 3. The Mexican troops will evacuate the ter- 
 ritory of Texas, passing to the other side of the Rio 
 Grande Del Norte. 
 
 Art. 4. The Mexican army, in its retreat, shall not 
 take the property of any person without his consent and 
 just indemnification, using only such articles as may be 
 necessary for its subsistence, in cases when the owner 
 may not be present, and remitting to the commander of 
 the army of Texas, or to the Commissioners to be ap- 
 pointed for the adjustment of such matters, an account of 
 the value of the property consumed, the place where 
 taken, and the name of the owner, if it can be ascer- 
 tained. 
 
 Art. 5. That all private property, including cattle, 
 horses, negro slaves, or indentured persons, of whatever 
 denomination, that may have been captured by any por- 
 tion of the Mexican army, or may have taken refuge in 
 the said army, since the commencement of the late inva- 
 sion, shall be restored to the commander of the Texan 
 army, or to such other persons as may be appointed by 
 the Government of Texas to receive them. 
 
 Art. 6. The troops of both armies will refrain 
 
214 ABRAHAM LINCOLN: 
 
 from coming into contact with each other; and to this 
 end, the commander of the army of Texas will he careful 
 not to approach within a shorter distance than five 
 leagues. 
 
 Art. 7. The Mexican army shall not make any 
 other delay, on its march, than that which is necessary 
 to take up their hospitals, baggage, etc., and to cross the 
 rivers; and delay not necessary to these purposes to he 
 considered an infraction of this agreement. 
 
 Art. 8. By an express, to he immediately des- 
 patched, this agreement shall he sent to General Vin- 
 cente Filisola, and to General T. J. Rusk, commander of 
 the Texan army, in order that they may be apprized of 
 its stipulations; and to this end, they will exchange en- 
 gagements to comply with the same. 
 
 Art. 9. That all Texan prisoners now in the posses- 
 sion of the Mexican army, or its authorities, be forthwith 
 released, and furnished with free passports to return to 
 their homes; in consideration of which, a corresponding 
 number of Mexican prisoners, rank and file, now in pos- 
 session of the Government of Texas, shall be immediately 
 released — the remainder of the Mexican prisoners, that 
 continue in the possession of the Government of Texas 
 to be treated with due humanity; any extraordinary com- 
 forts that may be furnished them to be at the charge of 
 the Government of Mexico. * 
 
 Art. 10. General Antonio Lopez de Santa Anna 
 will be sent to Vera Cruz as soon as it shall be deemed 
 proper. 
 
 The contracting parties sign this instrument for the 
 above mentioned purposes, in duplicate, at the port of 
 Velasco, this fourteenth day of May, 1836. 
 David G. Burnet, President, 
 Jas. Collingsworth, Secretary of State, 
 Antonio Lopez de Santa Anna, 
 B. Hardiman, Secretary of the Treasury, 
 P. W. Grayson, Attorney-General. 
 
HIS SPEECHES AND WRITINGS 215 
 
 The excerpt printed below is from a speech made 
 before the House on February 2, 1848, by Alexander 
 Stephens of Georgia, later Vice-President of the Con- 
 federacy. It is reproduced here chiefly for the purpose 
 of illustrating the similarity of views and emotional 
 convictions held by the two men on the Mexican War. 
 It is Stephens at his rhetorical best during this period. 
 For Lincoln's testimony concerning the effectiveness 
 of the speech as a whole see his "Letter to William H. 
 Herndon" February 2, 1848. The paragraph is as fol- 
 lows: 
 
 "The honor of this country does not and cannot 
 require us to force and compel the people of any other 
 to sell theirs. I have, 1 trust, as high a regard for national 
 honor as any man. It is the brightest gem in the chaplet 
 of a nations glory; and there is nothing of which I am 
 prouder than the high character for honor this country 
 has acquired throughout the civilized world — that code 
 of honor which was established by Washington and the 
 men of the Revolution and which rests upon truth, jus- 
 tice, and honesty, which is the offspring of virtue and 
 integrity, and which is seen in the length and breadth of 
 our land, in all the evidences of art, and civilization, and 
 moral advancement, and everything that tends to ele- 
 vate, dignify, and ennoble man. This is the honor of my 
 admiration, and it is made of 'sterner,' purer, nobler 
 'stuff' than that aggressive and degrading, yea, odious 
 principle now avowed of waging a war against a neigh- 
 boring people to compel them to sell their country. Who 
 is here so base as to be willing, under any circumstances, 
 to sell his country? For myself, I can only say, if the last 
 funeral pile of liberty were lighted, I would mount it 
 and expire in its flames before I would be coerced by any 
 power however great and strong, to sell or surrender the 
 land of my home, the place of my nativity, and the graves 
 of my sires! Sir, the principle is not only dishonorable, 
 but infamous. As the Representative upon this floor of 
 
216 ABRAHAM LINCOLN: 
 
 a high-minded and honorable constituency, I repeat, 
 that the principle of waging war against a neighboring 
 people to compel them to sell their country, is not only 
 dishonorable, but disgraceful and infamous. What! shall 
 it be said that American honor aims at nothing higher 
 than land — than the ground on which we tread? Do we 
 look no higher, in our aspirations for honor, than do the 
 soulless brutes? Shall we disavow the similitude of our 
 Maker, and disgrace the very name of man? Tell it not to 
 the world. Let not such an aspersion and reproach rest 
 upon our name. I have heard of nations whose honor 
 could be satisfied with gold — that glittering dust which 
 is so precious in the eyes of some — but never did I expect 
 to live to see the day when the Executive of this coun- 
 try should announce that our honor was such a loath- 
 some, beastly thing, that it could not be satisfied with any 
 achievements in arms, however brilliant and glorious, 
 but must feed on earth — gross, vile dirt! — and require 
 even a prostrate foe to be robbed of mountain rocks and 
 desert plains!" 
 
 Stephens and Lincoln were closely associated in a 
 group of young Whigs who called themselves the Young 
 Indians. Stephens's colleague from Georgia, Robert 
 Toombs, three Virginia Congressmen — Preston, Flournoy, 
 and Pendleton — and Smith of Connecticut formed the 
 original group. The mutual respect of Lincoln and 
 Stephens in particular continued until and during the 
 Civil War. 
 
HIS SPEECHES AND WRITINGS 217 
 
 LETTER TO WILLIAM H. HERNDON 
 FEBRUARY I, 1848 
 
 Washington, February 1, 1848. 
 Dear William: 
 
 Your letter of the 19th ultimo was received last night, and for 
 which I am much obliged. The only thing in it that I wish to talk 
 to you at once about is that because of my vote for Ashmun's 
 amendment you fear that you and I disagree about the war. I re- 
 gret this, not because of any fear we shall remain disagreed after 
 you have read this letter, but because if you misunderstand I fear 
 other good friends may also. That vote affirms that the war was 
 unnecessarily and unconstitutionally commenced by the Presi- 
 dent; and I will stake my life that if you had been in my place 
 you would have voted just as I did. Would you have voted what 
 you felt and knew to be a lie? I know you would not. Would you 
 have gone out of the House — skulked the vote? I expect not. If 
 you had skulked one vote, you would have had to skulk many 
 more before the end of the session. Richardson's resolutions, in- 
 troduced before I made any move or gave any vote upon the sub- 
 ject, make the direct question of the justice of the war; so that no 
 man can be silent if he would. You are compelled to speak; and 
 your only alternative is to tell the truth or a lie. I cannot doubt 
 which you would do. 
 
 This vote has nothing to do in determining my votes on the 
 questions of supplies. I have always intended, and still intend, to 
 vote supplies; perhaps not in the precise form recommended by 
 the President, but in a better form for all purposes, except Loco- 
 foco party purposes. It is in this particular you seem mistaken. 
 The Locos are untiring in their efforts to make the impression that 
 all who vote supplies or take part in the war do of necessity ap- 
 prove the President's conduct in the beginning of it; but the Whigs 
 have from the beginning made and kept the distinction between 
 the two. In the very first act nearly all the Whigs voted against 
 
218 ABRAHAM LINCOLN: 
 
 the preamble declaring that war existed by the act of Mexico; and 
 yet nearly all of them voted for the supplies. As to the Whig men 
 who have participated in the war, so far as they have spoken in 
 my hearing they do not hesitate to denounce as unjust the Presi- 
 dent's conduct in the beginning of the war. They do not suppose 
 that such denunciation is directed by undying hatred to him, as 
 "The Register" would have it believed. There are two such Whigs 
 on this floor (Colonel Haskell and Major James). The former 
 fought as a colonel by the side of Colonel Baker at Cerro Gordo, 
 and stands side by side with me in the vote that you seem dis- 
 satisfied with. The latter, the history of whose capture with Cas- 
 sius Clay you well know, had not arrived here when that vote was 
 given; but, as I understand, he stands ready to give just such a 
 vote whenever an occasion shall present. Baker, too, who is now 
 here, says the truth is undoubtedly that way; and whenever he 
 shall speak out, he will say so. Colonel Doniphan, too, the favorite 
 Whig of Missouri, and who overran all Northern Mexico, on his 
 return home in a public speech at St. Louis condemned the ad- 
 ministration in relation to the war, if I remember. G.T.M. Davis, 
 who has been through almost the whole war, declares in favor of 
 Mr. Clay; from which I infer that he adopts the sentiments of Mr. 
 Clay, generally at least. On the other hand, I have heard of but 
 one Whig who has been to the war attempting to justify the 
 President's conduct. That one was Captain Bishop, editor of the 
 "Charleston Courier," and a very clever fellow. I do not mean this 
 letter for the public, but for you. Before it reaches you, you will 
 have seen and read my pamphlet speech, and perhaps been scared 
 anew by it. After you get over your scare, read it over again, sen- 
 tence by sentence, and tell me honestly what you think of it. I 
 condensed all I could for fear of being cut off by the hour rule, 
 and when I got through I had spoken but forty-five minutes. 
 
 Yours forever, 
 
 A. Lincoln. 
 
 This and the three succeeding letters indicate the 
 ardor with which Lincoln personally felt the views he 
 and other Whigs were expressing. Herndons letters were 
 
HIS SPEECHES AND WRITINGS 219 
 
 an accurate sounding board of sentiment back home even 
 among Lincoln's closest associates. All were disturbed, 
 many plainly antagonized, by Lincoln's stand. The Loco- 
 focos referred to were, of course, the Democrats. For its 
 derisive import, see Webster's Dictionary. 
 
 LETTER TO WILLIAM H. HERNDON 
 FEBRUARY 2, 1848 
 
 Washington, Feb. 2. 1848 
 Dear William 
 
 I just take up 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 hours length, I 
 ever heard. 
 
 My old, withered, dry eyes, are full of tears yet. 
 If he writes it out any thing like he delivered it, our people 
 shall see a good many copies of it. 
 
 Yours truly 
 
 A. Lincoln 
 To W H Herndon 
 
220 ABRAHAM LINCOLN 
 
 LETTER TO WILLIAM H. HERNDON 
 FEBRUARY 15, 1848 
 
 Washington, Feb. 15. 1848 
 Dear William: 
 
 Your letter of the 29th. Jany. was receved [sic] last night. 
 Being exclusively a constitutional argument, I wish to submit 
 some reflections upon it in the same spirit of kindness that I know 
 actuates you. Let me first state what I understand to be your posi- 
 tion. It is, that if it shall become necessary, to repel invasion, the 
 President may, without violation of the Constitution, cross the 
 line, and invade the teritory [sic] of another country; and that 
 whether such necessity exists in any given case, the President is 
 to be the sole judge. 
 
 Before going further, consider well whether this is, or is not 
 your position. If it is, it is a position that neither the President 
 himself, nor any friend of his, so far as I know, has ever taken. 
 Their only positions are first, that the soil was ours where hostili- 
 ties commenced, and second, that whether it was rightfully ours or 
 not, Congress had annexed it, and the President, for that reason 
 was bound to defend it, both of which are as clearly proved to be 
 false in fact, as you can prove that your house is not mine. That 
 soil was not ours; and Congress did not annex or attempt to annex 
 it. But to return to your position: Allow the President to invade a 
 neighboring nation, whenever he shall deem it necessary to repel 
 an invasion, and you allow him to do so, whenever he may choose 
 to say he deems it necessary for such purpose — and you allow him 
 to make war at pleasure. Study to see if you can fix any limit to his 
 power in this respect, after you have given him so much as you 
 propose. If, to-day, he should choose to say he thinks it necessary 
 to invade Canada, to prevent the British from invading us, how 
 could you stop him? You may say to him, "I see no probability of 
 the British invading us" but he will say to you "be silent; I see it, 
 if you dont". 
 
HIS SPEECHES AND WRITINGS 221 
 
 The provision of the Constitution giving the war-making 
 power to Congress, was dictated, as I understand it, by the fol- 
 lowing reasons. Kings had always been involving and impover- 
 ishing their people in wars, pretending generally, if not always, 
 that the good of the people was the object. This, our convention 
 understood to be the most oppressive of all Kingly oppressions; 
 and they resolved to so frame the Constitution that no one man 
 should hold the power of bringing this oppression upon us. But 
 your view destroys the whole matter, and places our President 
 where Kings have always stood. Write soon again. 
 
 Yours truly, 
 
 A Lincoln 
 
 LETTER TO USHER F. LINDER 
 MARCH 22, 1848 
 
 Washington, March 22—1848— 
 Friend Linder: 
 
 Yours of the 15th. is just received, as was a day or two ago, 
 one from Dunbar on the same subject. Although I address this to 
 you alone, I intend it for you, Dunbar, and Bishop, and wish you 
 to show it to them. In Dunbar's letter, and in Bishop's paper, it is 
 assumed that Mr. Crittenden's position on the war is correct. Well, 
 so I think. Please wherein is my position different from his? Has 
 he ever approved the President's conduct in the beginning of the 
 war, or his mode or objects in prossecuting [sic] it? Never. He 
 condemns both. True, he votes supplies, and so do I. What, then, 
 is the difference, except that he is a great man and I am a small 
 one? 
 
 Towards the close of your letter you ask three questions, the 
 first of which is "Would it not have been just as easy to have 
 elected Genl. Taylor without opposing the war as by opposing it?" 
 I answer, I suppose it would, if we could do neither — could be 
 
222 ABRAHAM LINCOLN: 
 
 silent on the question; but the Locofocos here will not let the 
 whigs be silent. Their very first act in Congress was to present a 
 preamble declaring that war existed by the act of Mexico, and the 
 whigs were obliged to vote on it — and this policy is followed up 
 by them, so that they are compelled to speak and their only option 
 is whether they will, when they do speak, tell the truth, or tell a 
 foul, villanous [sic], and bloody falsehood. But, while on this point, 
 I protest against your calling the condemnation of Polk "opposing 
 the war." In thus assuming that all must be opposed to the war, 
 even though they vote supplies, who do not not [sic] endorse Polk, 
 with due deference I say I think you fall into one of the artfully 
 set traps of Locofocoism. 
 
 Your next question is "And suppose we could succeed in 
 proving it a wicked and unconstitutional war, do we not thereby 
 strip Taylor and Scott of more than half their laurels?" Whether 
 it would so strip them is not matter of demonstration, but of 
 opinion only; and my opinion is that it would not; but as your 
 opinion seems to be different, let us call in some others as umpire. 
 There are in this H. R. some more than forty members who sup- 
 port Genl. Taylor for the Presidency, every one of whom has voted 
 that the war was "unnecessarily and unconstitutionally com- 
 menced by the President" every one of whom has spoken to the 
 same effect, who has spoken at all, and not one of whom supposes 
 he thereby strips Genl. of any laurels. More than this; two of 
 these, Col. Haskell and Major Gaines, themselves fought in 
 Mexico; and yet they vote and speak just as the rest of us do, with- 
 out ever dreaming that they "strip" themselves of any laurels. 
 There may be others, but Capt. Bishop is the only intelligent whig 
 who has been to Mexico, that I have heard of taking different 
 ground. 
 
 Your third question is "And have we as a party, ever gained 
 any thing by falling in company with abolitionists?" Yes. We 
 gained our only national victory by falling in company with them 
 in the election of Genl. Harrison. Not that we fell into abolition 
 doctrines; but that we took up a man whose position induced them 
 to join us in his election. But this question is not so significant as 
 a question, as it is as a charge of abolitionism against those who 
 have chosen to speak their minds against the President. As you 
 
HIS SPEECHES AND WRITINGS 223 
 
 and I perhaps would again differ as to the justice of this charge, 
 let us once more call in our umpire. There are in this H. R. whigs 
 from the slave states as follows: one from Louisiana, one from 
 Mississippi, one from Florida, two from Alabama, four from 
 Georgia, five from Tennessee, six from Kentucky, six from North 
 Carolina, six from Virginia, four from Maryland, and one from 
 Delaware, making thirtyseven in all, and all slave-holders, every 
 one of whom votes the commencement of the war "unnecessary 
 and unconstitutionar and so falls subject to your charge of aboli- 
 tionism! — 
 
 "En passant" these are all Taylor men, except one in Tenn — 
 two in Ky, one in N. C. and one in Va. Besides which we have 
 one in Ills — two in la, three in Ohio, five in Penn — four in N. J. 
 and one in Conn. While this is less than half the whigs of the H. R. 
 it is three times as great as the strength of any other one candidate. 
 
 You are mistaken in your impression that any one has com- 
 municated expressions of yours and Bishop's to me. In my letter 
 to Dunbar, I only spoke from the impression made by seeing in 
 the paper that you and he were, "in the degree, though not in the 
 extreme" on the same tack with Latshaw. 
 
 Yours as ever 
 
 A. Lincoln 
 
 hinder was a Democrat who had turned Whig in 
 1838 and who returned to the Democratic party when 
 "the Whigs were merged in the Abolitionists." Lincoln 
 had verbally crossed swords with him in the Legislature 
 in 1837, in an exchange of sarcasm and ridicule, one side 
 of which is recorded in Lincoln's opening observations 
 in the "Speech in the Illinois Legislature" January 11, 
 1837. Linders protests, like those of Herndon, were 
 representative of the reception Lincoln s congressional 
 activities were receiving in the home district. 
 
224 ABRAHAM LINCOLN 
 
 LETTER TO DAVID LINCOLN 
 MARCH 24, 1848 
 
 Washington, March 24th. 1848. 
 Mr. David Lincoln 
 Dear Sir: 
 
 Your very worthy representative, Gov. McDowell has given 
 me your name and address, and, as my father was born in Rock- 
 ingham, from whence his father, Abraham Lincoln, emigrated to 
 Kentucky about the year 1782, I have concluded to address you 
 to ascertain whether we are not of the same family. I shall be 
 much obliged, if you will write me, telling me, whether you, in 
 any way, know any thing of my grandfather, what relation you 
 are to him, and so on. Also, if you know, where your family came 
 from, when they settled in Virginia, tracing them back as far as 
 your knowledge extends. 
 
 Very respectfully 
 
 A. Lincoln 
 
 LETTER TO DAVID LINCOLN 
 APRIL 2, 1848 
 
 Washington, April 2nd. 1848 
 Dear Sir, 
 
 Last evening I was much gratified by receiving and reading 
 your letter of the 30th. of March. There is no longer any doubt 
 that your uncle Abraham, and my grandfather was the same man. 
 His family did reside in Washington County, Kentucky, just as 
 you say you found them in 1801 or 2. The oldest son, Uncle Mord- 
 
HIS SPEECHES AND WRITINGS 225 
 
 ecai, near twenty years ago, removed from Kentucky to Hancock 
 County, Illinois, where within a year or two afterwards, he died, 
 and where his surviving children now live. His two sons there now 
 are Abraham & Mordecai; and their Post-office is "La Harp" 
 Uncle Josiah, farther back than my recollection, went from 
 Kentucky to Blue River in Indiana. I have not heard from him 
 in a great many years, and whether he is still living I can not say. 
 My recollection of what I have heard is, that he has several 
 daughters & only one son, Thomas. Their Post-office is "Cory don, 
 Harrisson [sic] County, Indiana. 
 
 My father, Thomas, is still living, in Coles County Illinois, 
 being in the 71st. year of his age. His Post-office is Charleston, 
 Coles Co. Ills. I am his only child. I am now in my 40th. year; and I 
 live in Springfield, Sangamon County, Illinois. This is the out- 
 line of my grandfather's family in the West. 
 
 I think my father has told me that grandfather had four 
 brothers, Isaac, Jacob, John and Thomas. Is that correct? and 
 which of them was your father? Are any of them alive? I am 
 quite sure that Isaac resided on Wataga [sic], near a point where 
 Virginia and Tennessee join; and that he has been dead more 
 than twenty, perhaps thirty, years, — Also, that Thomas removed 
 to Kentucky, near Lexington, where he died a good while ago. 
 
 What was your grandfather's Christian name? Was he or 
 not, a Quaker? About what time did he emigrate from Berks 
 County, Pa. to Virginia? — Do you know anything of your family 
 (or rather I may now say, our family) farther back than your 
 grandfather? 
 
 If it be not too much trouble to you, I shall be much pleased 
 to hear from you again. Be assured I will call on you, should 
 any thing ever bring me near you. I shall give your respects to 
 Gov. McDowell, as you desire. 
 
 Very truly yours — 
 
 A. Lincoln — 
 
226 ABRAHAM LINCOLN 
 
 LETTER TO MARY TODD LINCOLN 
 APRIL 16, 1848 
 
 Washington, April 16—1848. 
 Dear Mary: 
 
 In this troublesome world we are never quite satisfied. When 
 you were here, I thought you hindered me some in attending to 
 business; but now, having nothing but business — no variety — it 
 has grown exceedingly tasteless to me. I hate to sit down and 
 direct documents, and I hate to stay in this old room by myself. 
 You know I told you in last Sunday's letter, I was going to make 
 a little speech during the week; but the week has passed away 
 without my getting a chance to do SO; and now my interest in 
 the subject has passed away too. Your second and third letters 
 have been received since I wrote before. Dear Eddy thinks father 
 is "gone tapila." Has any further discovery been made as to the 
 breaking into your grand-mother's house? If I were she, I would 
 not remain there alone. You mention that your Uncle John 
 Parker is likely to be at Lexington. Dont forget to present him 
 my very kindest regards. 
 
 I went yesterday to hunt the little plaid stockings as you 
 wished; but found that McKnight has quit business and Allen had 
 not a single pair of the description you give and only one plaid 
 pair of any sort that I thought would fit "Eddy's dear little feet." 
 I have a notion to make another trial to-morrow morning. If I could 
 get them, I have an excellent chance of sending them. Mr. War- 
 rich Tunstall, of St. Louis is here. He is to leave early this week 
 and to go by Lexington. He says he knows you and will call to see 
 you; and he voluntarily asked if I had not some package to send 
 to you. 
 
 I wish you to enjoy yourself in every possible way, but is 
 there no danger of wounding the feelings of your good father, by 
 being so openly intimate with the Wickliffe family? 
 
 Mrs. Broome has not removed yet; but she thinks of doing so 
 
HIS SPEECHES AND WRITINGS 227 
 
 to-morrow. All the house — or rather, all with whom you were on 
 decided good terms — send their love to you. The others say 
 nothing. 
 
 Very soon after you went away I got what I think a very 
 pretty set of shirt-bosom studs — modest little ones, jet set in 
 gold, only costing 50 cents a piece or 1.50 for the whole. 
 
 Suppose you do not prefix the "Hon" to the address on your 
 letters to me any more. I like the letters very much but I would 
 rather they should not have that upon them. It is not necessary, 
 as I suppose you have thought, to have them to come free. 
 
 And you are entirely free from headache? That is good — 
 good considering it is the first spring you have been free from 
 it since we were acquainted. I am afraid you will get so well, 
 and fat, and young, as to be wanting to marry again. Tell Louisa 
 I want her to watch you a little for me. Get weighed and write 
 me how much you weigh. 
 
 I did not get rid of the impression of that foolish dream 
 about dear Bobby till I got your letter written the same day. 
 What did he and Eddy think of the little letters father sent them? 
 Dont let the blessed fellows forget father. 
 
 A day or two ago Mr. Strong, here in Congress, said to me 
 that Matilda would visit here within two or three weeks. Sup- 
 pose you write her a letter, and enclose it in one of mine, and if 
 she comes I will deliver it to her, and if she does not, I will 
 send it to her. 
 
 Most affectionately 
 
 A. Lincoln 
 
 This letter and the two succeeding ones are Lin- 
 coln's most interesting letters of family concern. That the 
 separation was due to more than Mary's wish to visit 
 her family is obvious from the second letter, in which 
 Lincoln's question, "Will you he a good girl in all things'' 
 speaks so explicitly of marital difficulties that even 
 Herndon indicated his wish to suppress its publication. 
 The reference to Mary's headaches perhaps indicates 
 migraine and may have had some connection with the 
 
228 ABRAHAM LINCOLN: 
 
 mental and emotional disorder which plagued her life 
 and finally destroyed her reason. For discussion of 
 Mary's illness the reader may consult the works referred 
 to in the note following Lincoln's '"Letter to Mary 
 Owens," December IS, 1836. For the best treatment of 
 Mary's life see Carl Sandburg and Paul M. Angle, Mary 
 Lincoln: Wife and Widow. 
 
 LETTER TO MARY TODD LINCOLN 
 JUNE 12, 1848 
 
 Washington, June 12. 1848— 
 My dear wife: 
 
 On my return from Philadelphia, yesterday, where, in my 
 anxiety I had been led to attend the whig convention, I found 
 your last letter. I was so tired and sleepy, having ridden all night, 
 that I could not answer it till to-day; and now I have to do so in 
 the H. R. The leading matter in your letter, is your wish to return 
 to the side of the mountains. Will you be a good girl in all things, 
 if I consent? Then come along, and that as soon as possible. 
 Having got the idea in my head, I shall be impatient till I see 
 you. You will not have money enough to bring you; but I pre- 
 sume your uncle will supply you, and I will refund him here. 
 By the way you do not mention whether you have received the 
 fifty dollars I sent you. I do not much fear but that you got it; 
 because the want of it would have induced you [to?] say some- 
 thing in relation to it. If your uncle is already at Lexington, you 
 might induce him to start on earlier than the first of July; he could 
 stay in Kentucky longer on his return, and so make up for lost 
 time. Since I began this letter, the H. R. has passed a resolution for 
 adjourning on the 17th. July, which probably will pass the Senate. 
 I hope this letter will not be disagreeable to you; which, together 
 with the circumstances under which I write, I hope will excuse me 
 
HIS SPEECHES AND WRITINGS 229 
 
 from not writing a longer one. Come on just as soon as you can. I 
 want to see you, and our dear — dear boys very much. Every body 
 here wants to see our dear Bobby. 
 
 Affectionately 
 
 A Lincoln 
 
 LETTER TO MARY TODD LINCOLN 
 JULY 2, 1848 
 
 Washington, July 2. 1848 
 My dear wife: 
 
 Your letter of last Sunday came last night. On that day ( sun- 
 day) I wrote the principal part of a letter to you, but did not 
 finish it, or send it till tuesday, when I had provided a draft for 
 $100 which I sent in it. It is now probable that on that day (tues- 
 day) you started to Shelby ville; so that when the money reaches 
 Lexington, you will not be there. Before leaving, did you make any 
 provision about letters that might come to Lexington for you? 
 Write me whether you got the draft, if you shall not have already 
 done so, when this reaches you. Give my kindest regards to your 
 uncle John, and all the family. Thinking of them reminds me that 
 I saw your acquaintance, Newton, of Arkansas, at the Philadelphia 
 Convention. We had but a single interview, and that was so brief, 
 and in so great a multitude of strange faces, that I am quite sure 
 I should not recognize him, if I were to meet him again. He was 
 a sort of Trinity, three in one, having the right, in his own person, 
 to cast the three votes of Arkansas. Two or three days ago I sent 
 your uncle John, and a few of our other friends each a copy of the 
 speech I mentioned in my last letter; but I did not send any to 
 you, thinking you would be on the road here, before it would 
 reach you. I send you one now. Last Wednesday, P. H. Hood & 
 Co, dunned me for a little bill of $5.38 cents, and Walter Harper 
 & Co, another for $8.50 cents, for goods which they say you 
 
230 ABRAHAM LINCOLN: 
 
 bought. I hesitated to pay them, because my recollection is that 
 you told me when you went away, there was nothing left unpaid. 
 Mention in your next letter whether they are right. Mrs. Richard- 
 son is still here; and what is more, has a baby — so Richard- 
 son says, and he ought to know. I believe Mary Hewett has left 
 here and gone to Boston. I met her on the street about fifteen or 
 twenty days ago, and she told me she was going soon. I have seen 
 nothing of her since. The music in the Capitol grounds on Satur- 
 days, or, rather, the interest in it, is dwindling down to nothing. 
 Yesterday evening the attendance was rather thin. Our two girls, 
 whom you remember seeing first at Carusis, at the exhibition of 
 the Ethiopian Serenaders, and whose peculiarities were the wear- 
 ing of black fur bonnets, and never being seen in close company 
 with other ladies, were at the music yesterday. One of them was 
 attended by their brother, and the other had a member of Con- 
 gress in tow. He went home with her; and if I were to guess, I 
 would say, he went away a somewhat altered man — most likely 
 in his pockets, and in some other particular. The fellow looked 
 conscious of guilt, although I believe he was unconscious that 
 every body around knew who it was that had caught him. 
 
 I have had no letter from home, since I wrote you before, 
 except short business letters, which have no interest for you. 
 
 By the way, you do not intend to do without a girl, because 
 the one you had has left you? Get another as soon as you can to 
 take charge of the dear codgers. Father expected to see you all 
 sooner; but let it pass; stay as long as you please, and come when 
 you please. Kiss and love the dear rascals. 
 
 Affectionately 
 
 A. Lincoln 
 
 The reading of the name "Carusis" requires more 
 than the manuscript for verification, since to all appear- 
 ances the writing seems to read "Canisis" (as given in 
 Paul M. Angle, editor, New Letters and Papers of 
 Lincoln). Search in contemporary sources, however, re- 
 veals no corroboration for "Canisis," while "Carusis" 
 seems certain. Lincoln's r and n, as well as his i and u 
 
HIS SPEECHES AND WRITINGS 231 
 
 are often indistinguishable. The following advertisement 
 appears in the Daily National Intelligencer, January 5, 
 1848: 
 
 CARUSl's SALOON 
 
 For Nine Nights, commencing Thursday, January 
 6th, 1848 
 
 first appearance of the celebrated Ethiopian 
 serenaders, Messrs. Germon, Stanwood, Harrington, 
 Pell, White, and Howard, since their return from Europe, 
 where they had the distinguished honor of appearing 
 before Her Majesty, Queen Victoria, H.R.H. Prince 
 Albert, the Royal Family, the Nobility and Gentry of 
 England, ire. 
 
 Under the direction of Mr. J. A. Dumbolton. 
 
 Admission 25 cents. Doors open at 7; Concert to 
 commence at 7 ¥2 o'clock. 
 
 Carusis Saloon (i.e., salon) was in fact the old Wash- 
 ington Theater, built by public subscription and opened 
 in 1805, which was partially destroyed by fire fifteen 
 years later and was remodeled and opened in 1822 by 
 Louis Carusi as a dancing academy under the name of 
 Carusis Assembly Rooms. For a third of a century there- 
 after this was the smartest of the Capital's public social 
 resorts. Most of the inaugural balls from John Quincy 
 Adams's in 1825 to James Buchanans in 1857 were given 
 there (Federal Writers' Project, Washington, City and 
 Capital). 
 
232 ABRAHAM LINCOLN 
 
 LETTER TO WILLIAM H. HERNDON 
 JULY 11, 1848 
 
 Washington, July 11—1848 
 Dear William: 
 
 Yours of the 3rd. is this moment received; and I hardly need 
 say, it gives unalloyed pleasure. I now almost regret writing the 
 serious, long faced letter, I wrote yesterday; but let the past as 
 nothing be. Go it while you're young! I write this in the confusion 
 of the H. R, and with several other things to attend to. I will send 
 you about eight different speeches this evening; and as to kissing 
 a pretty girl, I know one very pretty one, but I guess she wont 
 let me kiss her. 
 
 Yours forever 
 
 A Lincoln 
 
 Lincoln s letter of July 10 — in answer to a letter in 
 which Herndon had apparently voiced disappointment 
 with his advancement, a feeling of self-pity, and an 
 inclination to throw everything overboard — had given 
 fatherly advice and expressed the wish "to save you from 
 a fatal error!' On the following day Lincoln received a 
 letter of different tenor and hastened to reply in kind. 
 The "go it while you're young" and the allusion to a 
 pretty girl are open to anyone's guess, but in view of 
 Lincoln's marital status may sound somewhat regretful 
 of opportunities missed in his own youth, too much pre- 
 occupied with getting on in the world. 
 
HIS SPEECHES AND WRITINGS 233 
 
 THE PRESIDENTIAL QUESTION: SPEECH IN THE 
 UNITED STATES HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 
 JULY 27, 1848 
 
 THE MESSAGE OF THE PRESIDENT IN RELATION TO THE BOUNDARIES OF 
 THE TERRITORIES CEDED BY MEXICO TO THE UNITED STATES, 
 BEING UNDER CONSIDERATION 
 
 Mr. Speaker: 
 
 Our Democratic friends seem to be in great distress because 
 they think our candidate for the Presidency don't suit us. Most of 
 them cannot find out that General Taylor has any principles at 
 all; some, however, have discovered that he has one, but that 
 that one is entirely wrong. This one principle is his position on 
 the veto power. The gentleman from Tennessee [mr. stanton,] 
 who has just taken his seat, indeed, has said there is very 
 little if any difference on this question between General Taylor 
 and all the Presidents; and he seems to think it sufficient detrac- 
 tion from General Taylor's position on it, that it has nothing new 
 in it. But all others, whom I have heard speak, assail it furiously. 
 A new member from Kentucky, [mr. clark] of very considera- 
 ble ability, was in particular concern about it. He thought it alto- 
 gether novel and unprecedented for a President, or a Presidential 
 candidate, to think of approving bills whose constitutionality may 
 not be entirely clear to his own mind. He thinks the ark of our 
 safety is gone, unless Presidents shall always veto such bills as, 
 in their judgment, may be of doubtful constitutionality. However 
 clear Congress may be of their authority to pass any particular act, 
 the gentleman from Kentucky thinks the President must veto it if 
 he has doubts about it. Now I have neither time nor inclination to 
 argue with the gentleman on the veto power as an original ques- 
 tion; but I wish to show that General Taylor, and not he, agrees 
 with the earlier statesmen on this question. When the bill charter- 
 ing the first Bank of the United States passed Congress, its con- 
 
234 ABRAHAM LINCOLN: 
 
 stitutionality was questioned; Mr. Madison, then in the House of 
 Representatives, as well as others, had opposed it on that ground. 
 General Washington, as President, was called on to approve or 
 reject it. He sought and obtained, on the constitutional question, 
 the separate written opinion of Jefferson, Hamilton, and Edmund 
 Randolph, they then being respectively Secretary of State, Secre- 
 tary of the Treasury, and Attorney-General. Hamilton's opinion 
 was for the power; while Randolph's and Jefferson's were both 
 against it. Mr. Jefferson, after giving his opinion decidedly against 
 the constitutionality of that bill, closes his letter with the para- 
 graph which I now read: 
 
 "It must be admitted, however, that unless the President's 
 mind, on a view of everything which is urged for and against this 
 bill, is tolerably clear that it is unauthorized by the Constitution; 
 if the pro and the con hang so even as to balance his judgment, 
 a just respect for the wisdom of the legislature would naturally 
 decide the balance in favor of their opinion; it is chiefly for cases 
 where they are clearly misled by error, ambition, or interest, that 
 the Constitution has placed a check in the negative of the Presi- 
 dent. 
 
 "Thomas Jefferson 
 
 "February 15, 1791." 
 
 General Taylor's opinion, as expressed in his Allison letter, is 
 as I now read: 
 
 "The power given by the veto is a high conservative power; 
 but, in my opinion, should never be exercised, except in cases of 
 clear violation of the Constitution, or manifest haste and want of 
 consideration by Congress." 
 
 It is here seen that, in Mr. Jefferson's opinion, if, on the con- 
 stitutionality of any given bill, the President doubts, he is not to 
 veto it, as the gentleman from Kentucky would have him do, but 
 is to defer to Congress and approve it. And if we compare the 
 opinions of Jefferson and Taylor, as expressed in these paragraphs, 
 we shall find them more exactly alike than we can often find any 
 two expressions having any literal difference. None but interested 
 fault-finders, I think, can discover any substantial variation. 
 
HIS SPEECHES AND WRITINGS 235 
 
 But gentlemen on the other side are unanimously agreed that 
 General Taylor has no other principles. They are in utter darkness 
 as to his opinions on any of the questions of policy which occupy 
 the public attention. But is there any doubt as to what he will do 
 on the prominent questions, if elected? Not the least. It is not 
 possible to know what he will or would do in every imaginable 
 case; because many questions have passed away, and others doubt- 
 less will arise which none of us have yet thought of; but on the 
 prominent questions of currency, tariff, internal improvements, 
 and Wilmot proviso, General Taylor's course is at least as well 
 defined as is General Cass's. Why, in their eagerness to get at 
 General Taylor, several Democratic members here have desired to 
 know whether, in case of his election, a bankrupt law is to be 
 established. Can they tell us General Cass's opinion on this ques- 
 tion? [Some member answered, "He is against it."] Aye, how do 
 you know he is? There is nothing about it in the platform, nor else- 
 where, that I have seen. If the gentleman knows anything which 
 I do not, he can show it. But to return: General Taylor, in his 
 Allison letter, says: 
 
 "Upon the subject of the tariff, the currency, the improvement 
 of our great highways, rivers, lakes, and harbors, the will of the 
 people, as expressed through their Representatives in Congress, 
 ought to be respected and carried out by the Executive." 
 
 Now, this is the whole matter — in substance, it is this: The 
 people say to General Taylor, "If you are elected, shall we have a 
 national bank?" He answers, "Your will, gentlemen, not mine." 
 "What about the tariff?" "Say yourselves." "Shall our rivers and 
 harbors be improved?" "Just as you please." "If you desire a bank, 
 an alteration of the tariff, internal improvements, any or all, I 
 will not hinder you; if you do not desire them, I will not attempt 
 to force them on you." "Send up your members of Congress from 
 the various districts, with opinions according to your own, and if 
 they are for these measures, or any of them, I shall have nothing 
 to oppose; if they are not for them, I shall not, by any appliances 
 whatever, attempt to dragoon them into their adoption." Now, can 
 there be any difficulty in understanding this? To you, Democrats, 
 it may not seem like principle; but surely you cannot fail to per- 
 
236 ABRAHAM LINCOLN: 
 
 ceive the position plainly enough. The distinction between it and 
 the position of your candidate is broad and obvious, and I admit 
 you have a clear right to show it is wrong, if you can; but you 
 have no right to pretend you cannot see it at all. We see it, and 
 to us it appears like principle, and the best sort of principle at 
 that — the principle of allowing the people to do as they please 
 with their own business. My friend from Indiana [mr. c. b. 
 smith] has aptly asked, "Are you willing to trust the people?" 
 Some of you answered, substantially, "We are willing to trust 
 the people; but the President is as much the representative of the 
 people as Congress/' In a certain sense, and to a certain extent, 
 he is the representative of the people. He is elected by them, as 
 well as Congress is. But can he, in the nature of things, know the 
 wants of the people as well as three hundred other men coming 
 from all the various localities of the nation? If so, where is the 
 propriety of having a Congress? That the Constitution gives the 
 President a negative on legislation, all know; but that this negative 
 should be so combined with platforms and other appliances as to 
 enable him, and, in fact, almost compel him, to take the whole 
 of legislation into his own hands, is what we object to — is what 
 General Taylor objects to— and is what constitutes the broad dis- 
 tinction between you and us. To thus transfer legislation is clearly 
 to take it from those who understand with minuteness the interest 
 of the people, and give it to one who does not and cannot so well 
 understand it. I understand your idea, that if a Presidential can- 
 didate avow his opinion upon a given question, or rather upon all 
 questions, and the people, with full knowledge of this, elect him, 
 they thereby distinctly approve all those opinions. This, though 
 plausible, is a most pernicious deception. By means of it measures 
 are adopted or rejected, contrary to the wishes of the whole of 
 one party, and often nearly half of the other. The process is this: 
 Three, four, or half a dozen questions are prominent at a given 
 time; the party selects its candidate, and he takes his position on 
 each of these questions. On all but one his positions have already 
 been endorsed at former elections, and his party fully committed 
 to them; but that one is new, and a large portion of them are 
 against it. But what are they to do? The whole are strung together, 
 and they must take all or reject all. They cannot take what they 
 
HIS SPEECHES AND WRITINGS 237 
 
 like and leave the rest. What they are already committed to, being 
 the majority, they shut their eyes and gulp the whole. Next elec- 
 tion, still another is introduced in the same way. If we run our 
 eyes along the line of the past, we shall see that almost, if not 
 quite, all the articles of the present Democratic creed have been 
 at first forced upon the party in this very way. And just now, and 
 just so, opposition to internal improvements is to be established if 
 General Cass shall be elected. Almost half the Democrats here are 
 for improvements, but they will vote for Cass, and if he succeeds, 
 their votes will have aided in closing the doors against improve- 
 ments. Now, this is a process which we think is wrong. We prefer 
 a candidate who, like General Taylor, will allow the people to have 
 their own way regardless of his private opinion; and I should think 
 the internal-improvement Democrats at least, ought to prefer such 
 a candidate. He would force nothing on them which they don't 
 want, and he would allow them to have improvements, which their 
 own candidate, if elected, will not. 
 
 Mr. Speaker, I have said General Taylor's position is as well 
 defined as is that of General Cass. In saying this, I admit I do not 
 certainly know what he would do on the Wilmot proviso. I am a 
 northern man, or, rather, a western free State man, with a con- 
 stituency I believe to be, and with personal feelings I know to be, 
 against the extension of slavery. As such, and with what informa- 
 tion I have, I hope, and believe. General Taylor, if elected, would 
 not veto the proviso; but I do not know it. Yet, if I knew he would, 
 I still would vote for him. I should do so, because, in my judg- 
 ment, his election alone can defeat General Cass; and because, 
 should slavery thereby go into the territory we now have, just 
 so much will certainly happen by the election of Cass; and, in 
 addition, a course of policy leading to new wars, new acquisi- 
 tions of territory, and still further extensions of slavery. One of the 
 two is to be President: which is preferable? 
 
 But there is as much doubt of Cass on improvements as there 
 is of Taylor on the proviso. I have no doubt myself of General 
 Cass on this question, but I know the Democrats differ among 
 themselves as to his position. My internal-improvement colleague 
 [mr. wentworth] stated on this floor the other day, that he 
 was satisfied Cass was for improvements, because he had voted all 
 
238 ABRAHAM LINCOLN: 
 
 the bills that he [Mr. W.] had. So far so good. But Mr. Polk vetoed 
 some of these very bills; the Baltimore Convention passed a set 
 of resolutions, among other things, approving these vetoes, and 
 Cass declares, in his letter accepting the nomination, that he has 
 carefully read these resolutions, and that he adheres to them as 
 firmly as he approves them cordially. In other words, General Cass 
 voted for the bills, and thinks the President did right to veto 
 them; and his friends here are amiable enough to consider him as 
 being on one side or the other, just as one or the other may corres- 
 pond with their own respective inclinations. My colleague admits 
 that the platform declares against the constitutionality of a general 
 system of improvements, and that General Cass endorses the plat- 
 form; but he still thinks General Cass is in favor of some sort of 
 improvements. Well, what are they? As he is against general 
 objects, those he is for, must be particular and local. Now, this is 
 taking the subject precisely by the wrong end. Particularity — 
 expending the money of the whole people for an object which will 
 benefit only a portion of them, is the greatest real objection to 
 improvements, and has been so held by General Jackson, Mr. 
 Polk, and all others, I believe, till now. But now, behold, the 
 objects most general, nearest free from this objection, are to be 
 rejected, while those most liable to it are to be embraced. To 
 return: I cannot help believing that General Cass, when he wrote 
 his letter of acceptance, well understood he was to be claimed by 
 the advocates of both sides of this question, and that he then 
 closed the door against all further expressions of opinion, pur- 
 posely to retain the benefits of that double position. His subse- 
 quent equivocation at Cleveland, to my mind, proves such to have 
 been the case. 
 
 One word more, and I shall have done with this branch of the 
 subject. You Democrats, and your candidate, in the main, are in 
 favor of laying down, in advance, a platform — a set of party posi- 
 tions, as a unit; and then of enforcing the people, by every sort 
 of appliance, to ratify them, however unpalatable some of them 
 may be. We, and our candidate, are in favor of making Presiden- 
 tial elections and the legislation of the country distinct matters; 
 so that the people can elect whom they please, and afterwards, 
 legislate just as they please, without any hindrance, save only so 
 
HIS SPEECHES AND WRITINGS 239 
 
 much as may guard against infractions of the Constitution, undue 
 haste, and want of consideration. The difference between us is 
 clear as noon-day. That we are right we cannot doubt. We hold the 
 tine Republican position. In leaving the people's business in their 
 hands, we cannot be wrong. We are willing, and even anxious, to 
 go to the people on this issue. 
 
 But I suppose I cannot reasonably hope to convince you 
 that we have any principles. The most I can expect is, to assure 
 you that we think we have, and are quite contented with them. 
 The other day, one of the gentlemen from Georgia [mr. iver- 
 son], an eloquent man, and a man of learning, so far as I can 
 judge, not being learned myself, came down upon us astonish- 
 ingly. He spoke in what the Baltimore American calls the "scath- 
 ing and withering style." At the end of his second severe flash I 
 was struck blind, and found myself feeling with my fingers for an 
 assurance of my continued physical existence. A little of the bone 
 was left, and I gradually revived. He eulogized Mr. Clay in high 
 and beautiful terms, and then declared that we had deserted all 
 our principles, and had turned Henry Clay out, like an old horse, 
 to root. This is terribly severe. It cannot be answered by argu- 
 ment; at least, I cannot so answer it. I merely wish to ask the 
 gentleman if the Whigs are the only party he can think of, who 
 sometimes turn old horses out to root. Is not a certain Martin 
 Van Buren an old horse, which your own party have turned out 
 to root? and is he not rooting a little to your discomfort about 
 now? But in not nominating Mr. Clay, we deserted our principles, 
 you say. Ah! in what? Tell us, ye men of principles, what prin- 
 ciple we violated? We say you did violate principle in discarding 
 Van Buren, and we can tell you how. You violated the primary, 
 the cardinal, the one great living principle of all Democratic rep- 
 resentative government — the principle that the representative is 
 bound to carry out the known will of his constituents. A large 
 majority of the Baltimore Convention of 1844 were, by their 
 constituents, instructed to procure Van Buren's nomination if 
 they could. In violation, in utter, glaring contempt of this, you 
 rejected him — rejected him, as the gentleman from New York, 
 [mr. birdsall], the other day expressly admitted, for avail- 
 ability — that same "general availability" which you charge upon 
 
240 ABRAHAM LINCOLN: 
 
 us, and daily chew over here, as something exceedingly odious 
 and unprincipled. But the gentleman from Georgia [mr. iver- 
 son,] gave us a second speech yesterday, all well considered and 
 put down in writing, in which Van Buren was scathed and with- 
 ered a "few" for his present position and movements. I cannot 
 remember the gentleman's precise language, but I do remember 
 he put Van Buren down, down, till he got him where he was 
 finally to "stink" and "rot." 
 
 Mr. Speaker, it is no business or inclination of mine to defend 
 Martin Van Buren. In the war of extermination now waging be- 
 tween him and his old admirers, I say, devil take the hindmost — 
 and the foremost. But there is no mistaking the origin of the 
 breach; and if the curse of "stinking" and "rotting" is to fall on 
 the first and greatest violators of principle in the matter, I disin- 
 terestedly suggest, that the gentleman from Georgia and his pres- 
 ent co-workers are bound to take it upon themselves. 
 
 But the gentleman from Georgia further says, we have de- 
 serted all our principles, and taken shelter under General Taylor s 
 military coat tail; and he seems to think this is exceedingly de- 
 grading. Well, as his faith is, so be it unto him. But can he re- 
 member no other military coat tail under which a certain other 
 party have been sheltering for near a quarter of a century? Has 
 he no acquaintance with the ample military coat tail of General 
 Jackson? Does he not know that his own party have run the last 
 five Presidential races under that coat tail, and that they are now 
 running the sixth under that same cover? Yes, sir, that coat tail 
 was used, not only for General Jackson himself, but has been clung 
 to with the grip of death by every Democratic candidate since. 
 You have never ventured, and dare not now venture, from under 
 it. Your campaign papers have constantly been "Old Hickories," 
 with rude likenesses of the old General upon them; hickory poles 
 and hickory brooms your never-ending emblems; Mr. Polk, him- 
 self, was "Young Hickory," "Little Hickory," or something so; 
 and even now your campaign paper here is proclaiming that Cass 
 and Butler are of the true "Hickory stripe." No, sir; you dare not 
 give it up. Like a horde of hungry ticks, you have stuck to the 
 tail of the Hermitage lion to the end of his life, and you are still 
 sticking to it, and drawing a loathsome sustenance from it after 
 
HIS SPEECHES AND WRITINGS 241 
 
 he is dead. A fellow once advertised that he had made a discovery, 
 by which he could make a new man out of an old one, and have 
 enough of the stuff left to make a little yellow dog. Just such a dis- 
 covery has General Jackson's popularity been to you. You not 
 only twice made President of him out of it, but you have had 
 enough of the stuff left to make Presidents of several compara- 
 tively small men since; and it is your chief reliance now to make 
 still another. 
 
 Mr. Speaker, old horses and military coat tails, or tails of any 
 sort, are not figures of speech such as I would be the first to in- 
 troduce into discussions here; but as the gentleman from Georgia 
 has thought fit to introduce them, he and you are welcome to all 
 you have made, or can make, by them. If you have any more old 
 horses, trot them out; any more tails, just cock them, and come 
 at us. 
 
 I repeat, I would not introduce this mode of discussion here; 
 but I wish gentlemen on the other side to understand, that the use 
 of degrading figures is a game at which they may not find them- 
 selves able to take all the winnings. [We give it up.] Aye, you give 
 it up, and well you may, but from a very different reason from 
 that which you would have us understand. The point — the power 
 to hurt — of all figures, consists in the truthfulness of their applica- 
 tion; and understanding this, you may well give it up. They are 
 weapons which hit you, but miss us. 
 
 But, in my hurry, I was very near closing on the 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 on to the great Michi- 
 gander. Yes, sir, all his biographers (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 outvaded it without 
 pursuit. As he did both under orders, I suppose there was, to him, 
 neither credit nor discredit in them; but they are made to con- 
 stitute 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, Harri- 
 
242 ABRAHAM LINCOLN: 
 
 son was picking whortleberries 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 whortleberries. 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 his- 
 torical 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 afterwards. 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 des- 
 peration; I bent the musket by accident. If General Cass went in 
 advance of me in picking whortleberries, I guess I surpassed him 
 in charges upon the wild onions. If he saw any live fighting In- 
 dians, it was more than I did, but I had a good many bloody 
 struggles with the mosquitoes; and although I never fainted from 
 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 Feder- 
 alism about me, and, thereupon, 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. 
 
 While I have General Cass in hand, I wish to say a word 
 about his political principles. As a specimen, I take the record of 
 his progress on the Wilmot proviso. In the Washington Union, of 
 March 2, 1847, there is a report of a speech of General Cass, 
 made the day before in the Senate, on the Wilmot proviso, during 
 the delivery of which Mr. Miller, of New Jersey, is reported to 
 have interrupted him as follows, to wit: 
 
 "mr. miller expressed his great surprise at the change in 
 the sentiments of the Senator from Michigan, who had been re- 
 
HIS SPEECHES AND WRITINGS 243 
 
 garded as the great champion of freedom in the northwest, of 
 which he was a distinguished ornament. Last year the Senator 
 from Michigan was understood to be decidedly in favor of the 
 Wilmot proviso; and, as no reason had been stated for the 
 change, he (Mr. M.) could not refrain from the expression of his 
 extreme surprise. " 
 
 To this General Cass is reported to have replied as follows, 
 to wit: 
 
 "Mr. Cass said, that the course of the Senator from New 
 Jersey was most extraordinary. Last year he (Mr. C.) should have 
 voted for the proposition had it come up. But circumstances had 
 altogether changed. The honorable Senator then read several 
 passages from the remarks as given above, which he had com- 
 mitted to writing, in order to refute such a charge as that of the 
 Senator from New Jersey." 
 
 In the "remarks above committed to writing," is one num- 
 bered 4, as follows, to wit: 
 
 "4th. Legislation would now be wholly inoperative, because 
 no territory hereafter to be acquired can be governed without an 
 act of Congress providing for its government. And such an act, on 
 its passage, would open the whole subject, and leave the Con- 
 gress, called on to pass it, free to exercise its own discretion, en- 
 tirely uncontrolled by any declaration found in the statute book." 
 
 In Niles's Register, vol. 73, page 293, there is a letter of Gen- 
 eral Cass to A. O. P. Nicholson, of Nashville, Tennessee, dated 
 December 24, 1847, from which the following are correct ex- 
 tracts: 
 
 "The Wilmot proviso has been before the country some time. 
 It has been repeatedly discussed in Congress, and by the public 
 press. I am strongly impressed with the opinion that a great 
 change has been going on in the public mind upon this subject — 
 in my own as well as others; and that doubts are resolving them- 
 selves into convictions, that the principle it involves should be 
 kept out of the National Legislature, and left to the people of the 
 Confederacy in their respective local Governments . . ." 
 
244 ABRAHAM LINCOLN: 
 
 "Briefly, then, I am opposed to the exercise of any jurisdic- 
 tion by Congress over this matter; and I am in favor of leaving 
 the people of any territory which may be hereafter acquired the 
 right to regulate it themselves, under the general principles of 
 the Constitution. Because, 
 
 "1. 1 do not see in the Constitution any grant of the requisite 
 power to Congress; and I am not disposed to extend a doubtful 
 precedent beyond its necessity — the establishment of territorial 
 governments when needed — leaving to the inhabitants all the 
 rights compatible with the relations they bear to the Confedera- 
 tion." 
 
 These extracts show that, in 1846, General Cass was for the 
 proviso at once; that in March, 1847, he was still for it, but not just 
 then; and that, in December, 1847, he was against it altogether. 
 This is a true index to the whole man. When the question was 
 raised in 1846, he was in a blustering hurry to take ground for it. 
 He sought to be in advance, and to avoid the uninteresting posi- 
 tion of a mere follower; but soon he began to see glimpses of the 
 great Democratic ox-gad waving in his face, and to hear, indis- 
 tinctly, a voice saying, "Back," "back, sir," "Back a little." He 
 shakes his head; and bats his eyes, and blunders back to his posi- 
 tion of March, 1847; but still the gad waves, and the voice grows 
 more distinct, and sharper still — "Back, sir!" "Back, I say!" 
 "Further back!" and back he goes to the position of December, 
 1847; at which the gad is still, and the voice soothingly says — 
 "So!" "Stand at that." 
 
 Have no fears, gentlemen, of your candidate; he exactly suits 
 you, and we congratulate you upon it. However much you may 
 be distressed about our candidate, you have all cause to be con- 
 tented and happy with your own. If elected, he may not maintain 
 all, or even any, of his positions previously taken; but he will be 
 sure to do whatever the party exigency, for the time being, may 
 require; and that is precisely what you want. He and Van Buren 
 are the same "manner of men;" and, like Van Buren, he will never 
 desert you till you first desert him. 
 
 Mr. Speaker, I adopt the suggestion of a friend, that General 
 Cass is a general of splendidly successful charges — charges, to be 
 
HIS SPEECHES AND WRITINGS 245 
 
 sure, not upon the public enemy, but upon the public treasury. 
 
 He was Governor of Michigan Territory, and, ex~officio, su- 
 perintendent 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 ex- 
 penses, the aggregate sum of $96,028 — being an average sum of 
 $14.79 per day for every day of the time. This large sum was 
 reached by assuming that he was doing service and incurring 
 expenses at several different places, and in several different ca- 
 pacities in the same place, all at the same time. By a correct anal- 
 ysis 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: 
 
 1. As Governor's salary, at the rate, per year, of $2,000. 
 
 2. As estimated for office rent, clerk hire, fuel, &c, in super- 
 intendence 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 Oc- 
 tober, 1813, to the 29th of May, 1822, he was paid in four dif- 
 ferent 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 be- 
 ginning of 1822 to the 31st of July, 1831, he was 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 Chi- 
 cago, Illinois, at the rate, per year, of $1,500. It 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. 
 
246 ABRAHAM LINCOLN: 
 
 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 differ- 
 ent capacities — that is to say: 
 
 The three first, as above; the item of rations, as above; and, 
 in addition 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 travelling 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 time which lies be- 
 tween the 1st 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. 
 
 These accounts have already been discussed some here; but 
 when we are amongst them, as when we are in the Patent Office, 
 we must peep about a good while before we can see all the 
 curiosities. I shall not be tedious with them. As to the large item 
 of $1,500 per year, amounting in the aggregate to $26,715, for 
 office rent, clerk hire, fuel, &c, I barely wish to remark that, so 
 far as I can discover in the public documents, there is no evi- 
 dence, by word or inference, either from any disinterested wit- 
 ness, or of General Cass himself, that he ever rented or kept a 
 separate office, ever hired or kept a clerk, or ever used any extra 
 amount of fuel, &c., in consequence of his Indian services. In- 
 deed, General Cass's entire silence in regard to these items in his 
 two long letters, urging his claims upon the Government, is, to my 
 mind, almost conclusive that no such items had any real existence. 
 
 But 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 hundred 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 ate ten 
 rations a day in Michigan, ten rations a day here in Washington, 
 and near five dollars' worth a day besides, partly on the road 
 
HIS SPEECHES AND WRITINGS 247 
 
 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 shall 
 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-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. 
 
 But as General Taylor is, par excellence, the hero of the 
 Mexican War; and, as you Democrats say we Whigs have always 
 opposed the war, you think it must be very awkward and embar- 
 rassing for us to go for General Taylor. The declaration that we 
 have always opposed the war is true or false, accordingly as one 
 may understand the term "opposing the war." If to say "the war 
 was unnecessarily and unconstitutionally commenced by the Presi- 
 dent," be opposing the war, then the Whigs have very generally 
 opposed it. Whenever they have spoken at all, they have said 
 this; and they have said it on what has appeared good reason to 
 them. The marching an army into the midst of a peaceful Mexi- 
 can settlement, frightening the inhabitants away, leaving their 
 growing crops, and other property to destruction, to you may 
 appear a perfectly amiable, peaceful, unprovoking procedure; but 
 it does not appear so to us. So to call such an act, to us appears 
 no other than a naked, impudent absurdity, and we speak of it 
 accordingly. But if, when the war had begun, and had become the 
 cause of the country, the giving of our money and our blood, in 
 common with yours, was support of the war, then it is not true that 
 we have always opposed the war. With few individual exceptions, 
 you have constantly had our votes here for all the necessary 
 supplies. And, more than this, you have had the services, the blood, 
 and the lives of our political brethren in every trial, and on every 
 field. The beardless boy, and the mature man — the humble and 
 the distinguished, you have had them. Through suffering and 
 
248 ABRAHAM LINCOLN*. 
 
 death, by disease, and in battle, they have endured, and fought, 
 and fell with you. Clay and Webster each gave a son, never to 
 be returned. From the State of my own residence, besides other 
 worthy but less known Whig names, we sent Marshall, Morrison, 
 Baker, and Hardin; they all fought, and one fell, and in the fall of 
 that one, we lost our best Whig man. Nor were the Whigs few in 
 number, or laggard in the day of danger. In that fearful, bloody, 
 breathless struggle at Buena Vista, where each man's hard task 
 was to beat back five foes or die himself, of the five high officers 
 who perished, four were Whigs. 
 
 In speaking of this, I mean no odious comparison between the 
 lion-hearted Whigs and Democrats who fought there. On other 
 occasions, and among the lower officers and privates on that occa- 
 sion, I doubt not the proportion was different. I wish to do justice 
 to all. I think of all those brave men as Americans, in whose proud 
 fame, as an American, I too have a share. Many of them, Whigs 
 and Democrats, are my constituents and personal friends; and 
 I thank them — more than thank them — one and all, for the high 
 imperishable honor they have conferred on our common State. 
 
 But the distinction between the cause of the President in be- 
 ginning the war, and the cause of the country after it was begun, 
 is a distinction which you cannot perceive. To you, the President, 
 and the country, seem to be all one. You are interested to see no 
 distinction between them; and I venture to suggest that 'possibly 
 your interest blinds you a little. We see the distinction, as we 
 think, clearly enough; and our friends who have fought in the 
 war have no difficulty in seeing it also. What those who have 
 fallen would say, were they alive and here, of course we can never 
 know; but with those who have returned there is no difficulty. 
 Colonel Haskell and Major Gaines, members here, both fought 
 in the war; and one of them underwent extraordinary perils and 
 hardships; still they, like all other Whigs here, vote on die record 
 that the war was unnecessarily and unconstitutionally commenced 
 by the President. And even General Taylor himself, the noblest 
 Roman of them all, has declared that, as a citizen, and particularly 
 as a soldier, it is sufficient for him to know that his country is at 
 war with a foreign nation, to do all in his power to bring it to a 
 speedy and honorable termination, by the most vigorous and 
 
HIS SPEECHES AND WRITINGS 249 
 
 energetic operations, without inquiring about its justice, or any- 
 thing else connected with it. 
 
 Mr. Speaker, let our Democratic friends be comforted with 
 the assurance, that we are content with our position, content with 
 our company, and content with our candidate; and that, although 
 they, in their generous sympathy, think we ought to be miserable, 
 we really are not, and that they may dismiss the great anxiety 
 they have on our account. 
 
 Mr. Speaker, I see I have but three minutes left, and this 
 forces me to throw out one whole branch of my subject. A single 
 word on still another. The Democrats are kind enough to fre- 
 quently remind us that we have some dissensions in our ranks. 
 Our good friend from Baltimore, immediately before me [mr. 
 mc lane,] expressed some doubt the other day as to which 
 branch of our party General Taylor would ultimately fall into the 
 hands of. That was a new idea to me. I knew we had dissenters, 
 but I did not know they were trying to get our candidate away 
 from us. I would like to say a word to our dissenters, but I have 
 not the time. Some such we certainly have; have you none, gen- 
 tlemen Democrats? Is it all union and harmony in your ranks? No 
 bickerings? No divisions? If there be doubt as to which of our 
 divisions will get our candidate, is there no doubt as to which 
 of your candidates will get your party? I have heard some things 
 from New York; and if they are true, we 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 ex- 
 claimed — "Well, by golly, that is the most equally divided gang 
 of hogs I ever did hear of." If there is any gang of hogs more 
 equally divided than the Democrats of New York are about this 
 time, I have not heard of it. 
 
 The campaign pamphlet printing of this speech 
 carrying the title, "Speech of Mr. A. Lincoln of Illinois, 
 on the Presidential Question," contains no major altera- 
 tions except subtitles distributed throughout, marking it 
 
250 ABRAHAM LINCOLN: 
 
 into sections. Lincoln's numerous allusions to incidents in 
 the military record of General Cass were aimed at the 
 campaign efforts of the Democrats to make General Cass 
 into a military hero comparable to the Whig candidate, 
 General Taylor. The sarcastic reference to a broken 
 sword is an allusion to the story that Cass broke his 
 sword in anger and disgust upon learning of the sur- 
 render of Detroit by General Hull in the War of 1812. 
 
 LETTERS TO THOMAS LINCOLN AND 
 JOHN D. JOHNSTON. DECEMBER 24, 1848 
 
 Washington, Deer. 24th. 1848. 
 My dear father: 
 
 Your letter of the 7th. was received night before last. I very 
 cheerfully send you the twenty dollars, which sum you say is 
 necessary to save your land from sale. It is singular that you 
 should have forgotten a judgment against you; and it is more 
 singular that the plaintiff should have let you forget it so long, 
 particularly as I suppose you have always had property enough 
 to satisfy a judgment of that amount. Before you pay it, it would 
 be well to be sure you have not paid it, or at least, that you can 
 not prove you have paid it. Give my love to Mother, and all the 
 connections. 
 
 Affectionately your Son 
 
 A. Lincoln 
 
 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 find you in the same difficulty again. 
 
HIS SPEECHES AND WRITINGS 251 
 
 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 use- 
 lessly wasting time, is the whole difficulty; and it is vastly impor- 
 tant to you, and still more so to your children that you should 
 break this 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 [ready?] money; and what I 
 propose is, that you shall go to work, "tooth and nails" for some- 
 body who will give you money for it. Let father and your boys 
 take charge of things at home — prepare for a crop, and make the 
 crop; and you go to work for the best money wages, or in dis- 
 charge 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 next May, get for 
 your own labor, either in money, or on your own indebtedness, 
 I will then give you one other dollar. By this, if you hire yourself 
 at ten dollafrs] 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 
 Calif [ornia,] 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, next year you would be just as deep 
 in as ever. You say you would almost give your place in Heaven 
 for $70 or $80. Then you value your place in Heaven very 
 cheapl[y] for I am sure you can with the offer I make you get the 
 seventy or eighty dollars for four or five months work. You say if 
 I furnish you the money you will deed me the land, and, if you 
 dont pay the money back, you will deliver possession. Nonsense! 
 If you cant now live with the land, how will you then live without 
 it? You have always been [kind] to me, and I do not now mean to 
 be unkind to you. On the contrary, if you will but follow my 
 
252 ABRAHAM LINCOLN: 
 
 advice, you will find it worth more than eight times eighty dollars 
 to you. 
 
 Affectionately 
 
 Your brother 
 
 A. Lincoln 
 
 The manuscript of these letters is one and the 
 same. The letter to Johnston, which Nicolay and Hay 
 erroneously give under the date of January (2?), 1851, 
 begins on the bottom of the same page following the 
 letter to Lincoln's father. The circumstance arose from 
 the fact that Johnston, Lincoln's stepbrother, had penned 
 for Thomas Lincoln the letter requesting twenty dollars, 
 and had added a request of his own on the same sheet. 
 The financial difficulties of Thomas Lincoln, and in par- 
 ticular of Lincoln's stepbrother Johnston, caused Lincoln 
 some embarrassment. He was willing to help, but not to 
 encourage importunity. Lincoln's letters to his father 
 show no disrespect, but neither do they even suggest any 
 filial attachment comparable to that shown for his step- 
 mother, Sarah Bush Johnston Lincoln. 
 
 LETTER TO WILLIAM H. HERNDON 
 JANUARY 5, 1849 
 
 Washington, Jan. 5. 1849 
 Dear William 
 
 Your two letters were received last night. I have a great 
 many letters to write, and so can not write very long ones. There 
 must be some mistake about Walter Davis saying I promised him 
 the Post-Office; I did not so promise him. I did tell him, that if 
 the distribution of the offices should fall into my hands, he should 
 
HIS SPEECHES AND WRITINGS 253 
 
 have something; and if I shall be convinced he has said any more 
 than this, I shall be disappointed. I said this much to him, because, 
 as I understand, he is of good character, is one of the young men, 
 is of the mechanics, an always faithful, and never troublesome 
 whig, and is poor, with the support of a widow mother thrown 
 almost exclusively on him by the death of his brother. If these are 
 wrong reasons, then I have been wrong; but I have certainly not 
 been selfish in it; because in my greatest need of friends he was 
 against me and for Baker. 
 
 Yours as ever 
 
 A. Lincoln 
 P. S. Let the above be confidential 
 To W H Herndon 
 
 Lincoln's reference to the fact that Davis "is of the 
 mechanics" may require comment. Many of the young 
 radical Whigs were mechanics by trade who were or- 
 ganizing for political reasons in "mechanics associations" 
 hardly comparable to our modern labor unions, but 
 which nevertheless were efforts to protect labor and 
 exert political pressure as a group. The Know-Nothings 
 were in large part made up from this portion of the 
 electorate. One of the chief grievances of the "me- 
 chanics" was the immigrant labor rapidly flowing into 
 the country. Hence the anti-alien and anti-Catholic bias 
 of the Know-Nothing party. 
 
254 ABRAHAM LINCOLN 
 
 LETTER TO C. U. SCHLATER 
 JANUARY 5, 1849 
 
 Washington, Jan: 5. 1849 
 Mr. C. U. Schlater: 
 Dear Sir: 
 
 Your note, requesting my "signature with a sentiment" was 
 received, and should have been answered long since, but that it 
 was mislaid. I am not a very sentimental man; and the best sen- 
 timent I can think of is, that if you collect the signatures of all 
 persons who are no less distinguished than I, you will have a 
 very undistinguishing mass of names. 
 
 Very respectfully 
 
 A. Lincoln 
 
 LETTER TO C. R. WELLES 
 FEBRUARY 20, 1849 
 
 Washington, Feb. 20. 1849 
 C. R. Welles, Esq. 
 Dear Sir: 
 
 This is tuesday evening, and your letter enclosing the one of 
 Young & Brothers to you, saying the money you sent by me to 
 them had not been received, came to hand last Saturday night. 
 The facts, which are perfectly fresh in my recollection, are these: 
 You gave me the money in a letter (open I believe) directed to 
 Young & Brothers. To make it more secure than it would be in 
 my hat, where I carry most all my packages, I put it in my 
 trunk. I had a great many jobs to do in St. Louis; and by the very 
 
HIS SPEECHES AND WRITINGS 255 
 
 extra care I had taken of yours, overlooked it. On the Steam Boat 
 near the mouth of the Ohio, I opened the trunk, and discovered 
 the letter. I then began to cast about for some safe hand to send 
 it back by. Mr. Yeatman, Judge Pope's son-in-law, and step-son 
 of Mr. Bell of Tennessee, was on board, and was to return imme- 
 diately to St. Louis from the Mouth of Cumberland. At my re- 
 quest, he took the letter and promised to deliver it — and I heard 
 no more about it till I received your letter on Saturday. It so 
 happens that Mr. Yeatman is now in this city; I called on him 
 last night about it; he said he remembered my giving him the 
 letter, and he could remember nothing more of it. He told me he 
 would try to refresh his memory, and see me again concerning it 
 to-day — which however he has not done. I will try to see him 
 tomorrow and write you again. He is a young man, as I under- 
 stand, of unquestioned, and unquestionable character; and this 
 makes me fear some pick-pocket on the boat may have seen me 
 give him the letter, and slipped it from him. In this way, never 
 seeing the letter again, he would, naturally enough, never think 
 of it again. 
 
 Yours truly 
 
 A. Lincoln 
 
 Charles Roger Welles was a resident of Springfield, 
 lawyer and land agent, who represented John Grigg of 
 Philadelphia, a capitalist and investor in western lands. 
 The incident of the lost letter recalls the fact that the 
 older custom of having travelers carry important letters 
 — particularly those containing money — survived well 
 into the nineteenth century in spite of the development 
 of an efficient Post Office Department. 
 
256 ABRAHAM LINCOLN 
 
 LETTER TO JOSHUA F. SPEED 
 FEBRUARY 20, 1849 
 
 Washington, Feb: 20. 1849. 
 Dear Speed: 
 
 Your letter of the 13th. was received yesterday. I showed it 
 to Baker. I did this because he knew I had written you, and was 
 expecting an answer; and he still enquired what I had received; 
 so that I could not well keep it a secret. Besides this, I knew the 
 contents of the letter would not affect him as you seemed to think 
 it would. He knows he did not make a favorable impression while 
 in Congress, and he and I had talked it over frequently. He tells 
 me to write you that he has too much self-esteem to be put out of 
 humor with himself by the opinion of any man who does not 
 know him better than Mr. Crittenden does; and that he thinks 
 you ought to have known it. The letter will not affect him the 
 least in regard to either Mr. Crittenden or you. He understands 
 you to have acted the part of a discreet friend; and he intends to 
 make Mr. Crittenden think better of him hereafter. I am flattered 
 to learn that Mr. Crittenden has any recollection of me which is 
 not unfavorable; and for the manifestation of your kindness 
 towards me, I sincerely thank you. Still there is nothing about me 
 which would authorize me to think of a first class office; and a 
 second class one would not compensate me for being snarled at 
 by others who want it for themselves. I believe that, so far as the 
 whigs in Congress, are concerned, I could have the Genl. Land 
 OfSce almost by common consent; but then Sweet, and Don: 
 Morrison, and Browning, and Cyrus Edwards all want it. And 
 what is worse, while I think I could easily take it myself, I fear 
 I shall have trouble to get it for any other man in Illinois. The 
 reason is, that McGaughey, an Indiana ex-member of Congress 
 is here after it; and being personally known, he will be hard to 
 beat by any one who is not. 
 
 Baker showed me your letter, in which you make a passing 
 
HIS SPEECHES AND WRITINGS 257 
 
 allusion to the Louisville Post-Office. I have told Garnett Duncan 
 I am for you. I like to open a letter of yours, and I therefore hope 
 you will write me again on the receipt of this. 
 Give my love, to Mrs. Speed. 
 
 Yours as ever 
 
 A. Lincoln 
 
 P. S. I have not read the Frankfort papers this winter; and con- 
 sequently do not know whether you have made a speech. If you 
 have, and it has been printed send me a copy. 
 
 A. L. 
 
 Lincoln's reference to the Land Office appointment 
 recalls that it was one of the notable disappointments of 
 his political career up to this time. At first he wanted his 
 friend Cyrus Edwards to get the appointment, hut when 
 he decided that this was an impossibility he went after 
 the job strenuously. In the end he lost out to Justin 
 Butterfield who was appointed June 21, 1849, to Lin- 
 coins complete chagrin. 
 
 McGaughey was Edward Wilson McGaughey, 
 Representative from Indiana in the 29th and 31st Con- 
 gresses. Don Morrison was James Lowery Donaldson 
 Morrison, a Belleville lawyer and member of the Illinois 
 Senate in 1848. M. P. Sweet, O. H. Browning, and Cyrus 
 Edwards were all prominent Whig politicians, Browning 
 becoming United States Senator in 1861. Edward Dickin- 
 son Baker was Lincoln's predecessor in Congress. 
 Crittenden, of course, refers to John Jordan Crittenden, 
 Senator from Kentucky. 
 
258 ABRAHAM LINCOLN 
 
 LETTER TO ABRAM BALE 
 FEBRUARY 22, 1850 
 
 Springfield, Feb. 22. 1850 
 Mr. Abraham [sic] Bale. 
 Dear Sir: 
 
 I understand Mr. Hickox will go, or send to Petersburg to- 
 morrow, for the purpose of meeting you to settle the difficulty 
 about the wheat. I sincerely hope you will settle it. I think you 
 can if you will, for I have always found Mr. Hickox a fair man in 
 his dealings. If you settle, I will charge nothing for what I have 
 done, and thank you to boot. By settling, you will most likely get 
 your money sooner, and with much less trouble & expense. 
 
 Yours truly 
 A. Lincoln — 
 
 "Abram" was the mans name, although Lincoln 
 spelled it like his own. He was a Baptist preacher who 
 settled in the deserted village of New Salem, which hy 
 this time had become "Old Salem." Hickox "was prob- 
 ably Virgil Hickox, a prominent Springfield merchant" 
 (Paul M. Angle, editor, News Letters and Papers of 
 Lincoln). 
 
HIS SPEECHES AND WRITINGS 259 
 
 LETTER TO JOHN D. JOHNSTON 
 JANUARY 12, 1851 
 
 Springfield, Jany. 12. 1851— 
 Dear Brother: 
 
 On the day before yesterday I received a letter from Harriett, 
 written at Greenup. She says she has just returned from your 
 house; and that Father is very low and will hardly recover. She 
 also say[s you] have written me two letters; and that [although] 
 you do not expect me to come now, you [wonder] that I do not 
 write. I received both your [letters, and] although I have not 
 answered them, it is no[t because] I have forgotten them, or 
 been uninterested about them — but because it appeared to me I 
 could write nothing which could do any good. You already know 
 I desire that neither Father or Mother shall be in want of any 
 comfort either in health or sickness while they live; and I feel sure 
 you have not failed to use my name, if necessary, to procure a 
 doctor, or any thing else for Father in his present sickness. My 
 business is such that I could hardly leave home now, if it were 
 not, as it is, that my own wife is sick-abed. (It is a case of baby 
 sickness, and I suppose is not dangerous.) I sincerely hope 
 Father may yet recover his health; but at all events tell him to 
 remember to call upon, and confide in, our great, and good, and 
 merciful Maker, who will not turn away from him in any ex- 
 tremity. He notes the fall of a sparrow, and numbers the hairs of 
 our heads; and He will not forget the dying man who puts his 
 trust in Him. Say to him that if we could meet now, it is doubtful 
 whether it would not be more painful than pleasant; but that if it 
 be his lot to go now, he will soon have a joyous [meeting] with 
 many loved ones gone before; and where [the rest] of us, through 
 the help of God, hope ere long [to join] them. 
 
 Write to me again when you receive this. 
 
 Affectionately 
 
 A. Lincoln 
 
260 ABRAHAM LINCOLN: 
 
 Lincoln's father died a jew days after this letter was 
 written. Much has been made, by some of Lincoln's 
 detractors, of his neglect of his father. Actually, Lincoln 
 seems to have had little sentiment for his father, but the 
 circumstances in his own home at this time fully account 
 for his inability to leave and the tone of the letter gives 
 little cause for supposing that Lincoln was wholly in- 
 different to his father's illness and death, although father 
 and son had apparently never been genuinely com- 
 patible. 
 
 LETTER TO ANDREW McCALLEN 
 JULY 4, 1851 
 
 Springfield, Ills. July. 4. 1851. 
 Andrew McCallen. 
 Dear Sir: 
 
 I have news from Ottawa, that we win our Galatin [sic] & 
 Salem county case. As the dutch Justice said, when he married 
 folks "Now, vere ish my hundred tollars" 
 
 Yours truly 
 
 A. Lincoln 
 
 The spelling of McCallen s name has been a matter 
 of some uncertainty. The manuscript appears plainly to 
 read McCallan, but Lincoln's a and e are often indis- 
 tinguishable. Illinois State Bar records have him listed 
 as Andrew McCallen, admitted to the Bar in 1847. John 
 M. Palmer, editor of The Bench and Bar of Illinois, gives 
 his name as McCallon. The History of Gallatin, Saline, 
 Hamilton, Franklin, and Williamson Counties, Illinois 
 gives his name as Andrew McCallen. 
 
HIS SPEECHES AND WRITINGS 261 
 
 In any event, he was a Shawneetown merchant and, 
 later, lawyer who "devoted nearly his entire time to the 
 criminal 'practice' (John M. ? aimer, editor, The Bench 
 and Bar of Illinois, Vol. II, p. 857). The editor has not 
 been able to identify the case about which Lincoln 
 writes. 
 
 LETTER TO JOHN D. JOHNSTON 
 NOVEMBER 4, 1851 
 
 Shelby ville, 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? 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 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 
 
262 ABRAHAM LINCOLN: 
 
 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 thou- 
 sand pretenses for not getting along better are all nonsense; they 
 deceive nobody 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. 
 
 The last paragraph of this letter in effect is advising 
 Johnstons mother (Lincoln's stepmother) to leave her 
 home and live with relatives. Chapman was the hus- 
 band of a granddaughter of Lincoln's stepmother — a 
 child of Dennis Hanks and Elizabeth Johnston. This 
 letter and the two succeeding ones indicate clearly the 
 scale on which the family lived as well as the uselessness 
 of Lincoln's advice to the shiftless Johnston. Lincoln's 
 expression of willingness to help Johnstons son Ahram, in 
 the following letter of November 9, is interesting for its 
 carefulness of statement. 
 
HIS SPEECHES AND WRITINGS 263 
 
 LETTER TO JOHN D. JOHNSTON 
 NOVEMBER 9, 1851 
 
 Shelbyville, Novr. 9. 1851 
 Dear Brother: 
 
 When I wrote you before I had not received your letter. I 
 still think as I did; but if the land can be sold so that I get three 
 hundred dollars to put to interest for mother, I will not object if 
 she does not. But before I will make a deed, the money must be 
 had, or secured, beyond all doubt, at ten per cent. 
 
 As to Abram, I do not want him on my own account; but I 
 understand he wants to live with me so that he can go to school, 
 and get a fair start in the world, which I very much wish him 
 to have. When I reach home, if I can make it convenient to take, 
 I will take him provided there is no mistake between us as to the 
 object and terms of my taking him. 
 
 In haste 
 
 As ever 
 A. Lincoln 
 
 LETTER TO JOHN D. JOHNSTON 
 NOVEMBER 25, 1851 
 
 Springfield, Novr. 25. 1851. 
 Dear Brother 
 
 Your letter of the 22nd. is just received. Your proposal about 
 selling the East forty acres of land is all that I want or could claim 
 for myself; but I am not satisfied with it on Mothers account. I 
 want her to have her living, and I feel that it is my duty, to some 
 
264 ABRAHAM LINCOLN: 
 
 extent, to see that she is not wronged. She had a right of Dower 
 (that is, the use of one third for life) in the other two forties; but, 
 it seems, she has already let you take that, hook and line. She 
 now has the use of the whole of the East forty, as long as she 
 lives; and if it be sold, of course, she is entitled to the interest on 
 all the money it brings, as long as she lives; but you propose to 
 sell it for three hundred dollars, take one hundred away with you, 
 and leave her two hundred, at 8 per cent, making her the enor- 
 mous sum of 16 dollars a year. Now, if you are satisfied with treat- 
 ing her in that way, I am not. It is true, that you are to have that 
 forty for two hundred dollars, at Mother's death; but you are not 
 to have it before. I am confident that land can be made to produce 
 for Mother, at least $30 a year, and I can not, to oblige any living 
 person, consent that she shall be put on an allowance of sixteen 
 dollars a year. 
 
 Yours &c 
 A. Lincoln 
 
 EULOGY ON HENRY CLAY DELIVERED IN THE STATE 
 HOUSE AT SPRINGFIELD, ILLINOIS. JULY 6, 1852 
 
 On the fourth day of July, 1776, the people of a few feeble 
 and oppressed colonies of Great Britain, inhabiting a portion of 
 the Atlantic coast of North America, publicly declared their 
 national independence, and made their appeal to the justice of 
 their cause, and to the God of battles, for the maintainance of 
 that declaration. That people were few in numbers, and without 
 resources, save only their own wise heads and stout hearts. With- 
 in the first year of that declared independence, and while its 
 maintainance was yet problematical — while the bloody struggle 
 between those resolute rebels, and their haughty would-be- 
 masters, was still waging, of undistinguished parents, and in an 
 obscure district of one of those colonies, Henry Clay was born. 
 
HIS SPEECHES AND WRITINGS 265 
 
 The infant nation, and the infant child began the race of life 
 together. For three quarters of a century they have travelled 
 hand in hand. They have been companions ever. The nation 
 has passed its perils, and is free, prosperous, and powerful. The 
 child has reached his manhood, his middle age, his old age, and 
 is dead. In all that has concerned the nation the man ever sym- 
 pathised; and now the nation mourns for the man. 
 
 The day after his death, one of the public Journals, opposed 
 to him politically, held the following pathetic and beautiful lan- 
 guage, which I adopt, partly because such high and exclusive 
 eulogy, originating with a political friend, might offend good taste, 
 but chiefly, because I could not, in any language of my own, so 
 well express my thoughts — 
 
 "Alas! who can realize that Henry Clay is dead! Who can 
 realize that never again that majestic form shall rise in the coun- 
 cil-chambers of his country to beat back the storms of anarchy 
 which may threaten, or pour the oil of peace upon the troubled 
 billows as they rage and menace around? Who can realize, that 
 the workings of that mighty mind have ceased — that the throb- 
 bings of that gallant heart are stilled — that the mighty sweep of 
 that graceful arm will be felt no more, and the magic of that 
 eloquent tongue, which spake as spake no other tongue besides, 
 is hushed — hushed forever! Who can realize that freedom's cham- 
 pion — the champion of a civilized world, and of all tongues and 
 kindreds and people, has indeed fallen! Alas, in those dark hours, 
 which, as they come in the history of all nations, must come in 
 ours — those hours of peril and dread which our land has experi- 
 enced, and which she may be called to experience again — to 
 whom now may her people look up for that counsel and advice, 
 which only wisdom and experience and patriotism can give, and 
 which only the undoubting confidence of a nation will receive? 
 Perchance, in the whole circle of the great and gifted of our 
 land, there remains but one on whose shoulders the mighty 
 mantle of the departed statesman may fall — one, while we now 
 write, is doubtless pouring his tears over the bier of his brother 
 and his friend — brother, friend ever, yet in political sentiment, as 
 far apart as party could make them. Ah, it is at times like these, 
 that the petty distinctions of mere party disappear. We see only 
 
266 ABRAHAM LINCOLN: 
 
 the great, the grand, the noble features of the departed states- 
 man; and we do not even beg permission to bow at his feet and 
 mingle our tears with those who have ever been his political 
 adherents — we do [not?] beg this permission — we claim it as a 
 right, though we feel it as a privilege. Henry Clay belonged to his 
 country — to the world, mere party cannot claim men like him. 
 His career has been national — his fame has filled the earth — his 
 memory will endure to "the last syllable of recorded time/' 
 
 "Henry Clay is dead!— He breathed his last on yesterday at 
 twenty minutes after eleven, in his chamber at Washington. 
 To those who followed his lead in public affairs, it more appro- 
 priately belongs to pronounce his eulogy, and pay specific honors 
 to the memory of the illustrious dead — but all Americans may 
 show the grief which his death inspires, for, his character and 
 fame are national property. As on a question of liberty, he knew 
 no North, no South, no East, no West, but only the Union, which 
 held them all in its sacred circle, so now his countrymen will 
 know no grief, that is not as wide-spread as the bounds of the 
 confederacy. The career of Henry Clay was a public career. From 
 his youth he has been devoted to the public service, at a period 
 too, in the world's history justly regarded as a remarkable era in 
 human affairs. He witnessed in the beginning the throes of the 
 French Revolution. He saw the rise and fall of Napoleon. He was 
 called upon to legislate for America, and direct her policy when 
 all Europe was the battle-field of contending dynasties, and when 
 the struggle for supremacy imperilled the rights of all neutral 
 nations. His voice spoke war and peace in the contest with Great 
 Britain. 
 
 "When Greece rose against the Turks and struck for liberty, 
 his name was mingled with the battle-cry of freedom. When 
 South America threw off the thraldom of Spain, his speeches were 
 read at the head of her armies by Bolivar. His name has been, 
 and will continue to be, hallowed in two hemispheres, for it is — 
 
 "One of the few the immortal names 
 That were not born to die," 
 
 "To the ardent patriot and profound statesman, he added a 
 quality possessed by few of the gifted on earth. His eloquence has 
 
HIS SPEECHES AND WRITINGS 267 
 
 not been surpassed. In the effective power to' move the heart of 
 man, Clay was without an equal, and the heaven born endow- 
 ment, in the spirit of its origin, has been most conspicuously 
 exhibited against intestine feud. On at least three important oc- 
 casions, he has quelled our civil commotions, by a power and 
 influence, which belonged to no other statesman of his age and 
 times. And in our last internal discord, when this Union trembled 
 to its center — in old age, he left the shades of private life and 
 gave the death blow to fraternal strife, with the vigor of his 
 earlier years in a series of Senatorial efforts, which in themselves 
 would bring immortality, by challenging comparison with the 
 efforts of any statesman in any age. He exorcised the demon 
 which possessed the body politic, and gave peace to a distracted 
 land. Alas! the achievement cost him his life! He sank day by day 
 to the tomb — his pale, but noble brow, bound with a triple wreath, 
 put there by a grateful country. May his ashes rest in peace, 
 while his spirit goes to take its station among the great and good 
 men who preceded him!" 
 
 While it is customary, and proper, upon occasions like the 
 present, to give a brief sketch of the life of the deceased, in the 
 case of Mr. Clay, it is less necessary than most others; for his 
 biography has been written and re-written, and read and re-read, 
 for the last twenty-five years; so that, with the exception of a few 
 of the latest incidents of his life, all is as well known, as it can be. 
 The short sketch which I give is, therefore, merely to maintain 
 the connection of this discourse. 
 
 Henry Clay was born on the twelfth of April 1777, in Han- 
 over County, Virginia. Of his father, who died in the fourth or 
 fifth year of Henry's age, little seems to be known, except that he 
 was a respectable man, and a preacher of the Baptist persuasion. 
 Mr. Clay's education, to the end of life, was comparatively limited. 
 I say "to the end of life," because I have understood that, from 
 time to time, he added something to his education during the 
 greater part of his whole life. Mr. Clay's lack of a more perfect 
 early education, however it may be regretted generally, teaches at 
 least one profitable lesson: it teaches that in this country, one can 
 scarcely be so poor, but that, if he toill, he can acquire sufficient 
 education to get through the world respectably. In his twenty- 
 
268 ABRAHAM LINCOLN: 
 
 third year Mr. Clay was licensed to practise law, and emigrated 
 to Lexington, Kentucky. Here he commenced and continued the 
 practice till the year 1803, when he was first elected to the Ken- 
 tucky legislature. By successive elections he was continued in the 
 Legislature till the latter part of 1806, when he was elected to fill 
 a vacancy, of a single session, in the United States Senate. In 
 1807 he was again elected to the Kentucky House of Representa- 
 tives, and by that body, chosen its Speaker. In 1808 he was re- 
 elected to the same body. In 1809 he was again chosen to fill a 
 vacancy of two years in the United States Senate. In 1811 he was 
 elected to the United States House of Representatives, and on the 
 first day of taking his seat in that body, he was chosen its Speaker. 
 In 1813 he was again elected Speaker. Early in 1814, being the 
 period of our last British war, Mr. Clay was sent as commissioner, 
 with others, to negotiate a treaty of peace, which treaty was con- 
 cluded in the latter part of the same year. On his return from 
 Europe he was again elected to the lower branch of Congress, 
 and on taking his seat in December 1815, was called to his old 
 post — the Speaker's chair, a position in which he was retained by 
 successive elections, with one brief intermission, till the inaugura- 
 tion of John Q. Adams, in March, 1825. He was then appointed 
 Secretary of State, and occupied that important station till the 
 inauguration of Gen. Jackson in March 1829. After this he re- 
 turned to Kentucky, resumed the practice of the law, and con- 
 tinued it till the autumn of 1831, when he was by the legislature 
 of Kentucky, again placed in the United States Senate. By a 
 re-election he continued in the Senate till he resigned his seat, 
 and retired, in March 1848. In December 1849 he again took his 
 seat in the Senate, which he again resigned only a few months 
 before his death. 
 
 By the foregoing it is perceived that the period from the 
 beginning of Mr. Clay's official life, in 1803, to the end of it in 
 1852, is but one year short of half a century; and that the sum 
 of all the intervals in it, will not amount to ten years. But mere 
 duration of time in office, constitutes the smallest part of Mr. 
 Clay's history. Throughout that long period, he has constantly 
 been the most loved, and most implicitly followed by friends, and 
 the most dreaded by opponents, of all living American politicians. 
 
HIS SPEECHES AND WRITINGS 269 
 
 In all the great questions which have agitated the country, and 
 particularly in those fearful crises, the Missouri question — the 
 Nullification question, and the late slavery question, as connected 
 with the newly acquired territory, involving and endangering the 
 stability of the Union, his has been the leading and most con- 
 spicuous part. In 1824 he was first a candidate for the Presidency, 
 and was defeated; and although he was successively defeated for 
 the same office in 1832 and in 1844, there has never been a 
 moment since 1824 till after 1848 when a very large portion of the 
 American people did not cling to him with an enthusiastic hope 
 and purpose of still elevating him to the Presidency. With other 
 men, to be defeated, was to be forgotten; but to him, defeat was 
 but a trifling incident, neither changing him, or the world's esti- 
 mate of him. Even those of both political parties who have been 
 preferred to him for the highest office, have run far briefer 
 courses than he, and left him, still shining high in the heavens of 
 the political world. Jackson, Van Buren, Harrison, Polk, and 
 Taylor, all rose after, and set long before him. The spell — the 
 long-enduring spell — with which the souls of men were bound to 
 him, is a miracle. Who can compass it? It is probably true he 
 owed his pre-eminence to no one quality, but to a fortunate com- 
 bination of several. He was surpassingly eloquent; but many 
 eloquent men fail utterly; and they are not, as a class, generally 
 successful. His judgment was excellent; but many men of good 
 judgment, live and die unnoticed. — His will was indomitable; but 
 this quality often secures to its owner nothing better than a char- 
 acter for useless obstinacy. These then were Mr. Clay's leading 
 qualities. No one of them is very uncommon; but all together 
 are rarely combined in a single individual; and this is probably 
 the reason why such men as Henry Clay are so rare in the world. 
 Mr. Clay's eloquence did not consist, as many fine specimens 
 of eloquence do, of types and figures — of antithesis, and elegant 
 arrangement of words and sentences; but rather of that deeply 
 earnest and impassioned tone, and manner, which can proceed 
 only from great sincerity, and thorough conviction, in the speaker 
 of the justice and importance of his cause. This it is, that truly 
 touches the chords of sympathy; and those who heard Mr. Clay 
 never failed to be moved by it, or ever afterwards, forgot the 
 
270 ABRAHAM LINCOLN: 
 
 impression. All his efforts were made for practical effect. He never 
 spoke merely to be heard. He never delivered a Fourth of July 
 oration, or an eulogy on an occasion like this. As a politician or 
 statesman, no one was so habitually careful to avoid all sectional 
 ground. Whatever he did, he did for the whole country. In the 
 construction of his measures he ever carefully surveyed every 
 part of the field, and duly weighed every conflicting interest. 
 Feeling as he did, and as the truth surely is, that the world's best 
 hope depended on the continued Union of these States, he was 
 ever jealous of, and watchful for, whatever might have the slight- 
 est tendency to separate them. 
 
 Mr. Clay's predominant sentiment, from first to last, was a 
 deep devotion to the cause of human liberty — a strong sympathy 
 with the oppressed everywhere, and an ardent wish for their 
 elevation. With him, this was a primary and all controlling pas- 
 sion. Subsidiary to this was the conduct of his whole life. He 
 loved his country partly because it was his own country, but 
 mostly because it was a free country; and he burned with a zeal 
 for its advancement, prosperity and glory, because he saw in such, 
 the advancement, prosperity, and glory, of human liberty, human 
 right and human nature. He desired the prosperity of his country- 
 men partly because they were his countrymen, but chiefly to 
 show to the world that freemen could be prosperous. 
 
 That his views and measures were always the wisest, needs 
 not to be affirmed; nor should it be, on this occasion, where so 
 many, thinking differently, join in doing honor to his memory. 
 A free people, in times of peace and quiet — when pressed by no 
 common danger — naturally divide into parties. At such times the 
 man who is of neither party, is not — cannot be, of any con- 
 sequence. Mr. Clay, therefore, was of a party. Taking a prominent 
 part, as he did, in all the great political questions of his country 
 for the last half century, the wisdom of his course on many, is 
 doubted and denied by a large portion of his countrymen; and 
 of such it is not now proper to speak particularly. — But there are 
 many others, about his course upon which, there is little or no 
 disagreement amongst intelligent and patriotic Americans. Of 
 these last are the war of 1812, the Missouri question, Nullification, 
 and the now recent compromise measures. In 1812 Mr. Clay, 
 
HIS SPEECHES AND WRITINGS 271 
 
 though not unknown, was still a young man. Whether we should 
 go to war with Great Britain, being the question of the day, a 
 minority opposed the declaration of war by Congress, while the 
 majority, though apparently inclining to war, had for years, 
 wavered, and hesitated to act decisively. Meanwhile British ag- 
 gressions multiplied, and grew more daring and aggravated. By 
 Mr. Clay, more than any other man, the struggle was brought to 
 a decision in Congress. The question, being now fully before 
 congress, came up in a variety of ways, in rapid succession, on 
 most of which occasions Mr. Clay spoke. Adding to all the logic, 
 of which the subject was susceptible, that noble inspiration, which 
 came to him as it came to no other, he aroused, and nerved, and 
 inspired his friends, and confounded and bore down all oppo- 
 sition. Several of his speeches, on these occasions, were reported, 
 and are still extant, but the best of these all never was. During 
 its delivery the reporters forgot their vocations, dropped their 
 pens, and sat enchanted from near the beginning to quite the 
 close. The speech now lives only in the memory of a few old men; 
 and the enthusiasm with which they cherish their recollection of 
 it is absolutely astonishing. The precise language of this speech 
 we shall never know; but we do know — we cannot help knowing 
 — that, with deep pathos, it pleaded the cause of the injured sailor 
 — that it invoked the genius of the revolution — that it apostro- 
 phized the names of Otis, of Henry and of Washington — that it 
 appealed to the interest, the pride, the honor and the glory of the 
 nation — that it shamed and taunted the timidity of friends — that it 
 scorned, and scouted, and withered the temerity of domestic foes 
 — that it bearded and defied the British Lion — and rising, and 
 swelling, and maddening in its course, it sounded the onset, till 
 the charge, the shock, the steady struggle, and the glorious vic- 
 tory, all passed in vivid review before the entranced hearers. 
 
 Important and exciting as was the war question, of 1812, it 
 never so alarmed the sagacious statesmen of the country for the 
 safety of the republic, as afterward did the Missouri question. 
 This sprang from that unfortunate source of discord — negro 
 slavery. When our Federal Constitution was adopted, we owned 
 no territory beyond the limits or ownership of the States, except 
 the territory North- West of the River Ohio, and east of the Mis- 
 
272 ABRAHAM LINCOLN: 
 
 sissippi. — What has since been formed into the States of Maine, 
 Kentucky, and Tennessee, was, I believe, within the limits of or 
 owned by Massachusetts, Virginia, and North Carolina. As to the 
 North Western Territory, provision had been made, even before 
 the adoption of the Constitution, that slavery should never go 
 there. On the admission of the States into the Union carved from 
 the territory we owned before the constitution, no question — or at 
 most, no considerable question — arose about slavery — those 
 which were within the limits of or owned by the old states, fol- 
 lowing respectively, the condition of the parent state, and those 
 within the North West territory, following the previously made 
 provision. But in 1803 we purchased Louisiana of the French; 
 and it included with much more, what has since been formed into 
 the State of Missouri. With regard to it, nothing had been done 
 to forestall the question of slavery. When, therefore, in 1819, 
 Missouri, having formed a State constitution, without excluding 
 slavery, and with slavery already actually existing within its limits, 
 knocked at the door of the Union for admission, almost the 
 entire representation of the non-slaveholding states, objected. A 
 fearful and angry struggle instantly followed. This alarmed think- 
 ing men, more than any previous question, because, unlike all the 
 former, it divided the country by geographical lines. Other ques- 
 tions had their opposing partizans in all localities of the country 
 and in almost every family; so that no division of the Union could 
 follow such, without a separation of friends, to quite as great an 
 extent, as that of opponents. — Not so with the Missouri question. 
 On this a geographical line could be traced which, in the main, 
 would separate opponents only. This was the danger. Mr. Jeffer- 
 son, then in retirement, wrote: 
 
 "I had for a long time ceased to read newspapers, or to pay 
 any attention to public affairs, confident they were in good hands, 
 and content to be a passenger in our bark to the shore from which 
 I am not distant. But this momentous question, like a fire bell in 
 the night, awakened, and filled me with terror. I considered it at 
 once as the knell of the Union. It is hushed, indeed, for the 
 moment. But this is a reprieve only, not a final sentence. A geo- 
 graphical line, co-inciding with a marked principle, moral and 
 
HIS SPEECHES AND WRITINGS 273 
 
 political, once conceived and held up to the angry passions of 
 men, will never be obliterated, and every irritation will mark it 
 deeper and deeper. I can say with conscious truth, that there is 
 not a man on earth who would sacrifice more than I would to 
 relieve us from this heavy reproach, hi any practicable way. The 
 cession of that kind of property, for so it is misnamed, is a baga- 
 telle which would not cost me a second thought, if, in that way, 
 a general emancipation, and expatriation could be effected; and, 
 gradually, and with due sacrifices I think it might be. But as it is, 
 we have the wolf by the ears, and we can neither hold him, nor 
 safely let him go. Justice is in one scale, and self-preservation in 
 the other/' 
 
 Mr. Clay was in congress, and, perceiving the danger, at once 
 engaged his whole energies to avert it. It began, as I have said, 
 in 1819; and it did not terminate till 1821. Missouri would not 
 yield the point; and congress — that is, a majority in congress — by 
 repeated votes, showed a determination to not admit the State 
 unless it should yield. After several failures, and great labor on 
 the part of Mr. Clay to so present the question that a majority 
 could consent to the admission, it was by a vote, rejected, and as 
 all seemed to think, finally. A sullen gloom hung over the nation. 
 All felt that the rejection of Missouri, was equivalent to a dissolu- 
 tion of the Union, because those states which already had, what 
 Missouri was rejected for refusing to relinquish, would go with 
 Missouri. All deprecated and deplored this, but none saw how to 
 avert it. For the judgment of members to be convinced of the 
 necessity of yielding, was not the whole difficulty; each had a 
 constituency to meet, and to answer to. Mr. Clay, though worn 
 down, and exhausted, was appealed to by members, to renew his 
 efforts at compromise. — He did so, and by some judicious modi- 
 fications of his plan, coupled with laborious efforts with individual 
 members, and his own over-mastering eloquence upon the floor, 
 he finally secured the admission of the State. Brightly, and cap- 
 tivating as it had previously shown, it was now perceived that 
 his great eloquence, was a mere embellishment, or at most, but 
 a helping hand to his inventive genius, and his devotion to his 
 country in the day of her extreme peril. 
 
274 ABRAHAM LINCOLN: 
 
 After the settlement of the Missouri question, although a 
 portion of the American people have differed with Mr. Clay, and 
 a majority even, appear generally to have been opposed to him 
 on questions of ordinary administration, he seems constantly to 
 have been regarded by all, as the man for a crisis. Accordingly, 
 in the days of Nullification, and more recently in the re-appear- 
 ance of the slavery question, connected with our territory newly 
 acquired of Mexico, the task of devising a mode of adjustment, 
 seems to have been cast upon Mr. Clay, by common consent — 
 and his performance of the task, in each case, was little else than, 
 a literal fulfilment of the public expectation. 
 
 Mr. Clay's efforts in behalf of the South Americans, and 
 afterwards, in behalf of the Greeks, in the times of their respec- 
 tive struggles for civil liberty are among the finest on record, 
 upon the noblest of all themes, and bear ample corroboration of 
 what I have said was his ruling passion — a love of liberty and 
 right, unselfishly, and for their own sakes. 
 
 Having been led to allude to domestic slavery so frequently 
 already, I am unwilling to close without referring more par- 
 ticularly to Mr. Clay's views and conduct in regard to it. He ever 
 was on principle and in feeling, opposed to slavery. The very 
 earliest, and one of the latest public efforts of his life, separated 
 by a period of more than fifty years; — were both made in favor of 
 gradual emancipation of the slave in Kentucky. He did not per- 
 ceive, that on a question of human right, the negroes were to be 
 excepted from the human race. And yet Mr. Clay was the owner 
 of slaves. Cast into life where slavery was already widely spread 
 and deeply seated, he did not perceive, as I think no wise man 
 has perceived, how it could be at once eradicated, without pro- 
 ducing a greater evil, even to the cause of human liberty itself. 
 His feeling and his judgment, therefore, ever led him to oppose 
 both extremes of opinion on the subject. Those who would shiver 
 into fragments the Union of these States; tear to tatters its now 
 venerated constitution; and even burn the last copy of the Bible, 
 rather than slavery should continue a single hour, together with 
 all their more halting sympathisers, have received, and are re- 
 ceiving their just execration; and the name, and opinions, and 
 influence of Mr. Clay, are fully, and, as I trust, effectually and 
 
HIS SPEECHES AND WRITINGS 275 
 
 enduringly, arrayed against them. But I would also, if I could, 
 array his name, opinions, and influence against the opposite ex- 
 treme — against a few, but an increasing number of men, who, for 
 the sake of perpetuating slavery, are beginning to assail and to 
 ridicule the white man's charter of freedom — the declaration that 
 "all men are created free and equal." So far as I have learned, 
 the first American, of any note, to do or attempt this, was the late 
 John C. Calhoun; and if I mistake not, it soon after found its way 
 into some of the messages of the Governors of South Carolina. 
 We, however, look for and are not much shocked by, political 
 eccentricities and heresies in South Carolina. But, only last year, 
 I saw with astonishment, what purported to be a letter of a very 
 distinguished and influential clergyman of Virginia, copied, with 
 apparent approbation, into a St. Louis news-paper, containing the 
 following, to me, very unsatisfactory language — 
 
 "I am fully aware that there is a text in some Bibles that is 
 not in mine. Professional abolitionists have made more use of it, 
 than of any passage in the Bible. It came, however, as I trace it, 
 from Saint Voltaire, and was baptized by Thomas Jefferson, and 
 since almost universally regarded as canonical authority, 'All men 
 are horn free and equal! 
 
 "This is a genuine coin in the political currency of our gen- 
 eration. I am sorry to say that I have never seen two men of whom 
 it is true. But I must admit I never saw the Siamese Twins, and 
 therefore will not dogmatically say that no man ever saw a proof 
 of this sage aphorism. " 
 
 This sounds strangely in republican America. — The like was 
 not heard in the fresher days of the Republic. Let us contrast 
 with it the language of that truly national man, whose life and 
 death we now commemorate and lament. I quote from a speech 
 of Mr. Clay delivered before the American Colonization Society 
 in 1827: 
 
 "We are reproached with doing mischief by the agitation of 
 this question. The society goes into no household to disturb its 
 domestic tranquillity; it addresses itself to no slaves to weaken 
 their obligations of obedience. It seeks to affect no man's property. 
 It neither has the power nor the will to affect the property of any 
 
276 ABRAHAM LINCOLN: 
 
 one contraiy to, his consent. — The execution of its scheme would 
 augment instead of diminishing the value of the property left 
 behind. The society, composed of free men, concerns itself only 
 with the free. Collateral consequences we are not responsible for. 
 It is not this society which has produced the great moral revolu- 
 tion which the age exhibits. What would they, who thus reproach 
 us, have done? If they would repress all tendencies towards 
 liberty, and ultimate emancipation, they must do more than put 
 down the benevolent efforts of this society. They must go back to 
 the era of our liberty and independence, and muzzle the cannon 
 which thunders its annual joyous return. They must renew the 
 slave trade with all its train of atrocities. They must suppress the 
 workings of British philanthropy, seeking to meliorate the condi- 
 tion of the unfortunate West Indian slave. They must arrest the 
 career of South American deliverance from thraldom. They must 
 blow out the moral lights around us, and extinguish that greatest 
 torch of all which America presents to a benighted world — point- 
 ing the way to their rights, their liberties, and their happiness. 
 And when they have achieved those purposes their work will 
 be yet incomplete. They must penetrate the human soul, and 
 eradicate the light of reason and the love of liberty. Then, and not 
 till then, when universal darkness and despair prevail, can you 
 perpetuate slavery, and repress all sympathy, and all humane, and 
 benevolent efforts among free men, in behalf of the unhappy 
 portion of our race doomed to bondage." 
 
 The American Colonization Society was organized in 1816. 
 Mr. Clay, though not its projector, was one of its earliest mem- 
 bers; and he died, as for the many preceding years he had been, 
 its President. — It was one of the most cherished objects of his 
 direct care and consideration; and the association of his name 
 with it has probably been its very greatest collateral support. He 
 considered it no demerit in the society, that it tended to relieve 
 slave-holders from the troublesome presence of the free negroes; 
 but this was far from being its whole merit in his estimation. In 
 the same speech from which I have quoted he says: 
 
 "There is a moral fitness in the idea of returning to Africa her 
 children, whose ancestors have been torn from her by the ruthless 
 
HIS SPEECHES AND WRITINGS 277 
 
 hand of fraud and violence. Transplanted in a foreign land, they 
 will carry back to their native soil the rich fruits of religion, 
 civilization, law and liberty. May it not be one of the great designs 
 of the Ruler of the universe, (whose ways are often inscrutable by 
 short-sighted mortals,) thus to transform an original crime, into a 
 signal blessing to that most unfortunate portion of the globe?" 
 
 This suggestion of the possible ultimate redemption of the 
 African race and African continent, was made twenty-five years 
 ago. Every succeeding year has added strength to the hope of its 
 realization. — May it indeed be realized! Pharaoh's country was 
 cursed with plagues, and his hosts were drowned in the Red Sea 
 for striving to retain a captive people who had already served 
 them more than four hundred years. May like disasters never 
 befall us! If as the friends of colonization hope, the present and 
 coming -generations of our countrymen shall by any means, suc- 
 ceed in freeing our land from the dangerous presence of slavery; 
 and, at the same time, in restoring a captive people to their long- 
 lost father-land, with bright prospects for the future; and this too, 
 so gradually, that neither races nor individuals shall have suffered 
 by the change, it will indeed be a glorious consummation. And if, 
 to such a consummation, the efforts of Mr. Clay shall have con- 
 tributed, it will be what he most ardently wished, and none of 
 his labors will have been more valuable to his country and his 
 kind. 
 
 But Henry Clay is dead. His long and eventful life is closed. 
 Our country is prosperous and powerful; but could it have been 
 quite all it has been, and is, and is to be, without Henry Clay? 
 Such a man the times have demanded, and such, in the provi- 
 dence of God was given us. But he is gone. Let us strive to deserve, 
 as far as mortals may, the continued care of Divine Provi- 
 dence, trusting that in future national emergencies, He will not 
 fail to provide us the instruments of safety and security. 
 
 Although this speech has been dated July 16 in the 
 Complete Works, Beveridge's Abraham Lincoln, and 
 other works, apparently it was delivered ten days earlier 
 
278 ABRAHAM LINCOLN: 
 
 on July 6. An account of the memorial service commem- 
 orating Henry Clay, which was held in the State House 
 at Springfield on July 6, appears in the Illinois State 
 Journal, July 9. The "Eulogy" was printed in full in the 
 Journal on July 21. 
 
 FRAGMENTS: ON SLAVERY 
 [JULY 1, 1854?] 
 
 If A. can prove, however conclusively, that he may, of right, 
 enslave B. — why may not B. snatch the same argument, and prove 
 equally, that he may enslave A? — 
 
 You say A. is white, and B. is black. It is color, then; the 
 lighter, having the right to enslave the darker? Take care. By 
 this rule, you are to be slave to the first man you meet, with a 
 fairer skin than your own. 
 
 You do not mean color exactly? You mean the whites are 
 intellectually the superiors of the blacks; and, therefore have the 
 right to enslave them? Take care again. By this rule, you are to 
 be slave to the first man you meet, with an intellect superior to 
 your own. 
 
 But, say you, it is a question of interest; and, if you can make 
 it your interest, you have the right to enslave another. Very well. 
 And if he can make it his interest, he has the right to enslave you. 
 
 dent truth. Made so plain by our good Father in Heaven, that all 
 feel and understand it, even down to brutes and creeping insects. 
 The ant who has toiled and dragged a crumb to his nest, will 
 furiously defend the fruit of his labor, against whatever robber 
 assails him. So plain, that the most dumb and stupid slave that 
 ever toiled for a master, does constantly know that he is wronged. 
 So plain that no one, high or low, ever does mistake it, except in 
 
HIS SPEECHES AND WRITINGS 279 
 
 a plainly selfish way; for although volume upon volume is written 
 to prove slavery a very good thing, we never hear of the man who 
 wishes to take the good of it by being a slave himself. 
 
 Most governments have been based, practically, on the denial 
 of the equal rights of men, as I have, in part, stated them; ours 
 began by affirming those rights. They said, some men are too 
 ignorant, and vicious to share in government. Possibly so, said we; 
 and, by your system, you would always keep them ignorant, and 
 vicious. We proposed to give all a chance; and we expected the 
 weak to grow stronger, the ignorant, wiser; and all better, and 
 happier together. 
 
 We made the experiment; and the fruit is before us. Look 
 at it — think of it. Look at it in its aggregate grandeur, of extent 
 of country, and numbers of population — of ship, and steamboat, 
 and rail- 
 
 LETTER TO J. M. PALMER 
 SEPTEMBER 7, 1854 
 
 (Confidential) 
 
 Springfield, Sept. 7, 1854 
 Hon. J. M. Palmer 
 Dear Sir. 
 
 You know how anxious I am that this Nebraska measure shall 
 be rebuked and condemned every where. Of course I hope some- 
 thing from your position; yet I do not expect you to do any thing 
 which may be wrong in your own judgment; nor would I have 
 you do anything personally injurious to yourself. You are, and 
 always have been, honestly, and sincerely a democrat; and I know 
 how painful it must be to an honest sincere man to be urged by 
 his party to the support of a measure, which on his conscience 
 he believes to be wrong. You have had a severe struggle with 
 yourself, and you have determined not to swallow the wrong. Is 
 
280 ABRAHAM LINCOLN: 
 
 it not just to yourself that you should, in a few public speeches, 
 state your reasons, and thus justify yourself? I wish you would; 
 and yet I say "dont do it, if you think it will injure you." You may 
 have given your word to vote for Major Harris, and if so, of 
 course you will stick to it. But allow me to suggest that you should 
 avoid speaking of this; for it probably would induce some of your 
 friends, in like manner, to cast their votes. You understand. And 
 now let me beg your pardon for obtruding this letter upon 
 you, to whom I have ever been opposed in politics. Had your 
 party omitted to make Nebraska a test of party fidelity; you 
 probably would have been the Democratic candidate for Congress 
 in the district. You deserved it, and I believe it would have been 
 given you. In that case I should have been quit, happy that 
 Nebraska was to be rebuked at all events. I still should have voted 
 for the Whig candidate; but I should have made no speeches, 
 written no letters; and you would have been elected by at least 
 a thousand majority. 
 
 Yours truly 
 A. Lincoln — 
 
 Palmer went over to the anti-Nebraska forces as a 
 Democratic member of the Legislature, but did not vote 
 for Lincoln for United States senator. He stuck to Trum- 
 bull, also an anti-Nebraska Democrat, until Lincoln 
 threw his votes to Trumbull. (See "Letter to E. B. Wash- 
 burne," February 9, 1855.) Palmer became a Republican 
 in 1856 and ran for Congress (an unexpired term) in 
 1859. It was he who offered the resolution in the Decatur 
 convention, 1860, making Lincoln Illinois' "favorite son." 
 
HIS SPEECHES AND WRITINGS 281 
 
 THE 14th SECTION: AN EDITORIAL IN THE 
 ILLINOIS JOURNAL. SEPTEMBER 11, 1854 
 
 The following is the 14th section of the Kansas-Nebraska law. 
 It repeals the Missouri Compromise; and then puts in a declara- 
 tion that it is not intended by this repeal to legislate slavery in or 
 exclude it therefrom, the territory. 
 
 Sec. 14. That the constitution, and all the laws of the United 
 States which are not locally inapplicable, shall have the same 
 force and effect within said territory of Nebraska as elsewhere 
 in the United States, except the 8th section of the act preparatory 
 to the admission of Missouri into the Union, approved March 
 sixth, eighteen hundred and twenty, which being inconsistent 
 with the principles of non-intervention by congress with slavery 
 in the States and Territories as recognized by the legislation of 
 eighteen hundred and fifty, commonly called the compromise 
 measures, is hereby declared inoperative and void; 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 domes- 
 tic institutions in their own way, subject only to the constitution 
 of the United States: Provided, that nothing herein contained 
 shall be construed to revive or put in force any law or regulation 
 which may have existed prior to the act of sixth of March, eighteen 
 hundred and twenty, either protecting, establishing, prohibiting, 
 or abolishing slavery. 
 
 The state of the case in a few words, is this: The Missouri 
 Compromise excluded slavery from the Kansas-Nebraska terri- 
 tory. The repeal opened the territories to slavery. If there is any 
 meaning to the declaration in the 14th section, that it does not 
 mean to legislate slavery into the territories, [it?] is this: that it 
 does not require slaves to be sent there. The Kansas and Nebraska 
 
282 ABRAHAM LINCOLN: 
 
 territories are now as open to slavery as Mississippi or Arkansas 
 were when they were territories. 
 
 To illustrate the case — Abraham Lincoln has a fine meadow, 
 containing beautiful springs of water, and well fenced, which 
 John Calhoun had agreed with Abraham (originally owning the 
 land in common) should be his, and the agreement had been 
 consummated in the most solemn manner, regarded by both as 
 sacred. John Calhoun, however, in the course of time, had be- 
 come owner of an extensive herd of cattle — the prairie grass had 
 become dried up and there was no convenient water to be had. 
 John Calhoun then looks with a longing eye on Lincoln's meadow, 
 and goes to it and throws down the fences, and exposes it to the 
 ravages of his starving and famishing cattle. "You rascal," says 
 Lincoln, "what have you done? What do you do this for?" — "Oh," 
 replies Calhoun, "everything is right. I have taken down your 
 fence; but nothing more. It is my true intent and meaning not 
 to drive my cattle into your meadow, nor to exclude them there- 
 from, but to leave them perfectly free to form their own notions 
 of the feed, and to direct their movements in their own way!" 
 
 Now would not the man who committed this outrage be 
 deemed both a knave and a fool, — a knave in removing the restric- 
 tive fence, which he had solemnly pledged himself to sustain; 
 — and a fool in supposing that there could be one man found 
 in the country to believe that he had not pulled down the fence 
 for the purpose of opening the meadow for his cattle? 
 
 This unsigned editorial, discovered in the Illinois 
 State Journal by Paul M. Angle, was undoubtedly written 
 by Lincoln. Probably other editorials which appeared in 
 the Journal were also written by Lincoln, but as Mr. 
 Angle has pointed out "it is generally dangerous to 
 designate such unsigned articles as indisputably Lin- 
 coln's." The "illustration" is an excellent example of 
 Lincoln's employment of homely analogy to make brief 
 and clear a complex political issue — here the funda- 
 mental concept which Lincoln presents at great length 
 in the "Speech at Peoria." 
 
HIS SPEECHES AND WRITINGS 283 
 
 THE REPEAL OF THE MISSOURI COMPROMISE AND 
 THE PROPRIETY OF ITS RESTORATION: SPEECH AT 
 PEORIA, ILLINOIS, IN REPLY TO SENATOR DOUGLAS 
 OCTOBER 16, 1854 
 
 The repeal of the Missouri Compromise, and the propriety of 
 its restoration, constitute the subject of what I am about to say. 
 
 As I desire to present my own connected view of this subject, 
 my remarks will not be, specifically, an answer to Judge Doug- 
 las; yet, as I proceed, the main points he has presented will arise, 
 and will receive such respectful attention as I may be able to 
 give them. 
 
 I wish further to say, that I do not propose to question the 
 patriotism, or to assail the motives of any man, or class of men; 
 but rather to strictly confine myself to the naked merits of the 
 question. 
 
 I also wish to be no less than National in all the positions 
 I may take; and whenever I take ground which others have 
 thought, or may think, narrow, sectional, and dangerous to the 
 Union, I hope to give a reason, which will appear sufficient, at 
 least to some, why I think differently. 
 
 And, as this subject is no other, than part and parcel of the 
 larger general question of domestic slavery, I wish to make 
 and to keep the distinction between the existing institution, 
 and the extension of it, so broad, and so clear, that no honest 
 man can misunderstand me, and no dishonest one, successfully 
 misrepresent me. 
 
 In order to [get?] a clear understanding of what the Missouri 
 Compromise is, a short history of the preceding kindred subjects 
 will perhaps be proper. When we established our independence, 
 we did not own, or claim, the country to which this compromise 
 applies. Indeed, strictly speaking, the confederacy then owned no 
 country at all; the States respectively owned the country within 
 
284 ABRAHAM LINCOLN: 
 
 their limits; and some of them owned territory beyond their strict 
 State limits. Virginia thus owned the North-Western territory — 
 the country out of which the principal part of Ohio, all Indiana, 
 all Illinois, all Michigan and all Wisconsin, have since been 
 formed. She also owned (perhaps within her then limits) what 
 has since been formed into the State of Kentucky. North Carolina 
 thus owned what is now the State of Tennessee; and South Caro- 
 lina and Georgia, in separate parts, owned what are now Missis- 
 sippi and Alabama. Connecticut, I think, owned the little remain- 
 ing part of Ohio — being the same where they now send Giddings 
 to Congress, and beat all creation at making cheese. These terri- 
 tories, together with the States themselves, constituted all the 
 country over which the confederacy then claimed any sort of 
 jurisdiction. We were then living under the Articles of Confedera- 
 tion, which were superseded by the Constitution several years 
 afterwards. The question of ceding these territories to the general 
 government was set on foot. Mr. Jefferson, the author of the 
 Declaration of Independence, and otherwise a chief actor in the 
 Revolution; then a delegate in Congress; afterwards twice Presi- 
 dent; who was, is, and perhaps will continue to be, the most 
 distinguished politician of our history; a Virginian by birth and 
 continued residence, and withal, a slave-holder; conceived the 
 idea of taking that occasion, to prevent slavery ever going into 
 the north-western territory. He prevailed on the Virginia legisla- 
 ture to adopt his views, and to cede the territory, making the 
 prohibition of slavery therein, a condition of the deed.* Congress 
 accepted the cession, with the condition; and in the first Ordi- 
 nance ( which the acts of Congress were then called ) for the gov- 
 ernment of the territory, provided that slavery should never be 
 permitted therein. This is the famed ordinance of '87 so often 
 spoken of. Thenceforward, for sixty-one years, and until in 1848, 
 the last scrap of this territory came into the Union as the State 
 of Wisconsin, all parties acted in quiet obedience to this ordi- 
 nance. It is now what Jefferson foresaw and intended — the happy 
 
 * " 'Mr. Lincoln afterward authorized the correction of the error into which the 
 report here falls, with regard to the prohibition being made a condition of the deed. 
 It was not a condition/ " — Nicolay and Hay, Complete Works of Abraham Lincoln, 
 Vol. II, p. 194. 
 
 I 
 
HIS SPEECHES AND WRITINGS 285 
 
 home of teeming millions of free, white, prosperous people, and 
 no slave amongst them. 
 
 Thus, with the author of the declaration of Independence, 
 the policy of prohibiting slavery in new territory originated. 
 Thus, away back of the Constitution, in the pure, fresh, free 
 breath of the revolution, the State of Virginia, and the National 
 Congress put that policy in practice. — Thus, through sixty odd of 
 the best years of the republic did that policy steadily work to its 
 great and beneficent end. And thus, in those five states, and five 
 millions of free, enterprising people, we have before us the rich 
 fruits of this policy. But now new light breaks upon us. — Now 
 Congress declares this ought never to have been; and the like of 
 it, must never be again. — The sacred right of self-government is 
 grossly violated by it! We even find some men, who drew their 
 first breath, and every other breath of their lives, under this very 
 restriction, now live in dread of absolute suffocation, if they 
 should be restricted in the "sacred right'' of taking slaves to 
 Nebraska. That perfect liberty they sigh for — the liberty of 
 making slaves of other people — Jefferson never thought of; their 
 own father never thought of, they never thought of themselves, 
 a year ago. How fortunate for them, they did not sooner become 
 sensible of their great misery! Oh, how difficult it is to treat with 
 respect such assaults upon all we have ever really held sacred! 
 
 But to return to history. In 1803 we purchased what was 
 then called Louisiana, of France. It included the now States of 
 Louisiana, Arkansas, Missouri, and Iowa; also the territory of 
 Minnesota, and the present bone of contention, Kansas and 
 Nebraska. Slavery already existed among the French at New 
 Orleans; and to some extent at St. Louis. In 1812 Louisiana came 
 into the Union as a slave state, without controversy. In 1818 or 
 19, Missouri showed signs of a wish to come in with slavery. 
 This was resisted by Northern members of Congress; and thus 
 began the first great slavery agitation in the nation. This con- 
 troversy lasted several months, and became very angry and 
 exciting; the House of Representatives voting steadily for the 
 prohibition of slavery in Missouri, and the Senate voting as 
 steadily against it. Threats of breaking up the Union were freely 
 made; and the ablest public men of the day became seriously 
 
286 ABRAHAM LINCOLN: 
 
 alarmed. At length a compromise was made, in which, like all 
 compromises, both sides yielded something. It was a law passed 
 on the 6th day of March, 1820, providing that Missouri might 
 come into the Union with slavery, but that in all the remaining 
 part of the territory purchased of France, which lies north of 
 36 degrees and 80 minutes north latitude, slavery should never 
 be permitted. This provision of law, is the Missouri Compromise. 
 In excluding slavery north of the line, the same language is em- 
 ployed as in the ordinance of '87. It directly applied to Iowa, 
 Minnesota, and to the present bone of contention, Kansas and 
 Nebraska. Whether there should or should not, be slavery south 
 of that line, nothing was said in the law; but Arkansas constituted 
 the principal remaining part, south of the line; and it has since 
 been admitted as a slave state, without serious controversy. More 
 recently, Iowa, north of the line, came in as a free state without 
 controversy. Still later, Minnesota, north of the line, had a terri- 
 torial organization without controversy. Texas principally south 
 of the line, and west of Arkansas; though originally within the 
 purchase from France, had, in 1819, been traded off to Spain, in 
 our treaty for the acquisition of Florida. It had thus become a part 
 of Mexico. Mexico revolutionized and became independent of 
 Spain. American citizens began settling rapidly, with their slaves, 
 in the southern part of Texas. Soon they revolutionized against 
 Mexico, and established an independent government of their 
 own, adopting a constitution, with slavery, strongly resembling 
 the constitutions of our slave states. By still another rapid move, 
 Texas, claiming a boundary much further West, than when we 
 parted with her in 1819, was brought back to the United States, 
 and admitted into the Union as a slave state. There then was little 
 or no settlement in the northern part of Texas, a considerable por- 
 tion of which lay north of the Missouri line; and in the resolutions 
 admitting her into the Union, the Missouri restriction was expressly 
 extended westward across her territory. This was in 1845, only 
 nine years ago. 
 
 Thus originated the Missouri Compromise; and thus has it 
 been respected down to 1845. — And even four years later, in 
 1849, our distinguished Senator, in a public address, held the 
 following language in relation to it: 
 
 
HIS SPEECHES AND WRITINGS 287 
 
 "The Missouri Compromise had been in practical operation 
 for about a quarter of a century, and had received the sanction 
 and approbation of men of all parties in every section of the 
 Union. It had allayed all sectional jealousies and irritations grow- 
 ing out of this vexed question, and harmonized and tranquilized 
 the whole country. It has given to Henry Clay, as its prominent 
 champion, the proud sobriquet of the "Great Pacificator," and by 
 that title and for that service, his political friends had repeatedly 
 appealed to the people to rally under his standard, as a presi- 
 dential candidate, as the man who had exhibited the patriotism 
 and the power to suppress, an unholy and treasonable agitation, 
 and preserve the Union. He was not aware that any man or any 
 party from any section of the Union, had ever urged as an objec- 
 tion to Mr. Clay, that he was the great champion of the Missouri 
 Compromise. On the contrary, the effort was made by the oppo- 
 nents of Mr. Clay, to prove that he was not entitled to the exclu- 
 sive merit of that great patriotic measure, and that the honor was 
 equally due to others as well as to him, for securing its adoption — 
 that it had its origin in the hearts of all patriotic men, who de- 
 sired to preserve and perpetuate the blessings of our glorious 
 Union — an origin akin that of the Constitution of the United 
 States, conceived in the same spirit of fraternal affection, and 
 calculated to remove forever, the only danger, which seemed to 
 threaten, at some distant day, to sever the social bond of union. 
 All the evidences of public opinion at that day, seemed to in- 
 dicate that this Compromise had been canonized in the hearts of 
 the American people, as a sacred thing which no ruthless hand 
 would ever be reckless enough to disturb/' 
 
 I do not read this extract to involve Judge Douglas in an 
 inconsistency — If he afterwards thought he had been wrong, it 
 was right for him to change — I bring this forward merely to 
 show the high estimate placed on the Missouri Compromise by all 
 parties up to so late as the year 1849. 
 
 But, going back a little, in point of time, our war with Mexico 
 broke out in 1846. When Congress was about adjourning that 
 session, President Polk asked them to place two millions of dollars 
 
288 ABRAHAM LINCOLN: 
 
 under his control, to be used by him in the recess, if found prac- 
 ticable and expedient, in negotiating a treaty of peace with 
 Mexico, and acquiring some part of her territory. — A bill was duly 
 got up, for the purpose, and was progressing swimmingly, in the 
 House of Representatives, when a member by the name of David 
 Wilmot, a democrat from Pennsylvania, moved as an amendment 
 "Provided that in any territory thus acquired, there shall never 
 be slavery." 
 
 This is the origin of the far-famed "Wilmot Proviso/' It 
 created a great flutter; but it stuck like wax, was voted into the 
 bill, and the bill passed with it through the House. The Senate, 
 however, adjourned without final action on it and so both appro- 
 priation and proviso were lost, for the time. — The war continued, 
 and at the next session, the President renewed his request for 
 the appropriation, enlarging the amount, I think, to three million. 
 Again came the proviso; and defeated the measure. — Congress 
 adjourned again, and the war went on. In Dec. 1847, the new 
 congress assembled. — I was in the lower House that term. — The 
 "Wilmot Proviso" or the principle of it, was constantly coming up 
 in some shape or other, and I think I may venture to say I voted 
 for it at least forty times; during the short term I was there. The 
 Senate, however, held it in check, and it never became a law. In 
 the spring of 1848 a treaty of peace was made with Mexico; by 
 which we obtained that portion of her country which now consti- 
 tutes the territories of New Mexico and Utah, and the now state 
 of California. By this treaty the Wilmot Proviso was defeated, as 
 so far as it was intended to be a condition of the acquisition of 
 territory. Its friends, however, were still determined to find some 
 way to restrain slavery from getting into the new country. This 
 new acquisition lay directly west of our old purchase from France, 
 and extended west to the Pacific Ocean — and was so situated 
 that if the Missouri line should be extended straight west, the 
 new country would be divided by such extended line, leaving 
 some north and some south of it. On Judge Douglas' motion a 
 bill, or provision of a bill, passed the Senate to so extend the 
 Missouri line. The Proviso men in the House, including myself, 
 voted it down, because by implication, it gave up the southern 
 part to slavery, while we were bent on having it all free. 
 
HIS SPEECHES AND WRITINGS 289 
 
 In the fall of 1848 the gold mines were discovered in Cali- 
 fornia. This attracted people to it with unprecedented rapidity, 
 so that on, or soon after, the meeting of the new congress in 
 Dec, 1849, she already had a population of nearly a hundred 
 thousand, had called a convention, formed a state constitution, 
 excluding slavery, and was knocking for admission into the 
 Union. — The Proviso men, of course, were for letting her in, but 
 the Senate, always true to the other side, would not consent to 
 her admission. And there California stood, kept out of the Union, 
 because she would not let slavery into her borders. Under all the 
 circumstances perhaps this was not wrong. There were other 
 points of dispute, connected with the general question of slavery, 
 which equally needed adjustment. The South clamored for a 
 more efficient fugitive slave law. The North clamored for the 
 abolition of a peculiar species of slave trade in the District of 
 Columbia, in connection with which, in view from the windows 
 of the capitol, a sort of negro-livery stable, where droves of 
 negroes were collected, temporarily kept, and finally taken to 
 Southern markets, precisely like droves of horses, had been 
 openly maintained for fifty years. Utah and New Mexico needed 
 territorial governments; and whether slavery should or should 
 not be prohibited within them, was another question. The in- 
 definite western boundary of Texas was to be settled. She was 
 received a slave state; and consequently the farther west the 
 slavery men could push her boundary, the more slave country 
 they secured. And the farther east the slavery opponents could 
 thrust the boundary back, the less slave ground was secured. Thus 
 this was just as clearly a slavery question as any of the others. 
 
 These points all needed adjustment; and they were held up, 
 perhaps wisely, to make them help to adjust one another. The 
 Union, now, as in 1820, was thought to be in danger; and devo- 
 tion to the Union rightfully inclined men to yield somewhat, in 
 points where nothing else could have so inclined them. A com- 
 promise was finally effected. The South got their new fugitive- 
 slave law; and the North got California, (the far best part of our 
 acquisition from Mexico,) as a free State. The South got a provi- 
 sion that New Mexico and Utah, when admitted as States, may 
 come in with or without slavery as they may then choose; and 
 
290 ABRAHAM LINCOLN: 
 
 the North got the slave-trade abolished in the District of Colum- 
 bia. The North got the western boundary of Texas, thence further 
 back eastward than the South desired; but, in turn, they gave 
 Texas ten millions of dollars, with which to pay her old debts. 
 This is the compromise of 1850. 
 
 Preceding the presidential election of 1852, each of the great 
 political parties, democrats and whigs, met in convention and 
 adopted resolutions endorsing the compromise of '50, as a "final- 
 ity," a final settlement, so far as these parties could make it so, 
 of all slavery agitation. Previous to this, in 1851, the Illinois Legis- 
 lature had indorsed it. 
 
 During this long period of time Nebraska had remained, 
 substantially an uninhabited country, but now emigration to, and 
 settlement within it began to take place. It is about one third as 
 large as the present United States, and its importance so long 
 overlooked, begins to come into view. The restriction of slavery 
 by the Missouri Compromise directly applies to it; in fact, was 
 first made, and has since been maintained, expressly for it. In 
 1853, a bill to give it a territorial government passed the House 
 of Representatives, and, in the hands of Judge Douglas, failed of 
 passing the Senate only for want of time. This bill contained no 
 repeal of the Missouri Compromise. Indeed, when it was assailed 
 because it did not contain such repeal, Judge Douglas defended 
 it in its existing form. On January 4th, 1854, Judge Douglas in- 
 troduces a new bill to give Nebraska territorial government. He 
 accompanies this bill with a report, in which last, he expressly 
 recommends that the Missouri Compromise shall neither be 
 affirmed nor repealed. 
 
 Before long the bill is so modified as to make two territories 
 instead of one; calling the southern one Kansas. 
 
 Also, about a month after the introduction of the bill, on the 
 judge's own motion, it is so amended as to declare the Missouri 
 Compromise inoperative and void; and, substantially, that the 
 people who go and settle there may establish slavery, or exclude 
 it, as they may see fit. In this shape the bill passed both branches 
 of congress, and became a law. 
 
 This is the repeal of the Missouri Compromise. The forego- 
 ing history may not be precisely accurate in every particular; but 
 
HIS SPEECHES AND WRITINGS 291 
 
 I am sure it is sufficiently so, for all the uses I shall attempt to 
 make of it, and in it, we have before us, the chief material en- 
 abling us to correctly judge whether the repeal of the Missouri 
 Compromise is right or wrong. 
 
 I think, and shall try to show, that it is wrong; wrong in its 
 direct effect, letting slavery into Kansas and Nebraska — and 
 wrong in its prospective principle, allowing it to spread to every 
 other part of the wide world, where men can be found inclined 
 to take it. 
 
 This declared indifference, but, as I must think, covert real 
 zeal for the spread of slavery, I can not 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 
 really good men amongst ourselves into an open war with the 
 very fundamental principles of civil liberty — criticizing the 
 Declaration of Independence, and insisting that there is no right 
 principle of action but self-interest. 
 
 Before proceeding, let me say that I think I have no 
 prejudice against the Southern people. They are just what we 
 would be in their situation. If slavery did not now exist amongst 
 them, they would not introduce it. If it did now exist amongst 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. We know that some southern men do free their slaves, 
 go north, and become tip-top abolitionists; while some northern 
 ones go south, and become most cruel slave-masters. 
 
 When southern people tell us they are no more responsible 
 for the origin of slavery, than we; 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 understand and ap- 
 preciate the saving. 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 
 
292 ABRAHAM LINCOLN: 
 
 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 impossible. If they were all landed there in a day, 
 they would all perish in the next ten days; and there are not 
 surplus shipping and surplus money enough in the world 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 to 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 white people will not. Whether this feeling 
 accords with justice and sound judgment, is not the sole ques- 
 tion, if indeed, it is any part of it. A universal feeling, whether 
 well or ill-founded, can not be safely disregarded. We can not, 
 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. 
 
 When they remind us of their constitutional rights, I acknowl- 
 edge them, not grudgingly, but fully, and fairly; and I would 
 give them any legislation for the reclaiming of their fugitives, 
 which should not, in its stringency, be more likely to carry a free 
 man into slavery, than our ordinary criminal laws are to hang 
 an innocent one. 
 
 But all this, to my judgment, furnishes no more excuse for 
 permitting slavery to go into our own free territory, than it would 
 for reviving the African slave trade by law. The law which for- 
 bids the bringing of slaves from Africa; and that which has so 
 long forbid the taking them to Nebraska, can hardly be dis- 
 tinguished on any moral principle; and the repeal of the former 
 could find quite as plausible excuses as that of the latter. 
 
 The arguments by which the repeal of the Missouri Com- 
 promise is sought to be justified, are these: 
 
 First, that the Nebraska country needed a territorial govern- 
 ment. 
 
HIS SPEECHES AND WRITINGS 293 
 
 Second, that in various ways, the public had repudiated it, 
 and demanded the repeal; and therefore should not now com- 
 plain of it. 
 
 And lastly, that the repeal establishes a principle, which is 
 intrinsically right. 
 
 I will attempt an answer to each of them in its turn. 
 
 First, then, if that country was in need of a territorial organi- 
 zation, could it not have had it as well without as with the repeal? 
 Iowa and Minnesota, to both of which the Missouri restriction 
 applied, had, without its repeal, each in succession, territorial or- 
 ganizations. And even, the year before, a bill for Nebraska it- 
 self, was within an ace of passing, without the repealing clause; 
 and this in the hands of the same men who are now the cham- 
 pions of repeal. Why no necessity then for the repeal? But still 
 later, when this very bill was first brought in, it contained no 
 repeal. But, say they, because the public had demanded, or 
 rather commanded the repeal, the repeal was to accompany the 
 organization, whenever that should occur. 
 
 Now, I deny that the public ever demanded any such thing 
 — ever repudiated the Missouri Compromise — ever commanded 
 its repeal. I deny it, and call for the proof. It is not contended, I 
 believe, that any such command has ever been given in express 
 terms. It is only said that it was done in principle. The support of 
 the Wilmot Proviso, is the first fact mentioned, to prove that 
 the Missouri restriction was repudiated in principle, and the 
 second is, the refusal to extend the Missouri line over the country 
 acquired from Mexico. These are near enough alike to be treated 
 together. The one was to exclude the chances of slavery from the 
 whole new acquisition by the lump; and the other was to reject 
 a division of it, by which one half was to be given up to those 
 chances. Now whether this was a repudiation of the Missouri line, 
 in principle, depends upon whether the Missouri law contained 
 any principle requiring the line to be extended over the country 
 acquired from Mexico. I contend it did not. I insist that it con- 
 tained no general principle, but that it was, in every sense, 
 specific. That its terms limit it to the country purchased from 
 France, is undenied and undeniable. It could have no principle 
 beyond the intention of those who made it. They did not intend 
 
294 ABRAHAM LINCOLN: 
 
 to extend the line to country which they did not own. If they 
 intended to extend it, in the event of acquiring additional terri- 
 tory, why did they not say so? It was just as easy to say, that "in 
 all the country west of the Mississippi, which we now own, 
 or may hereafter acquire there shall never be slavery," as to say 
 what they did say; and they would have said it if they had meant 
 it. An intention to extend the law is not only not mentioned in the 
 law, but is not mentioned in any contemporaneous history. Both 
 the law itself, and the history of the times are a blank as to any 
 principle of extension; and by neither the known rules of con- 
 struing statutes and contracts, nor by common sense, can any such 
 principle be inferred. 
 
 Another fact showing the specific character of the Missouri 
 law — showing that it intended no more than it expressed — show- 
 ing that the line was not intended as a universal dividing line 
 between free and slave territory, present and prospective — north 
 of which slavery could never go — is the fact that by that very 
 law, Missouri came in as a slave State, north of the line. If that 
 law contained any prospective principle, the whole law must be 
 looked to in order to ascertain what the principle was. And by 
 this rule, the South could fairly contend that inasmuch as they 
 got one slave state north of the line at the inception of the law, 
 they have the right to have another given them north of it occa- 
 sionally — now and then in the indefinite westward extension of 
 the line. This demonstrates the absurdity of attempting to deduce 
 a prospective principle from the Missouri Compromise line. 
 
 When we voted for the Wilmot Proviso, we were voting to 
 keep slavery out of the whole Missouri [Mexican?] acquisition; 
 and little did we think we were thereby voting, to let it into 
 Nebraska, laying several hundred miles distant. When we voted 
 against extending the Missouri line, little did we think we were 
 voting to destroy the old line, then of near thirty years standing. 
 To argue that we thus repudiated the Missouri Compromise is no 
 less absurd than it would be to argue that because we have, so 
 far, forborne to acquire Cuba, we have thereby, in principle, re- 
 pudiated our former acquisitions, and determined to throw them 
 out of the Union! No less absurd than it would be to say that be- 
 cause I may have refused to build an addition to my house, I 
 
HIS SPEECHES AND WRITINGS 295 
 
 thereby have decided to destroy the existing house! And if I 
 catch you setting fire to my house, you will turn upon me and say 
 I instructed you to do it! The most conclusive argument, 
 however, that, while voting for the Wilmot Proviso, and while 
 voting against the extension of the Missouri line, we never 
 thought of disturbing the original Missouri Compromise, is 
 found in the fact that there was then, and still is, an unorganized 
 tract of fine country, nearly as large as the State of Missouri, lying 
 immediately west of Arkansas, and south of the Missouri Com- 
 promise line; and that we never attempted to prohibit slavery as 
 to it. I wish particular attention to this. It adjoins the original 
 Missouri Compromise line, by its northern boundary; and con- 
 sequently is part of the country, into which, by implication, 
 slavery was permitted to go, by that compromise. There it has 
 lain open ever since, and there it still lies. And yet no effort has 
 been made at any time to wrest it from the South. In all our 
 struggles to prohibit slavery within our Mexican acquisitions, we 
 never so much as lifted a finger to prohibit it, as to this tract. 
 Is not this entirely conclusive that at all times, we have held the 
 Missouri Compromise as a sacred thing; even when against our- 
 selves, as well as when for us? 
 
 Senator Douglas sometimes says the Missouri line itself was, 
 in principle, only an extension of the line of the ordinance of '87 — 
 that is to say, an extension of the Ohio River. I think this is weak 
 enough on its face. I will remark, however, that, as a glance at 
 the map will show, the Missouri line is a long way farther south 
 than the Ohio; and that if our Senator, in proposing his extension, 
 had stuck to the principle of jogging southward, perhaps it might 
 not have been voted down so readily. 
 
 But next it is said that the compromises of '50 and the ratifi- 
 cation of them by both political parties, in '52, established a new 
 principle, which required the repeal of the Missouri Compromise. 
 This again I deny. I deny it, and demand the proof. I have 
 already stated fully what the compromises of '50 are. The particu- 
 lar part of those measures, for which the virtual repeal of the 
 Missouri Compromise is sought to be inferred (for it is admitted 
 they contain nothing about it, in express terms) is the provision 
 in the Utah and New Mexico laws, which permits them when they 
 
296 ABRAHAM LINCOLN: 
 
 seek admission into the Union as States, to come in with or with- 
 out slavery as they shall then see fit. Now I insist this provision 
 was made for Utah and New Mexico, and for no other place 
 whatever. It had no more direct reference to Nebraska than it 
 had to the territories of the moon. But, say they, it had reference 
 to Nebraska, in principle. Let us see. The North consented to this 
 provision, not because they considered it right in itself; but be- 
 cause they were compensated — paid for it. — They, at the same 
 time, got California into the Union as a free State. This was far 
 the best part of all they had struggled for by the Wilmot Proviso. 
 They also got the area of slavery somewhat narrowed in the 
 settlement of the boundary of Texas. Also, they got the slave 
 trade abolished in the District of Columbia. For all these de- 
 sirable objects the North could afford to yield something; and 
 they did yield to the South the Utah and New Mexico provision. 
 I do not mean that the whole North, or even a majority, yielded, 
 when the law passed; but enough yielded, when added to the 
 vote of the South, to carry the measure. Now can it be pretended 
 that the principle of this arrangement requires us to permit the 
 same provision to be applied to Nebraska, without any equivalent 
 at all? Give us another free State; press the boundary of Texas 
 still further back; give us another step toward the destruction of 
 slavery in the District, and you present us a similar case. But ask 
 us not to repeat, for nothing, what you paid for in the first in- 
 stance. If you wish the thing again, pay again. That is the prin- 
 ciple of the compromises of '50, if indeed they had any principles 
 beyond their specific terms — it was the system of equivalents. 
 
 Again, if Congress, at that time, intended that all future terri- 
 tories should, when admitted as States, come in with or without 
 slavery, at their own option, why did it not say so? With such 
 an universal provision, all know the bills could not have passed. 
 Did they, then — could they — establish a principle contrary to 
 their own intention? Still further, if they intended to establish 
 the principle that wherever Congress had control, it should be 
 left to the people to do as they thought fit with slavery, why did 
 they not authorize the people of the District of Columbia at their 
 adoption to abolish slavery within these limits? I personally know 
 that this has not been left undone, because it was unthought of. 
 
HIS SPEECHES AND WRITINGS 297 
 
 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 system of gradual emancipation, with compensa- 
 tion to owners, would meet the approbation of a large majority of 
 the white people of the District. But without the action of Con- 
 gress they could say nothing; and Congress said "no." In the 
 measures of 1850, Congress had the subject of slavery in the Dis- 
 trict expressly on hand. If they were then establishing the prin- 
 ciple of allowing the people to do as they please with slavery, 
 why did they not apply the principle to that people? 
 
 Again, it is claimed that by the Resolutions of the Illinois 
 Legislature, passed in 1851, the repeal of the Missouri Com- 
 promise was demanded. This I deny also. Whatever may be 
 worked out by a criticism of the language of those resolutions, 
 the people have never understood them as being any more than 
 an endorsement of the compromises of 1850, and a release of our 
 Senators from voting for the Wilmot Proviso. The whole people 
 are living witnesses, that this only, was their view. Finally, it is 
 asked "If we did not mean to apply the Utah and New Mexico 
 provision, to all future territories, what did we mean, when we, 
 in 1852, endorsed the compromise of '50?" 
 
 For myself, I can answer this question most easily. I meant 
 not to ask a repeal, or modification of the fugitive slave law. I 
 meant not to ask for the abolition of slavery in the District of 
 Columbia. I meant not to resist the admission of Utah and New 
 Mexico, even should thev ask to come in as slave States. I meant 
 nothing about additional territories, because, as I understood, we 
 then had no territory whose character as to slavery was not al- 
 ready settled. As to Nebraska, I regarded its character as being 
 fixed, by the Missouri Compromise, for thirty years — as unalter- 
 ably fixed as that of my own home in Illinois. As to new acquisi- 
 tions I said "sufficient unto the day is the evil thereof." — When we 
 make new acquaintances [acquisitions?], we will, as heretofore, 
 try to manage them somehow. That is my answer. That is what 
 I meant and said; and I appeal to the people to say, each for him- 
 self, whether that was not also the universal meaning of the 
 free States. 
 
 And now, in turn, let me ask a few questions. If by any, or all 
 
298 ABRAHAM LINCOLN: 
 
 these matters, the repeal of the Missouri Compromise was com- 
 manded, why was not the command sooner obeyed? Why was the 
 repeal omitted in the Nebraska bill of 1853? — Why was it 
 omitted in the original bill of 1854? Why, in the accompanying 
 report, was such a repeal characterized as a departure from the 
 course pursued in 1850? and its continued omission recom- 
 mended? 
 
 I am aware Judge Douglas now argues that the subsequent 
 express repeal is no substantial alteration of the bill. This argu- 
 ment seems wonderful to me. It is as if one should argue that 
 white and black are not different. He admits, however, that 
 there is a literal change in the bill; and that he made the change 
 in deference to other Senators, who would not support the bill 
 without. This proves that those other Senators thought the change 
 a substantial one; and that the Judge thought their opinions 
 worth deferring to. His own opinions, therefore, seem not to rest 
 on a very firm basis even in his own mind — and I suppose the 
 world believes, and will continue to believe, that precisely on the 
 substance of that change this whole agitation has arisen. 
 
 I conclude then, that the public never demanded the repeal 
 of the Missouri Compromise. 
 
 I now come to consider whether the repeal, with its avowed 
 principle, is intrinsically right. I insist that it is not. Take the 
 particular case. A controversy had arisen between the advocates 
 and opponents of slavery, in relation to its establishment within 
 the country we had purchased of France. The southern, and then 
 best part of the purchase, was already in as a slave State. — The 
 controversy was settled by also letting Missouri in as a slave 
 State; but with the agreement that within all the remaining part 
 of the purchase, north of a certain line, there should never be 
 slavery. As to what was to be done with the remaining part 
 south of the line, nothing was said; but perhaps the fair implica- 
 tion was, that it should come in with slavery if it should so choose. 
 The southern part, except a portion heretofore mentioned, after- 
 wards did come in with slavery, as the State of Arkansas. All 
 these many years since 1820, the Northern part had remained a 
 wilderness. At length settlements began in it also. In due course, 
 Iowa, came in as a free State, and Minnesota was given a terri- 
 
HIS SPEECHES AND WRITINGS 299 
 
 torial government, without removing the slavery restriction. 
 Finally the sole remaining part, north of the line, Kansas and 
 Nebraska, was to be organized; and it is proposed, and carried, to 
 blot out the old dividing line of thirty-four years standing, and 
 to open the whole of that country to the introduction of slavery. 
 Now, this, to my mind, is manifestly unjust. After an angry and 
 dangerous controversy, the parties made friends by dividing the 
 bone of contention. The one party first appropriates her own 
 share, beyond all power to be disturbed in the possession of it; 
 and then seizes the share of the other party. It is as if two starv- 
 ing men had divided their only loaf; the one had hastily swallowed 
 his half, and then grabbed the other half just as he was putting 
 it to his mouth. 
 
 Let me here drop the main argument, to notice what I 
 consider rather an inferior matter. It is argued that slavery will 
 not go to Kansas and Nebraska, in any event. This is a palliation — 
 a lullaby. I have some hope that it will not; but let us not be too 
 confident. As to climate, a glance at the map shows that there 
 are five slave States — Delaware, Maryland, Virginia, Kentucky, 
 and Missouri — and also the District of Columbia, all north of the 
 Missouri Compromise line. The census returns of 1850 show that, 
 within these, there are 867,276 slaves — being more than one- 
 fourth of all the slaves in the nation. 
 
 It is not climate, then, that will keep slavery out of these 
 territories. Is there any thing in the peculiar nature of the coun- 
 try? Missouri adjoins these territories, by her entire western 
 boundary, and slavery is already within every one of her western 
 counties. I have even heard it said that there are more slaves, in 
 proportion to whites, in the north western county of Missouri, 
 than within any county of the State. Slavery pressed entirely up 
 to the old western boundary of the State, and when, rather re- 
 cently, a part of that boundary, at the north-west was moved out 
 a little farther west, slavery followed on quite up to the new 
 line. Now, when the restriction is removed, what is to prevent 
 it from going still further? Climate will not. — No peculiarity of 
 the country will — nothing in nature will. Will the disposition of 
 the people prevent it? Those nearest the scene, are all in favor 
 of the extension. The yankees, who are opposed to it, may be 
 
300 ABRAHAM LINCOLN: 
 
 more numerous; but, in military phrase, the battle-field is too 
 far from their base of operations. 
 
 But it is said, there now is no law in Nebraska on the subject 
 of slavery; and that, in such case, taking a slave there, operates 
 his freedom. That is good book-law; but is not the rule of actual 
 practice. Wherever slavery is, it has been first introduced with- 
 out law. The oldest laws we find concerning it, are not laws in- 
 troducing it; but regulating it, as an already existing thing. A 
 white man takes his slave to Nebraska now; who will inform the 
 negro that he is free? — Who will take him before court to test 
 the question of his freedom? In ignorance of his legal emancipa- 
 tion, he is kept chopping, splitting and plowing. Others are 
 brought, and move on in the same track. At last, if ever the time 
 for voting comes, on the question of slavery, the institution al- 
 ready in fact exists in the country, and cannot well be removed. 
 The facts of its presence, and the difficulty of its removal, will 
 carry the vote in its favor. Keep it out until a vote is taken, and a 
 vote in favor of it, can not be got in any population of forty 
 thousand, on earth, who have been drawn together by the 
 ordinary motives of emigration and settlement. To get slaves into 
 the country simultaneously with the whites, in the incipient stages 
 of settlement, is the precise stake played for, and won in this 
 Nebraska measure. 
 
 The question is asked us, "If slaves will go in, notwithstand- 
 ing the general principle of law liberates them, why would they 
 not equally go in against positive statute law? — go in, even if the 
 Missouri restriction were maintained?" I answer, because it takes 
 a much bolder man to venture in, with his property, in the latter 
 case, than in the former— -because the positive congressional en- 
 actment is known to, and respected by all, or nearly all; whereas 
 the negative principle that no law is free law, is not much known 
 except among lawyers. We have some experience of this practical 
 difference. In spite of the Ordinance of '87, a few negroes were 
 brought into Illinois, and held in a state of quasi slavery; not 
 enough, however, to carry a vote of the people in favor of the in- 
 stitution when they came to form a constitution. But in the 
 adjoining Missouri country, where there was no ordinance of 
 '87 — was no restriction — they were carried ten times, nay a hun- 
 
HIS SPEECHES AND WRITINGS 301 
 
 dred times, as fast, and actually made a slave State. This is fact 
 — naked fact. 
 
 Another lullaby argument is, that taking slaves to new 
 countries does not increase their number, does not make any one 
 slave who otherwise would be free. There is some truth in this, 
 and I am glad of it, but it is not wholly true. The African slave 
 trade is not yet effectually suppressed; and if we make a reason- 
 able deduction for the white people amongst us, who are for- 
 eigners, and the descendants of foreigners, arriving here since 
 1808, we shall find the increase of the black population out- 
 running that of the white, to an extent unaccountable, except by 
 supposing that some of them too, have been coming from Africa. 
 If this be so, the opening of new countries to the institution, in- 
 creases the demand for, and augments the price of slaves, and so 
 does, in fact, make slaves of freemen by causing them to be 
 brought from Africa, and sold into bondage. 
 
 But, however this may be, we know the opening of new 
 countries to slavery, tends to the perpetuation of the institution, 
 and so does keep men in slavery who otherwise would be free. 
 This result we do not feel like favoring, and we are under no 
 legal obligation to suppress our feelings in this respect. 
 
 Equal justice to the South, it is said, requires us to consent to 
 the extending of slavery to new countries. That is to say, inas- 
 much as you do not object to my taking my hog to Nebraska, 
 therefore I must not object to you taking your slave. Now, I 
 admit this is perfectly logical, if there is no difference between 
 hogs and negroes. But while you thus require me to deny the 
 humanity of the negro, I wish to ask whether you of the south 
 yourselves, have ever been willing to do as much? It is kindly pro- 
 vided that of all those who come into the world, only a small 
 percentage are natural tyrants. That percentage is no larger in 
 the slave States than in the free. The great majority, south as well 
 as north, have human sympathies, of which they can no more 
 divest themselves than they can of their sensibility to physical 
 pain. These sympathies in the bosoms of the southern people, 
 manifest in many ways, their sense of the wrong of slavery, and 
 their consciousness that, after all, there is humanity in the negro. 
 If they deny this, let me address them a few plain questions. In 
 
302 ABRAHAM LINCOLN: 
 
 1820 you joined the north, almost unanimously, in declaring the 
 African slave trade piracy, and in annexing to it the punishment of 
 death. Why did you do this? If you did not feel that it was wrong, 
 why did you join in providing that men should be hung for it? The 
 practice was no more than bringing wild negroes from Africa, 
 to sell to such as would buy them. But you never thought of hang- 
 ing men for catching and selling wild horses, wild buffaloes or 
 wild bears. 
 
 Again, you have amongst you, a sneaking individual, of 
 the class of native tyrants, known as the "slave-dealer." He 
 watches your necessities, and crawls up to buy your slave, at a 
 speculating price. If you cannot help it, you sell to him; but if you 
 can help it, you drive him from your door. You despise him utterly. 
 You do not recognize him as a friend, or even as an honest man. 
 Your children must not play with his; they may rollick freely with 
 the little negroes, but not with the "slave-dealer's" children. If you 
 are obliged to deal with him, you try to get through the job with- 
 out so much as touching him. It is common with you to join hands 
 with the men you meet; but with the slave-dealer you avoid the 
 ceremony — instinctively shrinking from the snaky contact. If he 
 grows rich and retires from business, you still remember him, 
 and still keep up the ban of non-intercourse upon him and his 
 family. Now why is this? You do not so treat the man who deals 
 in corn, cattle or tobacco. 
 
 And yet again, there are in the United States and territories, 
 including the District of Columbia, 433,643 free blacks. At $500 
 per head they are worth over two hundred millions of dollars. 
 How comes this vast amount of property to be running about 
 without owners? We do not see free horses or free cattle running 
 at large. How is this? All these free blacks are the descendants 
 of slaves, or have been slaves themselves, and they would be 
 slaves now, but for something which has operated on their 
 white owners, inducing them, at vast pecuniary sacrifices, to 
 liberate them. What is that something? Is there any mistaking 
 it? In all these cases it is your sense of justice, and human sym- 
 pathy, continually telling you, that the poor negro has some 
 natural right to himself — that those who deny it, and make mere 
 merchandise of him, deserve kickings, contempt and death. 
 
HIS SPEECHES AND WRITINGS 303 
 
 And now, why will you ask us to deny the humanity of 
 the slave? and estimate him only as the equal of the hog? Why 
 ask us to do what you will not do yourselves? Why ask us to do for 
 nothing, what two hundred million of dollars could not induce 
 you to do? 
 
 But one great argument in the support of the repeal of the 
 Missouri Compromise, is still to come. That argument is "the 
 sacred right of self government." It seems our distinguished 
 Senator has found great difficulty in getting his antagonists, even 
 in the Senate, to meet him fairly on this argument. Some poet 
 has said: 
 
 "Fools rush in where angels fear to tread." 
 
 At the hazzard [sic] of being thought one of the fools of this quota- 
 tion, I meet that argument — I rush in, I take that bull by the 
 horns. 
 
 I trust I understand, and truly estimate the right of self- 
 government. My faith in the proposition that each man should do 
 precisely as he pleases with all which is exclusively his own, lies 
 at the foundation of the sense of justice there is in me. I extend 
 the principles to communities of men, as well as to individuals. 
 I so extend it, because it is politically wise, as well as naturally 
 just; politically wise in saving us from broils about matters which 
 do not concern us. — Here or at Washington, I would not trouble 
 myself with the oyster laws of Virginia, or the cranberry laws of 
 Indiana. 
 
 The doctrine of self-government is right — absolutely and 
 eternally right — but it has no just application, as here attempted. 
 Or perhaps I should rather say that whether it has such appli- 
 cation depends upon whether a negro is not or is a man. If he is 
 not a man, why in that case, he who is a man may, as a matter of 
 self-government, do just as he pleases with him. But if the negro is 
 a man, is it not to that extent a total destruction of self-govern- 
 ment, to say that he too shall not govern himself? When the white 
 man governs himself that is self-government; but when he gov- 
 erns himself, and also governs another man, that is more than self- 
 government — that is despotism. If the negro is a man, why then 
 my ancient faith teaches me that "all men are created equal;" and 
 
304 ABRAHAM LINCOLN: 
 
 that there can be no moral right in connection with one man's 
 making a slave of another. 
 
 Judge Douglas frequently, with bitter irony and sarcasm, 
 paraphrases our argument by saying: "The white people of 
 Nebraska are good enough to govern themselves, but they are not 
 good enough to govern a few miserable negroes!!" 
 
 Well I doubt not that the people of Nebraska are, and will 
 continue to be as good as the average of people elsewhere. I do 
 not say the contrary. What I do say is, that no man is good enough 
 to govern another man, without that others consent. I say this is 
 the leading principle — the sheet anchor of American republican- 
 ism. Our Declaration of Independence says: 
 
 "We hold these truths to be self evident: That all men are 
 created equal; that they are endowed by their Creator with cer- 
 tain inalienable rights; that among these are life, liberty and the 
 pursuit of happiness. That to secure these rights, governments are 
 instituted among men, deriving their just powers from the 
 
 CONSENT OF THE GOVERNED." 
 
 I have quoted so much at this time merely to show that 
 according to our ancient faith, the just powers of governments are 
 derived from the consent of the governed. Now the relation of 
 masters and slaves is protanto, a total violation of this prin- 
 ciple. That master not only governs the slave without his consent; 
 but he governs him by a set of rules altogether different from 
 those which he prescribes for himself. Allow all the governed 
 an equal voice in the government, and that, and that only, is self- 
 government. 
 
 Let it not be said I am contending for the establishment of 
 political and social equality between the whites and blacks. I 
 have already said the contrary. I am not now combating the 
 argument of necessity, arising from the fact that the blacks 
 are already amongst us; but I am combating what is set up as 
 moral argument for allowing them to be taken where they 
 have never yet been — arguing against the extension of a bad 
 thing, which where it already exists we must of necessity, manage 
 as we best can. 
 
 In support of his application of the doctrine of self-govern- 
 
HIS SPEECHES AND WRITINGS 305 
 
 ment, Senator Douglas has sought to bring to his aid the opinions 
 and examples of our revolutionary fathers. I am glad he has done 
 this. I love the sentiments of those old-time men; and shall be 
 most happy to abide by their opinions. He shows us that when 
 it was in contemplation for the colonies to break off from Great 
 Britain, and set up a new government for themselves, several of 
 the states instructed their delegates to go for the measure, pro- 
 vided EACH STATE SHOULD BE ALLOWED TO REGULATE ITS DOMESTIC 
 
 concerns in its own way. I do not quote; but this in substance. 
 This was right. I see nothing objectionable in it. I also think it 
 probable that it had some reference to the existence of slavery 
 amongst them. I will not deny that it had. But had it, in any 
 reference, to the carrying of slavery into new countries? That is 
 the question; and we will let the fathers themselves answer it. 
 
 This same generation of men, and mostly the same individuals 
 of the generation, who declared this principle — who declared 
 independence — who fought the war of the revolution through — 
 who afterwards made the constitution under which we still live — 
 these same men passed the ordinance of '87, declaring that slavery 
 should never go to the north-west territory. I have no doubt 
 Judge Douglas thinks they were very inconsistent in this. It is a 
 question of discrimination between them and him. But there is not 
 an inch of ground left for his claiming that their opinions — their 
 example — their authority — are on his side in this controversy. 
 
 Again, is not Nebraska, while a territory, a part of us? Do we 
 not own the country? And if we surrender the control of it, do we 
 not surrender the right of self-government? It is part of ourselves. 
 If you say we shall not control it because it is only part, the 
 same is true of every other part; and when all the parts are gone, 
 what has become of the whole? What is then left of us? What use 
 for the General Government, when there is nothing left for it [to?] 
 govern? 
 
 But you say this question should be left to the people of. 
 Nebraska, because they are more particularly interested. If this 
 be the rule, you must leave it to each individual to say for him- 
 self whether he will have slaves. What better moral right have 
 thirty-one citizens of Nebraska to say, that the thirty-second shall 
 not hold slaves, than the people of the thirty-one States have to 
 
306 ABRAHAM LINCOLN*. 
 
 say that slavery shall not go into the thirty-second State at all? 
 
 But if it is a sacred right for the people of Nebraska to take 
 and hold slaves there, it is equally their sacred right to buy them 
 where they can buy them cheapest; and that undoubtedly will be 
 on the coast of Africa; provided you will consent to not hang 
 them for going there to buy them. You must remove this restric- 
 tion too, from the sacred right of self-government. I am aware 
 you say that taking slaves from the States to Nebraska, does not 
 make slaves of freemen; but the African slave-trader can say just 
 as much. He does not catch free negroes and bring them here. 
 He finds them already slaves in the hands of their black captors, 
 and he honestly buys them at the rate of about a red cotton hand- 
 kerchief a head. This is very cheap, and it is a great abridgment of 
 the sacred right of self-government to hang men for engaging in 
 this profitable trade! 
 
 Another important objection to this application of the right 
 of self-government, is that it enables the first few, to deprive 
 the succeeding many, of a free exercise of the right of self- 
 government. The first few may get slavery in, and the subsequent 
 many cannot easily get it out. How common is the remark now 
 in the slave States — "If we were only clear of our slaves, how 
 much better it would be for us." They are actually deprived of 
 the privilege of governing themselves as they would, by the action 
 of a very few, in the beginning. The same thing was true of the 
 whole nation at the time our constitution was formed. 
 
 Whether slavery shall go into Nebraska, or other new terri- 
 tories, is not a matter of exclusive concern to the people who may 
 go there. The whole nation is interested that the best use shall be 
 made of these territories. We want them for the homes of free 
 white people. This they cannot be, to any considerable extent, if 
 slavery shall be planted within them. Slave States are places for 
 poor white people to remove from; not to remove to. New 
 free States are the places for poor people to go to and better their 
 condition. For this use, the nation needs these territories. 
 
 Still further; there are constitutional relations between the 
 slave and free States, which are degrading to the latter. We are 
 under legal obligations to catch and return their runaway slaves 
 to them — a sort of dirty, disagreeable job which I believe, as a 
 
HIS SPEECHES AND WRITINGS 307 
 
 general rule, the slave-holders will not perform for one another. 
 Then again, in the control of the government — the management 
 of the partnership affairs — they have greatly the advantage of us. 
 By the constitution, each State has two Senators, each has a 
 number of Representatives, in proportion to the number of its 
 people — and each has a number of presidential electors, equal to 
 the whole number of its Senators and Representatives together. 
 But in ascertaining the number of the people, for this purpose, 
 five slaves are counted as being equal to three whites. The slaves 
 do not vote; they are only counted and so used as to swell the 
 influence of the white people's votes. The practical effect of this 
 is more aptly shown by a comparison of the States of South Caro- 
 lina and Maine. South Carolina has six representatives, and so has 
 Maine; South Carolina has eight presidential electors, and so has 
 Maine. This is precise equality so far; and, of course they are 
 equal in Senators, each having two. Thus in the control of the 
 government, the two States are equals precisely. But how are they 
 in the number of their white people? Maine has 581,813 — while 
 South Carolina has 274,567. Maine has twice as many as South 
 Carolina, and 32,679 over. — Thus each white man in South 
 Carolina is more than the double of any man in Maine. This is all 
 because South Carolina, besides her free people, has 384,984 
 slaves. The South Carolinian has precisely the same advantage 
 over the white man in every other free State, as well as in Maine. 
 He is more than the double of any one of us in this crowd. The 
 same advantage, but not to the same extent, is held by all the 
 citizens of the slave States, over those of the free; and it is an 
 absolute truth, without an exception, that there is no voter in any 
 slave State, but who has more legal power in the government, 
 than any voter in any free State. There is no instance of exact 
 equality; and the disadvantage is against us the whole chapter 
 through. This principle, in the aggregate, gives the slave States in 
 the present Congress, twenty additional representatives — being 
 seven more than the whole majority by which they passed the 
 Nebraska bill. 
 
 Now all this is manifestly unfair; yet I do not mention it to 
 complain of it, in so far as it is already settled. It is in the consti- 
 tution; and I do not, for that cause, or any other cause, propose 
 
308 ABRAHAM LINCOLN: 
 
 to destroy, or alter, or disregard the constitution. I stand to it, 
 fairly, fully, and firmly. 
 
 But when I am told I must leave it altogether to other 
 people to say whether new partners are to be bred up and 
 brought into the firm, on the same degrading terms against me, 
 I respectfully demur. I insist, that whether I shall be a whole 
 man, or only the half of one, in comparison with others, is a ques- 
 tion in which I am somewhat concerned; and one which no other 
 man can have a sacred right of deciding for me. If I am wrong in 
 this — if it really be a sacred right of self-government, in the 
 man who shall go to Nebraska, to decide whether he will be 
 the equal of me or the double of me, then, after he shall 
 have exercised that right, and thereby shall have reduced me to a 
 still smaller fraction of a man than I already am, I should like for 
 some gentleman, deeply skilled in the mysteries of sacred rights, 
 to provide himself with a microscope, and peep about, and find 
 out, if he can, what has become of my sacred rights! — They will 
 surely be too small for detection with the naked eye. 
 
 Finally, I insist that if there is any thing which it is the 
 duty of the whole people to never entrust to any hands but 
 their own, that thing is the preservation and perpetuity, of their 
 own liberties, and institutions. And if they shall think, as I do, 
 that the extension of slavery endangers them, more than any, or 
 all other causes, how recreant to themselves, if they submit the 
 question, and with it, the fate of their country, to a mere hand- 
 full of men, bent only on temporary self-interest. If this question 
 of slavery extension were an insignificant one — one having no 
 power to do harm — it might be shuffled aside in this way. But 
 being, as it is, the great Behemoth of danger, shall the strong 
 gripe of the nation be loosened upon him, to entrust him to the 
 hands of such feeble keepers? 
 
 I have done with this mighty argument, of self-government. 
 Go, sacred thing! Go in peace. 
 
 But Nebraska is urged as a great Union-saving measure. 
 Well, I too, go for saving the Union. Much as I hate slavery, I 
 would consent to the extension of it rather than see the Union 
 dissolved, just as I would consent to any great evil, to avoid a 
 greater one. But when I go to Union saving, I must believe, at 
 
HIS SPEECHES AND WRITINGS 309 
 
 least, that the means I employ have some adaptation to the end. 
 To my mind, Nebraska has no such adaptation. 
 
 "It hath no relish of salvation in it." 
 
 It is an aggravation, rather, of the only one thing which ever 
 endangers the Union. When it came upon us, all was peace and 
 quiet. The nation was looking to the forming of new bonds of 
 Union; and a long course of peace and prosperity seemed to lie 
 before us. In the whole range of possibility, there scarcely appears 
 to me to have been any thing, out of which the slavery agitation 
 could have been revived, except the very project of repealing the 
 Missouri Compromise. — Every inch of territory we owned, 
 already had a definite settlement of the slavery question, and by 
 which all parties were pledged to abide. Indeed, there was no 
 uninhabited country on the continent, which we could acquire; 
 if we except some extreme northern regions, which are wholly out 
 of the question. In this state of case, the genius of Discord him- 
 self, could scarcely have invented a way of again setting us by the 
 ears, but by turning back and destroying the peace measures of 
 the past. The councils of that genius seem to have prevailed, the 
 Missouri Compromise was repealed; and here we are, in the 
 midst of a new slavery agitation, such, I think, as we have never 
 seen before. Who is responsible for this? Is it those who resist 
 the measure; or those who, causelessly, brought it forward, and 
 pressed it through, having reason to know, and, in fact, knowing 
 it must and would be so resisted? It could not but be expected by 
 its author, that it would be looked upon as a measure for the 
 extension of slavery, aggravated by a gross breach of faith. Argue 
 as you will, and long as you will, this is the naked front and 
 aspect, of the measure. And in this aspect, it could not but 
 produce agitation. Slavery is founded in the selfishness of man's 
 nature — opposition to it, is [sic] his love of justice. These principles 
 are an eternal antagonism; and when brought into collision so 
 fiercely, as slavery extension brings them, shocks, and throes, and 
 convulsions must ceaselessly follow. Repeal the Missouri com- 
 promise — repeal all compromises — repeal the declaration of in- 
 dependence — repeal all past history, you still can not repeal 
 human nature. It still will be the abundance of man's heart, that 
 
310 ABRAHAM LINCOLN: 
 
 slavery extension is wrong; and out of the abundance of his heart, 
 his mouth will continue to speak. 
 
 The structure, too, of the Nebraska bill is very peculiar. The 
 people are to decide the question of slavery for themselves; 
 but when they are to decide, or how they are to decide; or 
 whether, when the question is once decided, it is to remain so, 
 or is to be subject to an indefinite succession of new trials, the law 
 does not say. Is it to be decided by the first dozen settlers who 
 arrive there? or is it to await the arrival of a hundred? Is it to be 
 decided by a vote of the people? or a vote of the legislature? or, 
 indeed, by a vote of any sort? To these questions, the law gives 
 no answer. There is a mystery about this; for when a member 
 proposed to give the legislature express authority to exclude 
 slavery, it was hooted down by the friends of the bill. This fact is 
 worth remembering. Some Yankees, in the east, are sending emi- 
 grants to Nebraska to exclude slavery from it; and, so far as I can 
 judge, they expect the question to be decided by voting, in some 
 way or other. But the Missourians are awake too. They are within 
 a stone's throw of the contested ground. They hold meetings, and 
 pass resolutions, in which not the slightest allusion to voting is 
 made. They resolve that slavery already exists in the territory; 
 that more shall go there; that they, remaining in Missouri, will 
 protect it; and that abolitionists shall be hung, or driven away. 
 Through all this, bowie-knives and six-shooters are seen plainly 
 enough; but never a glimpse of the ballot-box. And, really, what 
 is to be the result of this? Each party within, having numerous 
 and determined backers without, is it not probable that the 
 contest will come to blows, and bloodshed? Could there be a 
 more apt invention to bring about collision and violence, on the 
 slavery question, than this Nebraska project is? I do not charge, 
 or believe, that such was intended by Congress; but if they had 
 literally formed a ring, and placed champions within it to fight 
 out the controversy, the fight could be no more likely to come off, 
 than it is. And if this fight should begin, is it likely to take a very 
 peaceful, Union-saving turn? Will not the first drop of blood so 
 shed, be the real knell of the Union? 
 
 The Missouri Compromise ought to be restored. For the sake 
 of the Union, it ought to be restored. We ought to elect a House 
 
HIS SPEECHES AND WRITINGS 311 
 
 of Representatives which will vote its restoration. If by any means, 
 we omit to do this, what follows! — Slavery may or may not be 
 established in Nebraska. But whether it be or not, we shall have 
 repudiated — discarded from the councils of the Nation — the 
 spirit of compromise; for who after this will ever trust in a 
 national compromise? The spirit of mutual concession — that 
 spirit which first gave us the constitution, and which has thrice 
 saved the Union — we shall have strangled and cast from us for- 
 ever. And what shall we have in lieu of it? The South flushed with 
 triumph and tempted to excesses; the North, betrayed, as they 
 believe, brooding on wrong and burning for revenge. One side 
 will provoke; the other resent. The one will taunt, the other defy; 
 one agrees [aggresses?], the other retaliates. Already a few in the 
 North, defy all constitutional restraints, resist the execution of the 
 fugitive slave law, and even menace the institution of slavery in 
 the states where it exists. 
 
 Already a few in the South, claim the constitutional right to 
 take and to hold slaves in the free states — demand the revival of 
 the slave trade: and demand a treaty with Great Britain by which 
 fugitive slaves may be reclaimed from Canada. As yet they are 
 but few on either side. It is a grave question for the lovers of the 
 Union, whether the final destruction of the Missouri Compromise, 
 and with it the spirit of all compromise will or will not embolden 
 and embitter each of these, and fatally increase the numbers of 
 both. 
 
 But restore the compromise, and what then? We thereby 
 restore the national faith, the national confidence, the national 
 feeling of brotherhood. We thereby reinstate the spirit of con- 
 cession and compromise — that spirit which has never failed us 
 in past perils, and which may be safely trusted for all the future. 
 The south ought to join in doing this. The peace of the nation is 
 as dear to them as to us. In memories of the past and hopes of the 
 future, they share as largely as we. It would be on their part a 
 great act — great in its spirit, and great in its effect. It would be 
 worth to the nation a hundred years purchase of peace and pros- 
 perity. And what of sacrifice would they make? They only sur- 
 render to us, what they gave us for a consideration long, long ago; 
 what they have not now, asked for, struggled or cared for; what 
 
312 ABRAHAM LINCOLN: 
 
 lias been thrust upon them, not less to their own astonishment 
 than to ours. 
 
 But it is said we cannot restore it; that though we elect every 
 member of the lower house, the Senate is still against us. It is 
 quite true, that of the Senators who passed the Nebraska bill, a 
 majority of the whole Senate will retain their seats in spite of the 
 elections of this and the next year. But if at these elections, their 
 several constituencies shall clearly express their will against 
 Nebraska, will these Senators disregard their will? Will they 
 neither obey, nor make room for those who will? 
 
 But even if we fail to technically restore the compromise, it 
 is still a great point to carry a popular vote in favor of the restora- 
 tion. The moral weight of such a vote can not be estimated too 
 highly. The authors of Nebraska are not at all satisfied with the 
 destruction of the compromise — an endorsement of this prin- 
 ciple they proclaim to be the great object. With them, Nebraska 
 alone is a small matter — to establish a principle, for future 
 use, is what they particularly desire. 
 
 That future use is to be the planting of slavery wherever in 
 the wide world, local and unorganized opposition can not prevent 
 it. Now if you wish to give them this endorsement — if you wish 
 to establish this principle — do so. I shall regret it; but it is your 
 right. On the contrary if you are opposed to the principle — intend 
 to give it no such endorsement — let no wheedling, no sophistry, 
 divert you from throwing a direct vote against it. 
 
 Some men, mostly whigs, who condemn the repeal of the 
 Missouri Compromise, nevertheless hesitate to go for its restora- 
 tion, lest they be thrown in company with the abolitionists. Will 
 they allow me as an old whig to tell them good humoredly, that 
 I think this is very silly? Stand with anybody that stands right. 
 Stand with him while he is right and part with him when he 
 goes wrong. Stand with the abolitionist in restoring the Mis- 
 souri Compromise; and stand against him when he attempts 
 the repeal of the fugitive slave law. In the latter case you stand 
 with the southern disunionist. What of that? you are still right. 
 In both cases you are right. In both cases you expose the dan- 
 gerous extremes. In both you stand on middle ground and hold 
 the ship level and steady. In both you are national and nothing 
 
HIS SPEECHES AND WRITINGS 313 
 
 less than national. This is the good old whig ground. To desert 
 such ground, because of any company, is to be less than a whig — 
 less than a man — less than an American. 
 
 I particularly object to the new position which the avowed 
 principle of this Nebraska law gives to slavery in the body politic. 
 I object to it because it assumes that there can be moral 
 right in the enslaving of one man by another. I object to it as a 
 dangerous dalliance for a few people — a sad evidence that, feel- 
 ing prosperity, we forget right — that liberty, as a principle, we 
 have ceased to revere. I object to it because the fathers of the 
 republic eschewed, and rejected it. The argument of "Necessity" 
 was the only argument they ever admitted in favor of slavery; 
 and so far, and so far only as it carried them, did they ever go. 
 They found the institution existing among us, which they could 
 not help; and they cast blame upon the British King for having 
 permitted its introduction, before the constitution, they pro- 
 hibited its introduction into the northwestern Territory — the only 
 country we owned, then free from it. at the framing and adop- 
 tion of the constitution, they forbore to so much as mention the 
 word "slave" or "slavery" in the whole instrument. In the provi- 
 sion for the recovery of fugitives, the slave is spoken of as a 
 "person held to service or labor." In that prohibiting the 
 abolition of the African slave trade for twenty years, that trade 
 is spoken of as "The migration or importation of such persons 
 as any of the States now existing, shall think proper to admit," 
 &c. These are the only provisions alluding to slavery. Thus, 
 the thing is hid away, in the constitution, just as an afflicted 
 man hides away a wen or a cancer, which he dares not cut out at 
 once, lest he bleed to death; with the promise, nevertheless, that 
 the cutting may begin at the end of a given time. — Less than this 
 our fathers could not do; and now they would not do. Necessity 
 drove them so far, and further, they would not go. But this is 
 not all. The earlier Congress, under the constitution, took the 
 same view of slavery. They hedged and hemmed it in to the 
 narrowest limits of necessity. 
 
 In 1794, they prohibited an out-going slave trade — that is, 
 the taking of slaves from the United States to sell. 
 
 In 1798, they prohibited the bringing of slaves from Africa 
 
314 ABRAHAM LINCOLN: 
 
 into the Mississippi Territory, this territory then comprising 
 what are now the States of Mississippi and Alabama. This was 
 ten years before they had the authority to do the same thing 
 as to the States existing at the adoption of the constitution. 
 
 In 1800 they prohibited American citizens from trading 
 in slaves between foreign countries — as, for instance, from 
 Africa to Brazil. 
 
 In 1803 they passed a law in aid of one or two State laws, 
 in restraint of the internal slave trade. 
 
 In 1807, in apparent hot haste, they passed the law, nearly 
 a year in advance, to take effect the first day of 1808 — the very 
 first day the constitution would permit — prohibiting the African 
 slave trade by heavy pecuniary and corporal penalties. 
 
 In 1820, finding these provisions ineffectual, they declared 
 the trade piracy, and annexed to it, the extreme penalty of death. 
 While all this was passing in the general government, five or six 
 of the original slave States had adopted systems of gradual eman- 
 cipation; by which the institution was rapidly becoming extinct 
 within these limits. 
 
 Thus we see, the plain unmistakable spirit of that age, 
 towards slavery, was hostility to the principle, and toleration, 
 
 ONLY BY NECESSITY. 
 
 But now it is to be transformed into a "sacred right." 
 Nebraska brings it forth, places it on the high road to extension 
 and perpetuity; and, with a pat on its back, says to it, "Go, and 
 God speed you." Henceforth it is to be the chief jewel of the 
 nation — the very figurehead of the ship of State. Little by little, 
 but steadily as man's march to the grave, we have been giving up 
 the old for the new faith. Near eighty years ago we began 
 by declaring that all men are created equal; but now from that 
 beginning we have run down to the other declaration, that for 
 some men to enslave others is a "sacred right of self-govern- 
 ment." These principles can not stand together. They are as 
 opposite as God and mammon; and whoever holds to the one, 
 must despise the other. When Pettit, in connection with his sup- 
 port of the Nebraska bill, called the Declaration of Independence 
 "a self-evident lie," he only did what consistency and candor 
 require all other Nebraska men to do. Of the forty odd Nebraska 
 
HIS SPEECHES AND WRITINGS 315 
 
 Senators who sat present and heard him, no one rebuked him. Nor 
 am I apprized that any Nebraska newspaper, or any Nebraska 
 orator, in the whole nation, has ever yet rebuked him. If this had 
 been said among Marion's men, Southerners though they were, 
 what would have become of the man who said it? If this had been 
 said to the men who captured Andre, the man who said it, would 
 probably have been hung sooner than Andre was. If it had been 
 said in old Independence Hall, seventy-eight years ago, the very 
 door-keeper would have throttled the man, and thrust him into 
 the street. 
 
 Let no one be deceived. The spirit of seventy-six and the 
 spirit of Nebraska, are utter antagonisms; and the former is being 
 rapidly displaced by the latter. 
 
 Fellow-countrymen — Americans south, as well as north, shall 
 we make no effort to arrest this? Already the liberal party through- 
 out the world, express the apprehension "that the one retrograde 
 institution in America, is undermining the principles of progress, 
 and fatally violating the noblest political system the world ever 
 saw." This is not the taunt of enemies, but the warning of friends. 
 Is it quite safe to disregard it — to despise it? Is there no danger 
 to liberty itself, in discarding the earliest practice, and first pre- 
 cept of our ancient faith? In our greedy chase to make profit of 
 the negro, let us beware, lest we "cancel and tear to pieces" 
 even the white man's charter of freedom. 
 
 Our republican robe is soiled, and trailed in the dust. Let us 
 re-purify it. Let us turn and wash it white, in the spirit, if not the 
 blood, of the Revolution. Let us turn slavery from its claims of 
 "moral right" back upon its existing legal rights, and its argu- 
 ments of "necessity." — Let us return it to the position our fathers 
 gave it; and there let it rest in peace. Let us re-adopt the Declara- 
 tion of Independence, and with it, the practices, and policy, 
 which harmonize with it. Let north and south — let all Americans 
 — let all lovers of liberty everywhere — join in the great and good 
 work. If we do this, we shall not only have saved the Union; but 
 we shall have so saved it, as to make, and to keep it, forever 
 worthy of the saving. We shall have so saved it, that the suc- 
 ceeding millions of free happy people, the world over, shall rise 
 up, and call us blessed, to the latest generations. 
 
316 ABRAHAM LINCOLN: 
 
 At Springfield, twelve days ago, where I had spoken sub- 
 stantially as I have here, Judge Douglas replied to me — and as 
 he is to reply to me here, I shall attempt to anticipate him, by 
 noticing some of the points he made there. 
 
 He commenced by stating I had assumed all the way through, 
 that the principle of the Nebraska bill, would have the effect of 
 extending slavery. He denied that this was intended, or that 
 this effect would follow. 
 
 I will not re-open the argument upon this point. That such 
 was the intention, the world believed at the start, and will con- 
 tinue to believe. This was the countenance of the thing; and, 
 both friends and enemies, instantly recognized it as such. That 
 countenance can not now be changed by argument. You can 
 as easily argue the color out of the negro's skin. Like the "bloody 
 hand" you may wash it, and wash it, the red witness of guilt still 
 sticks, and stares horribly at you. 
 
 Next he says, congressional intervention never prevented 
 slavery any where — that it did not prevent it in the north west 
 territory, now in Illinois — that in fact, Illinois came into the 
 Union as a slave State — that the principle of the Nebraska bill 
 expelled it from Illinois, from several old States, from every 
 where. 
 
 Now this is mere quibbling all the way through. If the ordi- 
 nance of '87 did not keep slavery out of the north west territory, 
 how happens it that the north west shore of the Ohio River is 
 entirely free from it; while the south east shore, less than a mile 
 distant, along nearly the whole length of the river, is entirely 
 covered with it? 
 
 If that ordinance did not keep it out of Illinois, what was it 
 that made the difference between Illinois and Missouri? They lie 
 side by side, the Mississippi river only dividing them; while their 
 early settlements were within the same latitude. Between 1810 
 and 1820 the number of slaves in Missouri increased 7,211; 
 while in Illinois, in the same ten years, they decreased 51. — 
 This appears by the census returns. During nearly all of that ten 
 years, both were territories — not States. During this time the 
 ordinance forbid slavery to go into Illinois; and nothing forbid 
 it to go into Missouri. It did go into Missouri, and did not go 
 
HIS SPEECHES AND WRITINGS 317 
 
 into Illinois. — That is the fact. Can any one doubt as to the reason 
 of it? 
 
 But, he says, Illinois came into the Union as a slave State. 
 Silence, perhaps, would be the best answer to this flat contradic- 
 tion of the known history of the country. What are the facts upon 
 which this bold assertion is based? When we first acquired the 
 country, as far back as 1787, there were some slaves within it, held 
 by the French inhabitants at Kaskaskia. The territorial legislation, 
 admitted a few negroes, from the slave States, as indentured serv- 
 ants. One year after the adoption of the first State constitution 
 the whole number of them was — what do you think? just 117 — 
 while the aggregate free population was 55,094 — about 470 to 
 one. Upon this state of facts, the people framed their constitution 
 prohibiting the further introduction of slavery, with a sort of 
 guaranty to the owners of the few indentured servants, giving 
 freedom to their children to be born thereafter, and making no 
 mention whatever, of any supposed slave for life. Out of this small 
 matter, the Judge manufactures his argument that Illinois came 
 into the Union as a slave State. Let the facts be the answer to the 
 argument. 
 
 The principles of the Nebraska bill, he says, expelled slavery 
 from Illinois. The principle of that bill first planted it here — that 
 is, it first came, because there was no law to prevent it — first came 
 before we owned the country; and finding it here, and having the 
 ordinance of '87 to prevent its increasing, our people struggled 
 along, and finally got rid of it as best they could. 
 
 But the principle of the Nebraska bill abolished slavery in 
 several of the old States. — Well, it is true that several of the old 
 States, in the last quarter of the last century, did adopt systems 
 of gradual emancipation, by which the institution has finally be- 
 come extinct within their limits; but it may or may not be true 
 that the principle of the Nebraska bill was the cause that led to 
 the adoption of these measures. It is now more than fifty years, 
 since the last of these States adopted its system of emancipation. 
 If Nebraska Bill is the real author of these benevolent works, it is 
 rather deplorable, that he has, for so long a time, ceased working 
 altogether. Is there not some reason to suspect that it was the 
 principle of the revolution, and not the principle of Ne- 
 
318 ABRAHAM LINCOLN: 
 
 braska Bill, that led to emancipation in these old States? Leave it 
 to the people of these old emancipating States, and I am quite 
 sure they will decide, that neither that, nor any other good thing, 
 ever did, or ever will come of Nebraska Bill. 
 
 In the course of my main argument, Judge Douglas inter- 
 rupted me to say, that the principle of the Nebraska bill was very 
 old; that it originated when God made man and placed good and 
 evil before him, allowing him to choose for himself, being respon- 
 sible for the choice he should make. At the time I thought this was 
 merely playful; and I answered it accordingly. But in his reply to 
 me he renewed it, as a serious argument. In seriousness then, the 
 facts of this proposition are not true as stated. God did not place 
 good and evil before man, telling him to make his choice. On the 
 contrary, he did tell him there was one tree, of the fruit of which, 
 he should not eat, upon pain of certain death. I should scarcely 
 wish so strong a prohibition against slavery in Nebraska. 
 
 But this argument strikes me as not a little remarkable in an- 
 other particular — in its strong resemblance to the old argument 
 for the 'Divine right of Kings/ By the latter, the King is to do just 
 as he pleases with his white subjects, being responsible to God 
 alone. By the former, the white man is to do just as he pleases 
 with his black slaves, being responsible to God alone. The two 
 things are precisely alike, and it is but natural that they should 
 find similar arguments to sustain them. 
 
 I had argued, that the application of the principle of self- 
 government, as contended for, would require the revival of the 
 African slave trade — that no argument could be made in favor 
 of a man's right to take slaves to Nebraska, which could not be 
 equally well made in favor of his right to bring them from the 
 coast of Africa. — The judge replied that the Constitution requires 
 the suppression of the foreign slave-trade; but does not require the 
 prohibition of slavery in the territories. That is a mistake, in point 
 of fact. The Constitution does not require the action of Congress 
 in either case; and it does authorize it in both. And so, there 
 is still no difference between the cases. 
 
 In regard to what I had said, the advantage the slave States 
 have over the free, in the matter of representation, the Judge re- 
 plied that we, in the free States, count five free negroes as five 
 
HIS SPEECHES AND WRITINGS 319 
 
 white people, while in the slave States, they count five slaves as 
 three whites only; and that the advantage, at last, was on the side 
 of the free States. 
 
 Now, in the slave States, they count free negroes just as we do; 
 and it so happens that besides their slaves, they have as many free 
 negroes as we have, and thirty-three thousand over. — Thus their 
 free negroes more than balance ours; and their advantage over us, 
 in consequence of their slaves, still remains as I stated it. 
 
 In reply to my argument, that the compromise measures of 
 1850, were a system of equivalents; and that the provisions of no 
 one of them could fairly be carried to other subjects, without its 
 corresponding equivalent being carried with it, the judge denied 
 out-right, that these measures had any connection with, or de- 
 pendence upon, each other. This is mere desperation. If they have 
 no connection, why are they always spoken of in connection? 
 Why has he so spoken of them, a thousand times? Why has he 
 constantly called them a series of measures? Why does every- 
 body call them a compromise? Why was California kept out of the 
 Union, six or seven months, if it was not because of its connection 
 with the other measures? Webster's leading definition of the verb 
 "to compromise" is "to adjust and settle a difference, by mutual 
 agreement, with concessions of claims by the parties." This con- 
 veys precisely the popular understanding of the word "compro- 
 mise." We knew, before the judge told us, that these measures 
 passed separately, and in distinct bills; and that no two of them 
 were passed by the votes of precisely the same members. But we 
 also know, and so does he know, that no one of them could have 
 passed both branches of Congress but for the understanding that 
 the others were to pass also. Upon this understanding each got 
 votes, which it could have got in no other way. It is this fact, 
 which gives to the measures their true character; and it is the uni- 
 versal knowledge of this fact, that has given them the name of 
 "compromise," so expressive of that true character. 
 
 I had asked "If in carrying the provisions of the Utah and 
 New Mexico laws to Nebraska, you could clear away other objec- 
 tion, how can you leave Nebraska "perfectly free" to introduce 
 slavery before she forms a constitution — during her territorial 
 government? — while the Utah and New Mexico laws only author- 
 
320 ABRAHAM LINCOLN: 
 
 ize it when they form constitutions, and are admitted into the 
 Union?" To this Judge Douglas answered that the Utah and New 
 Mexico laws, also authorized it before; and to prove this, he 
 read from one of their laws, as follows: "That the legislative power 
 of said territory shall extend to all rightful subjects of legislation 
 consistent with the constitution of the United States and the 
 provisions of this act." 
 
 Now it is perceived from the reading of this, that there is 
 nothing express upon the subject; but that the authority is sought 
 to be implied merely, for the general provision of "all rightful 
 subjects of legislation." In reply to this, I insist, as a legal rule of 
 construction, as well as the plain popular view of the matter, that 
 the express provision for Utah and New Mexico coming in 
 with slavery if they choose, when they shall form constitutions, 
 is an exclusion of all implied authority on the same subject — 
 that Congress, having the subject distinctly in their minds, when 
 they made the express provision, they therein expressed their 
 whole meaning on that subject. 
 
 The judge rather insinuated that I had found it convenient to 
 forget the Washington territorial law passed in 1853. This was a 
 division of Oregon, organizing the northern part, as the territory 
 of Washington. He asserted that, by this act, the ordinance of '87 
 theretofore existing in Oregon, was repealed; that nearly all the 
 members of Congress voted for it, beginning in the H. R., with 
 Charles Allen of Massachusetts, and ending with Richard Yates, 
 of Illinois; and that he could not understand how those who now 
 oppose the Nebraska bill, so voted then, unless it was because it 
 was then too soon after both the great political parties had ratified 
 the compromises of 1850, and the ratification therefore too fresh, 
 to be then repudiated. 
 
 Now I had seen the Washington act before; and I have care- 
 fully examined it since; and I aver that there is no repeal of the 
 ordinance of '87, or of any prohibition of slavery, in it. In express 
 terms, there is absolutely nothing in the whole law upon the sub- 
 ject — in fact, nothing to lead a reader to think of the subject. 
 To my judgment, it is equally free from every thing from which 
 such repeal can be legally implied; but however this may be, are 
 men now to be entrapped by a legal implication, extracted from 
 
HIS SPEECHES AND WRITINGS 321 
 
 covert language, introduced perhaps, for the very purpose of en- 
 trapping them? I sincerely wish every man could read this law 
 quite through, carefully watching every sentence, and every line, 
 for a repeal of the ordinance of '87 or any thing equivalent to it. 
 
 Another point on the Washington act. If it was intended to 
 be modelled after the Utah and New Mexico acts, as Judge Doug- 
 las insists, why was it not inserted in it, as in them, that Wash- 
 ington was to come in with or without slavery as she may choose 
 at the adoption of her constitution? It has no such provision in it; 
 and I defy the ingenuity of man to give a reason for the omission, 
 other than that it was not intended to follow the Utah and New 
 Mexico laws in regard to the question of slavery. 
 
 The Washington act not only differs vitally from the Utah and 
 New Mexico acts; but the Nebraska act differs vitally from both. 
 — By the latter act the people are left "perfectly free" to regulate 
 their own domestic concerns, &c; but in all the former, all their 
 laws are to be submitted to Congress, and if disapproved are to 
 be null. The Washington act goes even further; it absolutely pro- 
 hibits the territorial legislation, by very strong and guarded lan- 
 guage, from establishing banks, or borrowing money on the faith 
 of the territory. Is this the sacred right of self-government we hear 
 vaunted so much? No sir, the Nebraska bill finds no model in the 
 acts of '50 or the Washington act. It finds no model in any law 
 from Adam till to-day. As Phillips says of Napoleon, the Nebraska 
 act is grand, gloomy, and peculiar; wrapped in the solitude of its 
 own originality; without a model, and without a shadow upon the 
 earth. 
 
 In the course of his reply, Senator Douglas remarked, in sub- 
 stance, that he had always considered this government was made 
 for the white people and not for the negroes. Why, in point of 
 mere fact, I think so too. But in this remark of the Judge, there is 
 a significance, which I think is the key to the great mistake (if 
 there is any such mistake) which he has made in this Nebraska 
 measure. It shows that the Judge has no very vivid impression 
 that the negro is a human; and consequently has no idea that there 
 can be any moral question in legislating about him. In his view, 
 the question of whether a new country shall be slave or free, is a 
 matter of as utter indifference, as it is whether his neighbor shall 
 
322 ABRAHAM LINCOLN: 
 
 plant his farm with tobacco, or stock it with horned cattle. Now, 
 whether this view is right or wrong, it is very certain that the great 
 mass of mankind take a totally different view. — They consider 
 slavery a great moral wrong; and their feeling against it, is not 
 evanescent, but eternal. It lies at the very foundation of their 
 sense of justice; and it cannot be trifled with. — It is a great and 
 durable element of popular action, and I think, no statesman can 
 safely disregard it. 
 
 Our Senator also objects that those who oppose him in this 
 measure do not entirely agree with one another. He reminds me 
 that in my firm adherence to the constitutional rights of the slave 
 States, I differ widely from others who are co-operating with me 
 in opposing the Nebraska bill; and he says it is not quite fair to 
 oppose him in this variety of ways. He should remember that he 
 took us by surprise — astounded us — by this measure. We were 
 thunderstruck and stunned; and we reeled and fell in utter con- 
 fusion. But we rose each fighting, grasping whatever he could first 
 reach — a scythe — a pitchfork — a chopping axe, or a butcher's 
 cleaver. We struck in the direction of the sound, and we are 
 rapidly closing in upon him. He must not think to divert us from 
 our purpose, by showing us that our drill, our dress, and our 
 weapons, are not entirely perfect and uniform. When the storm 
 shall be past, he shall find us still Americans; no less devoted to 
 the continued Union and prosperity of the country than hereto- 
 fore. 
 
 Finally, the Judge invokes against me, the memory of Clay 
 and of Webster. They were great men, and men of great deeds. 
 But where have I assailed them? For what is it, that their life-long 
 enemy, shall now make profit, by assuming to defend them 
 against me, their life-long friend? I go against the repeal of the 
 Missouri Compromise; did they ever go for it? They went for the 
 compromise of 1850; did I ever go against them? They were 
 gready devoted to the Union; to the small measure of my ability, 
 was I ever less so? Clay and Webster were dead before this ques- 
 tion arose; by what authority shall our Senator say they would 
 espouse his side of it, if alive? Mr. Clay was the leading spirit in 
 making the Missouri Compromise; is it very credible that if now 
 alive, he would take the lead in the breaking of it? The truth is 
 
HIS SPEECHES AND WRITINGS 323 
 
 that some support from whigs is now a necessity with the Judge, 
 and for this it is, that the names of Clay and Webster are now 
 invoked. His old friends have deserted him in such numbers as to 
 leave too few to live by. He came to his own, and his own re- 
 ceived him not, and Lo! he turns unto the Gentiles. 
 
 A word now as to the Judge's desperate assumption that the 
 compromises of '50 had no connection with one another; that 
 Illinois came into the Union as a slave State, and some other 
 similar ones. This is no other than a bold denial of the history of 
 the country. If we do not know that the compromises of '50 were 
 dependent on each other; if we do not know that Illinois came 
 into the Union as a free State — we do not know any thing. If we 
 do not know these things, we do not know that we ever had a 
 revolutionary war, or such a chief as Washington. To deny these 
 things is to deny our national axioms, or dogmas, at least; and it 
 puts an end to all argument. If a man will stand up and assert, 
 and repeat, and re-assert, that two and two do not make four, I 
 know nothing in the power of argument that can stop him. I think 
 I can answer the Judge so long as he sticks to the premises; but 
 when he flies from them, I cannot work an argument into the 
 consistency of a maternal gag, and actually close his mouth with 
 it. In such a case I can only commend him to the seventy thou- 
 sand answers just in from Pennsylvania, Ohio and Indiana. 
 
 Lincoln s seriousness in this speech has so often im~ 
 pressed his readers that they have missed the humor and 
 sarcasm which no audience could possibly have failed to 
 enjoy. To follow Lincoln as he drags Douglas over the 
 coals, exposing his inconsistency and lack of historical 
 perspective not merely by counter arguments but by 
 trenchant irony and sarcasm, one must disillusion oneself 
 of the somewhat pale image of the martyred saint and 
 savior of the nation, and recognize the hard-hitting, 
 dangerous opponent in political debate whom Dougjlas 
 learned to respect long before the nation ever awakened 
 to Lincoln s power with words. 
 
 A case in point is Lincoln's sarcastic figure of speech 
 
324 ABRAHAM LINCOLN: 
 
 in the last paragraph. That the identity of "a maternal 
 gag' bothered even Nicolay and Hay is indicated by the 
 fact that they emended the word maternal to mental, 
 leaving to the reader the even more difficult problem of 
 deciding what "the consistency of a mental gag could 
 possibly be, and how it could close the mouth of an 
 incoherent babbler. Lincoln was alluding to the perhaps 
 now archaic maternal practice of stopping the mouth of 
 a yelling infant with something — sugar-tit or other 
 variety of pacifier — in order that adults in the vicinity 
 might be heard. What the figure lacks in dignity is more 
 than made up in effectiveness. 
 
 The text of this speech is from the Illinois State 
 Journal. So far as the editor is aware, this is the only com- 
 plete and authorized version of the speech published at 
 the time. The first installment in the Journal of October 
 21, 1854, is preceded by the following prefatory remarks: 
 
 "On Monday, October 16, Senator Douglas, by ap- 
 pointment, addressed a large audience at Peoria. When 
 he closed he was greeted with six hearty cheers; and the 
 band in attendance played a stirring air. The crowd then 
 began to call for Lincoln, who, as Judge Douglas had 
 announced was, by agreement, to answer him. Mr. Lin- 
 coln took the stand and said — 
 
 \ 7 do not arise to speak now, if I can stipulate with 
 the audience to meet me here at half past 6 or 7 o'clock. 
 It is now several minutes past five, and Judge Douglas 
 has spoken over three hours. If you hear me at all, I wish 
 you to hear me thro. It will take me as long as it has 
 taken him. That will carry us beyond eight o'clock at 
 night. Now every one of you who can remain that long 
 can just as well get his supper, meet me at seven, and 
 remain one hour or two later. The judge has already in- 
 formed you that he is to have an hour to reply to me. 
 I doubt not but you have been a little surprised to learn 
 that I have consented to give one of his high reputation 
 and known ability, this advantage of me. Indeed, my 
 
HIS SPEECHES AND WRITINGS 325 
 
 consenting to it, though reluctant, was not wholly un- 
 selfish, for I suspected if it were understood, that the 
 judge was entirely done, you democrats would leave and 
 not hear me; but by giving him the close, I felt confident 
 you would stay for the fun of hearing him skin me.' 
 
 "The audience signified their assent to the arrange- 
 ment, and adjourned to 7 o'clock P.M., at which time 
 they reassembled, and mr. Lincoln spoke substan- 
 tially as follows . . ." 
 
 LETTER TO E. B. WASHBURNE 
 DECEMBER 14, 1854 
 
 Springfield, Dec: 14. 1854 
 Hon: E. B. Washburne 
 My dear Sir: 
 
 So far as I am concerned, there must be something wrong 
 about U. S. Senator, at Chicago. My most intimate friends there 
 do not answer my letters; and I can not get a word from them. 
 Wentworth has a knack of knowing things better than most men. 
 I wish you would pump him, and write me what you get from 
 him. Please do this as soon as you can, as the time is growing 
 short. Dont let any one know I have written you this; for there 
 may be those opposed to me, nearer about you than you think. 
 
 Very truly Yours &c 
 
 A. Lincoln 
 
 Lincoln wrote numerous "political" letters during 
 his first race for the United States Senate. Many of them 
 are shrewd, deft, and political in the best sense, but few 
 are of as much interest to the general reader as the series 
 written to Washburne of Galena, Whig Congressman, 
 
326 ABRAHAM LINCOLN: 
 
 1853-59. Of these, this and the succeeding letter, in 
 which Lincoln recounts the story of his defeat, are the 
 most interesting. John Wentworth, "Long John" as he 
 was known, was editor of the Chicago Democrat, Con- 
 gressman, 1844-58, an old anti-slavery man and one 
 of the founders of the Republican party. 
 
 LETTER TO E. B. WASHBURNE 
 FEBRUARY 9, 1855 
 
 Springfield, Feby. 9 1855— 
 Hon: E. B. Washburne. 
 My dear Sir: 
 
 The agony is over at last; and the result you doubtless know. 
 I write this only to give you some particulars to explain what 
 might appear difficult of understanding. I began with 44 votes, 
 Shields 41, and Trumbull 5 — yet Trumbull was elected. In fact 
 47 different members voted for me — getting three new ones on 
 the second ballot, and losing four old ones. How came my 47 to 
 yield to T's 5? It was Govr. Matteson's work. He has been secretly 
 a candidate every [sic] since (before, even) the fall election. All 
 the members round about the canal were Anti-Nebraska, but were, 
 nevertheless nearly all democrats, and old personal friends of 
 his. His plan was to privately impress them with the belief that he 
 was as good Anti-Nebraska as any one else — at least could be 
 secured to be so by instructions, which could be easily passed. In 
 this way he got from four to six of that sort of men to really prefer 
 his election to that of any other man — all "sub rosa" of course. 
 One notable instance of this sort was with Mr. Strunk of Kankakee. 
 At the beginning of the session he came a volunteer to tell me he 
 was for me and would walk a hundred miles to elect me; but lo, 
 it was not long before he leaked it out that he was going for me 
 the first few ballots and then for Govr. Matteson. 
 
HIS SPEECHES AND WRITINGS 327 
 
 The Nebraska men, of course, were not for Matteson; but 
 when they found they could elect no avowed Nebraska man they 
 tardily determined, to let him get whomever of our men he 
 could by whatever means he could and ask him no questions. In 
 the mean time Osgood, Don Morrison & Trapp of St. Clair had 
 openly gone over from us. With the united Nebraska force, and 
 their recruits, open & covert, it gave Matteson more than enough 
 to elect him. We saw into it plainly ten days ago; but with every 
 possible * effort, could not head it off. All that remained of the 
 Anti-Nebraska force, excepting Judd, Cook, Palmer Baker & Allen 
 of Madison, & two or three of the secret Matteson men, would go 
 into caucus, & I could get the nomination of that caucus. But the 
 three Senators & one of the two representatives above named 
 "could never vote for a whig" and this incensed some twenty 
 whigs to "think" they would never vote for the man of the five. 
 So we stood, and so we went into the fight yesterday; the Ne- 
 braska men very confident of the election of Matteson, though 
 denying that he was a candidate; and we very much believing also, 
 that they would elect him. But they wanted first to make a show 
 of good faith to Shields by voting for him a few times, and our 
 secret Matteson men also wanted to make a show of good faith 
 by voting with us a few times. So we led off. On the seventh ballot, 
 I think, the signal was given to the Neb. men, to turn on to Matte- 
 son, which they acted on to a man, with one exception; my old 
 friend S trunk going with them giving him 44 votes. Next ballot 
 the remaining Neb. man, & one pretended Anti. went on to him, 
 giving him 46. The next still another giving him 47, wanting only 
 three of an election. In the mean time, our friends with a view of 
 detaining our expected bolters had been turning from me to Trum- 
 bull till he he [sic] had risen to 35 & I had been reduced to 15. 
 These would never desert me except by my direction; but I be- 
 came satisfied that if we could prevent Matteson's election one or 
 two ballots more, we could not possibly do so a single ballot after 
 my friends should begin to return to me from Trumbull. So I de- 
 termined to strike at once; and accordingly advised my remaining 
 friends to go for him, which they did & elected him on that the 
 10th. ballot. 
 
 Such is the way the thing was done. I think you would have 
 
328 ABRAHAM LINCOLN: 
 
 done the same under the circumstances; though Judge Davis, who 
 came down this morning, declares he never would have consented 
 to the 47 men being controlled by the 5. I regret my defeat mod- 
 erately, but I am not nervous about it. I could have headed off 
 every combination and been elected, had it not been for Matteson's 
 double game — and his defeat now gives me more pleasure than 
 my own gives me pain. On the whole, it is perhaps as well for 
 our general cause that Trumbull is elected. The Neb. men confess 
 that they hate it worse than any thing that could have happened. 
 It is a great consolation to see them worse whipped than I am. 
 I tell them it is their own fault — that they had abundant oper- 
 tunity [sic] to choose between him & me, which they declined, 
 and in stead forced it on me to decide between him & Matteson. 
 With my grateful acknowledgments for the kind, active, and 
 continued interest you have taken for me in this matter, allow me 
 to subscribe myself 
 
 Yours forever 
 
 A. Lincoln — 
 
 LETTER TO OWEN LOVEJOY 
 AUGUST 11, 1855 
 
 Springfield, August 11—1855 
 Hon: Owen Lovejoy: 
 My dear Sir: 
 
 Yours of the 7th. was received the day before yesterday. 
 Not even you are more anxious to prevent the extension of slavery 
 than I; and yet the political atmosphere is such, just now, that I 
 fear to do any thing, lest I do wrong. Knownothingism has not yet 
 entirely tumbled to pieces — nay, it is even a little encouraged by 
 the late elections in Tennessee, Kentucky & Alabama. Until we 
 can get the elements of this organization, there is not sufficient 
 materials to successfully combat the Nebraska democracy with. 
 
HIS SPEECHES AND WRITINGS 329 
 
 We can not get them so long as they cling to a hope of success 
 under their own organization; and I fear an open push by us now, 
 may offend them, and tend to prevent our ever getting them. 
 About us here, they are mostly my old political and personal 
 friends; and I have hoped their organization would die out with- 
 out the painful necessity of my taking an open stand against them. 
 Of their principles I think little better than I do of those of the 
 slavery extentionists [sic]. Indeed I do not perceive how any one 
 professing to be sensitive to the wrongs of the negroes, can join 
 in a league to degrade a class of white men. 
 
 I have no objection to "fuse" with any body provided I can 
 fuse on ground which I think is right; and I believe the opponents 
 of slavery extension could now do this, if it were not for the K. 
 N.ism. In many speeches last summer I advised those who did me 
 the honor of a hearing to "stand with any body who stands right" 
 — and I am still quite willing to follow my own advice. I lately 
 saw, in the Quincy Whig, the report of a preamble and resolutions, 
 made by Mr. Williams, as chairman of a Committee, to a public 
 meeting and adopted by the meeting. I saw them but once, and 
 have them not now at command; but so far as I can remember 
 them, they occupy about the ground I should be willing to "fuse" 
 upon. 
 
 As to my personal movements this summer, and fall, I am 
 quite busy trying to pick up my lost crumbs of last year. I shall be 
 here till September; then to the circuit till the 20th. then to Cin- 
 cinnati, awhile, after a Patent right case; and back to the circuit 
 to the end of November. I can be seen here any time this month; 
 and at Bloomington at any time from the 10th. to the 17th. of 
 September. As to an extra session of the Legislature, I should 
 know no better how to bring that about, than to lift myself over a 
 fence by the straps of my boots. 
 
 Yours truly 
 A. Lincoln — 
 
 Lovejoy was a radical anti-slavery man and an 
 organizer of the Republican party in Illinois who had 
 been trying for more than a year to get Lincoln lined up 
 
330 ABRAHAM LINCOLN: 
 
 with the new party. This letter, together with the imme- 
 diately following ones to Robertson and Speed, illus- 
 trates Lincoln s indecision in the summer of 1855 as to his 
 party allegiance. Whigism was dead, but Lincoln clung 
 to it. He was slow to accept "fusion" as Republicanism 
 was called, though not entirely opposed to it. In con- 
 trast with this indecision, his personal position in regard 
 to principle is wholly clear to his own mind. Not until 
 he became convinced that the new party could be re- 
 strained in its more radical elements was he ready to 
 fuse. 
 
 LETTER TO GEORGE ROBERTSON 
 AUGUST 15, 1855 
 
 Springfield, Ills. Aug: 15. 1855 
 Hon: Geo. Robertson 
 Lexington, Ky. 
 My dear Sir: 
 
 The volume you left for me has been received. I am really 
 grateful for the honor of your kind remembrance, as well as for 
 the book. The partial reading I have already given it, has afforded 
 me much of both pleasure and instruction. It was new to me that 
 the exact question which led to the Missouri Compromise, has 
 arisen before it arose in regard to Missouri; and that you had 
 taken so prominent a part in it. Your short, but able and patriotic 
 speech upon that occasion, has not been improved upon since, 
 by those holding the same views; and, with all the lights you then 
 had, the views you took appear to me as very reasonable. 
 
 You are not a friend to slavery in the abstract. In that speech 
 you spoke of "the peaceful extinction of slavery 9 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 
 
HIS SPEECHES AND WRITINGS 331 
 
 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, extinguishes 
 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-evi- 
 dent 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 occasion, nearly half the 
 states adopted systems of emancipation at once; and it is a sig- 
 nificant fact, that not a single state has done the like since. So 
 far as peaceful, voluntary emancipation is concerned, the condi- 
 tion of the negro slave in America, scarcely less terrible to the 
 contemplation of a free mind, is now so fixed, and hopeless of 
 change for the better, as that of the lost souls of the finally impeni- 
 tent. The Autocrat of all the Russias will resign his crown, and 
 proclaim his subjects free republicans, sooner than will our Ameri- 
 can 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 — 
 
 Judge George Robertson of Lexington, Kentucky, 
 counsel for Lincoln and the other Illinois heirs in their 
 suit against Robert Wickliffe, was Professor of Law in 
 
332 ABRAHAM LINCOLN: 
 
 Transylvania College, and a member of the Sixteenth 
 Congress which had adopted the Missouri Compromise. 
 He had published a collection of his speeches on slavery 
 and other topics of public interest, entitled Scrap Book 
 on Law and Politics, Men and Times, a copy of which 
 he had left in Lincoln's office on a visit which found 
 Lincoln away. Lincoln had claimed in his "Speech at 
 Peoria" that Congress had not acted upon the question 
 of the extension of slavery into the Territories before the 
 Missouri Compromise of 1820, but learned from Robert- 
 sons book that the question had been acted upon in 
 regard to the Arkansas Territory in 1819. The last para- 
 graph of the letter should be noted as the earliest sug- 
 gestion in Lincoln's writings of the phraseology which 
 electrified the campaign against Douglas in the "House 
 Divided Speech," June 16, 1858. 
 
 LETTER TO JOSHUA F. SPEED 
 AUGUST 24, 1855 
 
 Springfield, Aug: 24. 1855 
 Dear Speed: 
 
 You know what a poor correspondent I am. Ever since I 
 received your very agreeable letter of the 22nd. of May I have 
 been intending to write you in answer to it. You suggest that in 
 political action now, you and I would differ. I suppose we would; 
 not quite as much, however, as you may think. You know I dis- 
 like 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 dis- 
 solved. I am not aware that any one is bidding you to yield that 
 right; very certainly I am not. I leave that matter entirely to your- 
 
HIS SPEECHES AND WRITINGS 333 
 
 self. 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 unrewarded toils; but I bite my lip and keep 
 quiet. In 1841 you and I had together a tedious low-water trip, 
 on a Steam Boat 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 something 
 like it every time I touch the Ohio, or any other slave-border. It 
 is hardly fair for you to assume, that I have no interest 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 Constitution and the Union. 
 
 I do oppose the extension of slavery, because my judgment 
 and feelings so prompt me; and I am under no obligation 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 Union 
 be 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 you 
 and I would differ about the Nebraska-law. I look upon that en- 
 actment not as a law, but as violence from the beginning. It was 
 conceived in violence, passed in violence, is maintained in violence, 
 and is being executed in violence. I say it was conceived in vio- 
 lence, because the destruction of the Missouri Compromise, under 
 the circumstances, 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 it's repeal, and this demand is openly dis- 
 regarded. You say men ought to be hung for the way they are 
 
334 
 
 ABRAHAM LINCOLN: 
 
 executing that law; and I say the way it is being executed is quite 
 as good as any of its antecedents. It is being executed in the pre- 
 cise 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 be- 
 lieve that any thing 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 an already settled 
 question; and so settled by the very means you so pointedly con- 
 demn. 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 Legisla- 
 ture gravely passes a law to hang men who shall venture to inform 
 a negro of his legal rights. This is the substance, and real object 
 of the law. If, like Haman, they should hang upon the gallows of 
 their 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 loth, in any case, to with- 
 hold my assent to the enjoyment 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 possibility with any man. Any 
 man who has sense enough to be the controller of his own prop- 
 erty, has too much sense to misunderstand the outrageous char- 
 acter of this whole Nebraska business. But I digress. In my opposi- 
 tion 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. On the contrary, if we succeed, there will 
 be enough of us to take care of 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 an open proposition to establish mon- 
 archy. Get hold of some man in the North, whose position and 
 ability is such, that he can make the support of your measure — 
 whatever it may be — a democratic party necessity, and the thing 
 
HIS SPEECHES AND WRITINGS 335 
 
 is done. Appropos [sic] of this, let me tell you an anecdote. Doug- 
 las introduced the Nebraska bill in January. In February after- 
 wards, there was a call 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 Dougla's [sic] orders came on to 
 have resolutions passed approving 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 unanamous [sic] against it; but as soon as the 
 party necessity of supporting it, became apparent, the way the 
 democracy began to see the wisdom and justice of it, was perfectly 
 astonishing. 
 
 You say if Kansas fairly votes herself a free state, as a Chris- 
 tian you will rather 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 conversation, you will 
 express your preference that Kansas shall 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. 
 You think Stringfellow & Co ought to be hung; and yet, at the next 
 presidential election you will vote for the exact type and represen- 
 tative of Stringfellow. 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 attempting 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 
 
336 ABRAHAM LINCOLN: 
 
 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." 
 When it comes to this I should prefer emigrating to some country 
 where they make no pretence of loving liberty — to Russia, for 
 instance, where despotism can be taken pure, and without the base 
 alloy of hypocracy [sic]. 
 
 Mary will probably pass a day to two in Louisville in Octo- 
 ber. 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 forever 
 
 A. Lincoln. 
 
 Presumably this is the last significant letter Lincoln 
 wrote to his friend Speed and the first one written since 
 1849. Two short notes, one in 1860 and the other in 1862, 
 concluded the correspondence, hut the friendship con- 
 tinued until Lincoln's death. Speed called to see Lincoln 
 last about two weeks before the assassination. The story 
 of that last visit between the two friends, as well as 
 numerous other episodes in their lives, is told in Speed's 
 Reminiscences of Abraham Lincoln. The trip by steam- 
 boat which Lincoln recalls so vividly in this letter is the 
 same which he describes in his fine "Letter to Miss Mary 
 Speed" September 27, 1841. 
 
HIS SPEECHES AND WRITINGS 337 
 
 LETTER TO ISHAM REAVIS 
 NOVEMBER 5, 1855 
 
 Springfield, Novr. 5. 1855 
 Isham Reavis, Esq. 
 My Dear Sir: 
 
 I have just reached home, and found your letter of the 23rd. 
 ult. I am from home too much of my time, for a young man to read 
 law with me advantageously. 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 any body 
 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 consequence 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 capac- 
 ity 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 I have no doubt he will cheer- 
 fully tell you what books to read, and also loan you the books. 
 
 Always bear in mind that your own resolution to succeed, is 
 more important than any other one thing. 
 
 Very truly your friend 
 
 A. Lincoln. 
 
 Apparently Isham Reavis lived in Beardstown, Cass 
 County, Illinois, for the Illinois Supreme Court file records 
 that he was admitted to the Bar from Cass County, July 
 30, 1857. That he followed Lincoln's advice and studied 
 with Lincoln's old friend Henry Dummer, a Beardstown 
 lawyer, seems probable. The advice given Reavis is much 
 the same that Lincoln gave another hopeful student in 
 the "Letter to James T. Thornton," December 2, 1858. 
 
338 ABRAHAM LINCOLN 
 
 LETTER TO R. P. MORGAN 
 FEBRUARY 13, 1856 
 
 Springfield, Feby 13 1856 
 R. P. Morgan, Esq 
 Dear Sir: 
 
 Says Tom to John "Heres your old rotten wheelbarrow" "Ive 
 broke it, usin on it" "I wish you would mend it, case I shall want 
 to borrow it this arternoon." 
 
 Acting on this as a precedent, I say "Heres 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 — 
 
 Morgan is listed in the Bloomington City Directory 
 for 1855 as "Superintendent of the Chicago, Alton 6- St. 
 Louis R.R." According to his own recollection years 
 later, he was Superintendent of the "Chicago b- M. Rd." 
 (Ida M. Tarbell, In the Footsteps of the Lincolns, p. 314). 
 At any rate, Lincoln was returning an expired railroad 
 pass and requesting a new one. 
 
HIS SPEECHES AND WRITINGS 339 
 
 FREMONT, BUCHANAN, AND THE EXTENSION OF 
 SLAVERY: SPEECH DELIVERED AT KALAMAZOO, 
 MICHIGAN. AUGUST 27, 1856 
 
 Fellow countrymen: — 
 
 Under the Constitution of the U. S. another Presidential 
 contest approaches us. All over this land — that portion at least, 
 of which I know much — the people are assembling to consider 
 the proper course to be adopted by them. One of the first con- 
 siderations is to learn what the people differ about. If we ascer- 
 tain what we differ about, we shall be better able to decide. The 
 question of slavery, at the present day, should be not only the 
 greatest question, but very nearly the sole question. Our oppo- 
 nents, however, prefer that this should not be the case. To get 
 at this question, I will occupy your attention but a single mo- 
 ment. The question is simply this: — Shall slavery be spread into 
 the new Territories, or not? This is the naked question. If we 
 should support Fremont successfully in this, it may be charged 
 that we will not be content with restricting slavery in the new 
 territories. If we should charge that James Buchanan, by his 
 platform, is bound to extend slavery into the territories, and that 
 he is in favor of its being thus spread, we should be puzzled to 
 prove it. We believe it, nevertheless. By taking the issue as I 
 present it, whether it shall be permitted as an issue, is made up 
 between the parties. Each takes his own stand. This is the ques- 
 tion: Shall the Government of the United States prohibit slavery 
 in the United States. 
 
 We have been in the habit of deploring the fact that slavery 
 exists amongst us. We have ever deplored it. Our forefathers did, 
 and they declared, as we have done in later years, the blame rested 
 on the mother Government of Great Britain. We constantly con- 
 demn Great Britain for not preventing slavery from coming 
 amongst us. She would not interfere to prevent it, and so indi- 
 viduals were enabled to introduce the institution without opposi- 
 
340 
 
 ABRAHAM LINCOLN 
 
 tion. I have alluded to this, to ask you if this is not exactly the 
 policy of Buchanan and his friends, to place this government in 
 the attitude then occupied by the government of Great Britain 
 — placing the nation in the position to authorize the territories to 
 reproach it, for refusing to allow them to hold slaves. I would like 
 to ask your attention, any gentleman to tell me when the people of 
 Kansas are going to decide. When are they to do it, How are they 
 to do it? I asked that question two years ago — when, and how are 
 [we?] to do it? Not many weeks ago, our new Senator from Illi- 
 nois, (Mr. Trumbull) asked Douglas how it could be done. Doug- 
 las is a great man — at keeping from answering questions he don't 
 want to answer. He would not answer. He said it was a question 
 for the Supreme Court to decide. In the North, his friends argue 
 that the people can decide it at any time. The Southerners say 
 there is no power in the people, whatever. We know that from 
 the time that white people have been allowed in the territory, 
 they have brought slaves with them. Suppose the people come 
 up to vote as freely, and with as perfect protection as we could 
 do it here. Will they be at liberty to vote their sentiments? If they 
 can, then all that has ever been said about our provincial ances- 
 tors is untrue, and they could have done so, also. We know our 
 Southern friends say that the General Government cannot inter- 
 fere. The people, say they, have no right to interfere. They could 
 as truly say, — "It is amongst us — we cannot get rid of it." 
 
 But I am afraid I waste too much time on this point. I take 
 it as an illustration of the principle, that slaves are admitted into 
 the territories. And, while I am speaking of Kansas, how will that 
 operate? Can men vote truly? We will suppose that there are ten 
 men who go into Kansas to settle. Nine of these are opposed to 
 slavery. One has ten slaves. The slaveholder is a good man in 
 other respects; he is a good neighbor, and being a wealthy man, 
 he is enabled to do the others many neighborly kindnesses. They 
 like the man, though they don't like the system by which he holds 
 his fellow-men in bondage. And here let me say, that in intellec- 
 tual and physical structure, our Southern brethren do not differ 
 from us. They are, like us, subject to passions, and it is only their 
 odious institution of slavery, that makes the breach between us. 
 These ten men of whom I was speaking, live together three or 
 
HIS SPEECHES AND WRITINGS 341 
 
 four years; they intermarry; their family ties are strengthened. 
 And who wonders that in time, the people learn to look upon 
 slavery with complacency? This is the way in which slavery is 
 planted, and gains so firm a foothold. I think this is a strong card 
 that the Nebraska party have played, and won upon, in this game. 
 I suppose that this crowd are opposed to the admission of 
 slavery into Kansas, yet it is true that in all crowds there are some 
 who differ from the majority. I want to ask the Buchanan men, 
 who are against the spread of slavery, if there be any present, why 
 not vote for the man who is against it? I understand that Mr. 
 Fillmore's position is precisely like Buchanan's. I understand that, 
 by the Nebraska bill, a door has been opened for the spread of 
 slavery in the Territories. Examine, if you please, and see if they 
 have ever done any such thing as try to shut the door. It is true 
 that Fillmore tickles a few of his friends with the notion that he 
 is not the cause of the door being opened. Well; it brings him 
 into this position: he tries to get both sides, one by denouncing 
 those who opened the door, and the other by hinting that he 
 doesn't care a fig for its being open. If he were President, he 
 would have one side or the other — he would either restrict slavery 
 or not. Of course it would be so. There could be no middle way. 
 You who hate slavery and love freedom, why not, as Fillmore and 
 Buchanan are on the same ground, vote for Fremont? Why not 
 vote for the man who takes your side of the question? "Well," says 
 Buchanier [sic], "it is none of our business." But is it not our busi- 
 ness? There are several reasons why I think it is our business. But 
 let us see how it is. Others have urged these reasons before, but 
 they are still of use. By our Constitution we are represented in 
 Congress in proportion to numbers, and in counting the numbers 
 that give us our representatives, three slaves are counted as two 
 people. The State of Maine has six representatives in the lower 
 house of Congress. In strength South Carolina is equal to her. 
 But stop! Maine has twice as many white people, and 32,000 to 
 boot! And is that fair? I don't complain of it. This regulation was 
 put in force when the exigencies of the times demanded it, and 
 could not have been avoided. Now, one man in South Carolina is 
 the same as two men here. Maine should have twice as many men 
 in Congress as South Carolina. It is a fact that any man in South 
 
 
342 ABRAHAM LINCOLN: 
 
 Carolina has more influence and power in Congress to-day than 
 any two now before me. The same thing is true of all slave States, 
 though it may not be in the same proportion. It is a truth that can- 
 not be denied, that in all the free States no white man is the equal 
 of the white man of the slave States. But this is in the Constitu- 
 tion, and we must stand up to it. The question, then is, "Have we 
 no interest as to whether the white man of the North shall be the 
 equal of the white man of the South?" Once when I used this argu- 
 ment in the presence of Douglas, he answered that in the North 
 the black man was counted as a full man, and had an equal vote 
 with the white, while at the South they were counted at but three- 
 fifths. And Douglas, when he made this reply, doubtless thought 
 he had forever silenced the objection. 
 
 Have we no interest in the free Territories of the United 
 States — that they should be kept open for the homes of free white 
 people? As our Northern States are growing more and more in 
 wealth and population, we are continually in want of an outlet, 
 through which it may pass out to enrich our country. In this we 
 have an interest — a deep and abiding interest. There is another 
 thing, and that is the mature knowledge we have — the greatest 
 interest of all. It is the doctrine, that the people are to be driven 
 from the maxims of our free Government, that despises the spirit 
 which for eighty years has celebrated the anniversary of our 
 national independence. 
 
 We are a great empire. We are eighty years old. We stand 
 at once the wonder and admiration of the whole world, and we 
 must enquire what it is that has given us so much prosperity, and 
 we shall understand that to give up that one thing, would be to 
 give up all future prosperity. This cause is that every man can 
 make himself. It has been said that such a race of prosperity has 
 been run nowhere else. We find a people on the North-east, who 
 have a different government from ours, being ruled by a Queen. 
 Turning to the South, we see a people who, while they boast of 
 being free, keep their fellow beings in bondage. Compare our 
 Free States with either, shall we say here that we have no interest 
 in keeping that principle alive? Shall we say — "Let it be." No — 
 we have an interest in the maintenance of the principles of the 
 Government, and without this interest, it is worth nothing. I have 
 
HIS SPEECHES AND WRITINGS 343 
 
 noticed in Southern newspapers, particularly the Richmond En- 
 quirer, the Southern view of the Free States. They insist that 
 slavery has a right to spread. They defend it upon principle. They 
 insist that their slaves are far better off than Northern freemen. 
 What a mistaken view do these men have of Northern laborers! 
 They think that men are always to remain laborers here — but 
 there is no such class. The man who labored for another last year, 
 this year labors for himself, and next year he will hire others to 
 labor for him. These men don't understand when they think in this 
 manner of Northern free labor. When these reasons can be intro- 
 duced, tell me not that we have no interest in keeping the Terri- 
 tories free for the settlement of free laborers. 
 
 I pass, then, from this question. I think we have an ever 
 growing interest in maintaining the free institutions of our country. 
 
 It is said that our party is a sectional party. It has been said 
 in high quarters that if Fremont and Dayton were elected the 
 Union would be dissolved. The South do not think so. I believe it! 
 I believe it! It is a shameful thing that the subject is talked of so 
 much. Did we not have a Southern President and Vice-President 
 at one time? And yet the Union has not yet been dissolved. Why, 
 at this very moment, there is a Northern President and Vice- 
 President. Pierce and King were elected, and King died without 
 ever taking his seat. The Senate elected a Northern man from 
 their own numbers, to perform the duties of the Vice-President. 
 He resigned his seat, however, as soon as he got the job of making 
 a slave State out of Kansas. Was not that a great mistake? 
 
 (A voice. — "He didn't mean that!") 
 
 Then why didn't he speak what he did mean? Why did not he 
 speak what he ought to have spoken? That was the very thing. 
 He should have spoken manly, and we should then have known 
 where to have found him. It is said we expect to elect Fremont 
 by Northern votes. Certainly we do not think the South will elect 
 him. But let us ask the question differently. Does not Buchanan 
 expect to be elected by Southern votes? Fillmore, however, will 
 go out of this contest the most national man we have. He has no 
 prospect of having a single vote on either side of Mason and 
 Dixon's line, to trouble his poor soul about. 
 
 We believe that it is right that slavery should not be tolerated 
 
344 ABRAHAM LINCOLN: 
 
 in the new territories, yet we cannot get support for this doctrine, 
 except in one part of the country. Slavery is looked upon by men 
 in the light of dollars and cents. The estimated worth of the slaves 
 at the South is $1,000,000,000, and in a very few years, if the 
 institution shall be admitted into the territories, they will have 
 increased fifty per cent in value. 
 
 Our adversaries charge Fremont with being an abolitionist. 
 When pressed to show proof, they frankly confess that they can 
 show no such thing. They then run off upon the assertion that his 
 supporters are abolitionists. But this they have never attempted 
 to prove. I know of no word in the language that has been used so 
 much as that one "abolitionist," having no definition. It has no 
 meaning unless taken as designating a person who is abolishing 
 something. If that be its signification, the supporters of Fremont 
 are not abolitionists. In Kansas all who come there are perfectly 
 free to regulate their own social relations. There has never been 
 a man there who was an abolitionist — for what was there to be 
 abolished? People there had perfect freedom to express what they 
 wished on the subject, when the Nebraska bill was first passed. 
 Our friends in the South, who support Buchanan, have five dis- 
 union men to one at the North. This disunion is a sectional ques- 
 tion. Who is to blame for it? Are we? I don't care how you express 
 it. This government is sought to be put on a new track. Slavery is 
 to be made a ruling element in our government. The question can 
 be avoided in but two ways. By the one, we must submit, and 
 allow slavery to triumph, or, by the other, we must triumph over 
 the black demon. We have chosen the latter manner. If you of 
 the North wish to get rid of this question, you must decide be- 
 tween these two ways — submit and vote for Buchanan, submit and 
 vote that slavery is a just and good thing and immediately get rid 
 of the question; or unite with us, and help us to triumph. We 
 would all like to have the question done away with, but we 
 cannot submit. 
 
 They tell us that we are in company with men who have 
 long been known as abolitionists. What care we how many may 
 feel disposed to labor for our cause? Why do not you, Buchanan 
 men, come in and use your influence to make our party respecta- 
 
HIS SPEECHES AND WRITINGS 345 
 
 ble? How is the dissolution of the Union to be consummated? 
 They tell us that the Union is in danger. Who will divide it? Is it 
 those who make the charge? Are they themselves the persons who 
 wish to see this result? A majority will never dissolve the Union. 
 Can a minority do it? When this Nebraska bill was first introduced 
 into Congress, the sense of the Democratic party was outraged. 
 That party has ever prided itself, that it was the friend of indi- 
 vidual, universal freedom. It was that principle upon which they 
 carried their measures. When the Kansas scheme was conceived, 
 it was natural that this respect and sense should have been out- 
 raged. Now I make this appeal to the Democratic citizens here. 
 Don't you find yourself making arguments in support of these 
 measures, which you never would have made before? Did you 
 ever do it before this Nebraska bill compelled you to do it? If 
 you answer this in the affirmative, see how a whole party have 
 been turned away from their love of liberty! And now, my Demo- 
 cratic friends, come forward. Throw off these things, and come to 
 the rescue of this great principle of equality. Don't interfere with 
 anything in the Constitution. — That must be maintained, for it is 
 the only safeguard of our liberties. And not to Democrats alone do 
 I make this appeal, but to all who love these great and true 
 principles. Come, and keep coming! Strike, and strike again! So 
 sure as God lives, the victory shall be yours. 
 
 The discovery of this important speech in the files 
 of the Detroit Daily Advertiser only a few years ago 
 raises the question whether there may not he other im- 
 portant speeches undiscovered in the files of newspapers 
 of the time. Although Lincoln campaigned strenuously 
 for Fremont and made numerous speeches, this and "Sec- 
 tionalism' are the only notable pieces we have. Earlier, 
 in May, at the Bloomington Convention, Lincoln had 
 delivered the legendary "Lost Speech" which has been 
 supposed by some biographers to have been his greatest 
 piece of oratory. However that may be, the year 1856 is 
 notable in Lincoln's writings chiefly for the speech at 
 
346 ABRAHAM LINCOLN: 
 
 Kalamazoo, which is hardly the equal of any one of sev- 
 eral speeches delivered in 1858, or the "Dred Scott 
 Speech" of 1857. 
 
 LETTER TO JULIAN M. STURTEVANT 
 SEPTEMBER 27, 1856 
 
 Springfield, Sept. 27. 1856 
 Rev. J. M. Sturtevant 
 Jacksonville, Ills 
 My dear Sir: 
 
 Owing to absence yours of the 16th. was not received till the 
 day-before yesterday. I thank you for your good opinion of me 
 personally, and still more for the deep interest you take in the 
 cause of our common country. It pains me a little that you have 
 deemed it necessary to point out to me how I may be compensated 
 for throwing myself in the breach now. This assumes that I am 
 merely calculating the chances of personal advancement. Let me 
 assure you that I decline to be a candidate for congress, on my 
 clear conviction, that my running would hurt, & not help the 
 cause. I am willing to make any personal sacrifice; but I am not 
 willing to do, what in my own judgment, is a sacrifice of the cause 
 itself. 
 
 Very truly Yours 
 
 A. Lincoln. 
 
 Julian M. Sturtevant was President of Illinois Col- 
 lege at Jacksonville and a well-known anti-slavery man. 
 
HIS SPEECHES AND WRITINGS 347 
 
 SECTIONALISM 
 [OCTOBER IP], 1856 
 
 SECTIONALISM 
 
 It is constantly objected to Fremont & Dayton, that they are 
 supported by a sectional party, who, by their sectionalism, en- 
 danger the National Union. This objection, more than all other, 
 causes men, really opposed to slavery extension, to hesitate. Prac- 
 tically, it is the most difficult objection we have to meet. 
 
 For this reason, I now propose to examine it, a little more 
 carefully than I have heretofore done, or seen it done by others. 
 
 First, then, what is the question between the parties, respec- 
 tively represented by Buchanan and Fremomont [sic]? 
 
 Simply this: "Shall slavery be allowed to extend into U. S. 
 terrtories /sic7, now legally free?' Buchanan says it shall; and 
 Fremont says it shall not. 
 
 That is the naked issue, and the whole of it. Lay the respec- 
 tive platforms side by side; and the difference between them, will 
 be found to amount to precisely that. 
 
 True, each party charges upon the other, designs much be- 
 yond what is involved in the issue, as stated; but as these charges 
 can not be fully proved either way, it is probably better to reject 
 them on both sides, and stick to the naked issue, as it is clearly 
 made up on the record. 
 
 And now, to restate the question "Shall slavery be allowed 
 to extend into U. S. terrtories /sic7, now legally free? I beg to 
 know how one side of that question is more sectional than the 
 other? Of course I expect to effect nothing with the man who 
 makes this charge of sectionalism, without caring whether it is 
 just or not. But of the candid, fair, man who has been puzzled with 
 this charge, I do ask how is one side of this question, more sec- 
 tional, than the other? I beg of him to consider well, and answer 
 calmly. 
 
348 ABRAHAM LINCOLN: 
 
 If one side be as sectional as the other, nothing is gained, as 
 to sectionalism, by changing sides; so that each must choose sides 
 of the question on some other ground. As I should think, accord- 
 ing, as the one side or the other, shall appear nearest right. If he 
 shall really think slavery ought to be extended, let him go to 
 Buchanan; if he think it ought not let [him?] go to Fremont. 
 
 But, Fremont and Dayton, are both residents of the free- 
 states; and this fact has been vaunted, in high places, as excessive 
 sectionalism. 
 
 While interested individuals become indignant and excited, 
 against this manifestation of sectionalism, I am very happy to 
 know, that the Constitution remains calm — keeps cool — upon the 
 subject. It does say that President and Vice President shall be 
 resident of different states; but it does not say one must live in a 
 slave, and the other in a free state. 
 
 It has been a custom to take one from a slave, and the other 
 from a free state; but the custom has not, at all been uniform. In 
 1828 Gen. Jackson and Mr. Calhoun, both from slave states, were 
 placed on the same ticket; and Mr. Adams and Dr. Rush both 
 from the free-states, were pitted against them. Gen. Jackson and 
 Mr. Calhoun were elected; and qualified and served under the 
 election; yet the whole thing never suggested the idea of section- 
 alism. 
 
 In 1841, the president, Gen. Harrison, died, by which Mr. 
 Tyler, the Vice-President & a slave state man, became president. 
 Mr. Mangum, another slave-state man, was placed in the Vice 
 Presidential chair, served out the term, and no fuss about it — no 
 sectionalism thought of. 
 
 In 1853 the present president came into office. He is a free- 
 state man. Mr. King, the new Vice President elect, was a slave 
 state man; but he died without entering on the duties of his of- 
 fice. At first, his vacancy was filled by Atchison, another slave- 
 state man; but he soon resigned, and the place was supplied by 
 Bright, a free-state man. So that right now, and for the year and 
 a half last past, our president and vice-president are both actually 
 free-state men. 
 
 But, it is said, the friends of Fremont, avow the purpose of 
 
HIS SPEECHES AND WRITINGS 349 
 
 electing him exclusively by free-state votes, and that this is unen- 
 durable sectionalism. 
 
 This statement of fact, is not exactly true. With the friends of 
 Fremont, it is an expected necessity, but it is not an "avowed pur- 
 pose" to elect him, if at all, principally, by free state votes; but it 
 is, with equal intensity, true that Buchanan's friends expect to 
 elect him, if at all, chiefly by slave-state votes. 
 
 Here, agan [sic], the sectionalism, is just as much on one side 
 as the other. 
 
 The thing which gives most color to the charge of Section- 
 alism, made against those who oppose the spread of slavery into 
 free terrtory [sic], is the fact that they can get no votes in the 
 slave-states, while their opponents get all, or nearly so, in the 
 slave-states, and also, a large number in the free States. To state 
 it in another way, the Extensionists, can get votes all over the Na- 
 tion, while the Restrictionists can get them only in the free states. 
 
 This being the fact, why is it so? It is not because one side of 
 the question dividing them, is more sectional than the other; nor 
 because of any difference in the mental or moral structure of the 
 people North and South. It is because, in that question, the people 
 of the South have an immediate palpable and immenesly [sic] 
 great pecuniary interest; while, with the people of the North, it is 
 merely an abstract question of moral right, with only slight, and 
 remote pecuniary interest added. 
 
 The slaves of the South, at a moderate estimate, are worth a 
 thousand millions of dollars. Let it be permanently settled that 
 this property may extend to new teritory [sic], without restraint, 
 and it greatly enhances, perhaps quite doubles, its value at once. 
 This immense, palpable pecuniary interest, on the question of ex- 
 tending slavery, unites the Southern people, as one man. But it 
 can not be demonstrated that the North will gain a dollar by re- 
 stricting it. 
 
 Moral principle is all, or nearly all, that unites us of the 
 North. Pity 'tis, it is so, but this is a looser bond than pecuniary 
 interest. Right here is the plain cause of their perfect union and 
 our want of it. And see how it works. If a Southern man aspires to 
 be president, they choke him down instantly, in order that the 
 
350 ABRAHAM LINCOLN: 
 
 glittering prize of the presidency, may be held up, on Southern 
 terms, to the greedy eyes of Northern ambition. With this they 
 tempt us, and break in upon us. 
 
 The democratic party, in 1844, elected a Southern president. 
 Since then, they have neither had a Southern candidate for elec- 
 tion, or nomination. Their conventions of 1848-1852 and 1856, 
 have been struggles exclusively among Northern men, each vieing 
 [sic] to outbid the other for the Southern vote — the South stand- 
 ing calmly by to finally cry going, going, gone, to the highest bid- 
 der; and, at the same time, to make its power more distinctly seen, 
 and thereby to secure a still higher bid at the next succeeding 
 struggle. 
 
 "Actions speak louder than words" is the maxim; and, if true, 
 the South now distinctly says to the North "Give us the measures, 
 and you take the men' 
 
 The total withdrawal of Southern aspirants, for the presi- 
 dency, multiplies the number of Northern ones. These last, in 
 competing with each other, commit themselves to the utmost 
 verge that, through their own greediness, they have the least hope 
 their Northern supporters will bear. Having got committed, in a 
 race of competition, necessity drives them into union to sus- 
 tain themselves. Each, at first secures all he can, on personal at- 
 tachments to him, and through hopes resting on him personally. 
 Next, they unite with one another, and with the perfectly banded 
 South, to make the offensive position they have got into, "a party 
 measure/' This done, large additional members are secured. When 
 the repeal of the Missouri Compromise was first proposed, at the 
 North there was litterally [sic] "nobody 9 in favor of it. In February 
 1854 our Legislature met in call, or extra, session. From them 
 Douglas sought an indorsement of his then pending measure of 
 Repeal. In our Legislature were about 70 democrats to 30 whigs. 
 The former held a caucus, in which it was resolved to give Doug- 
 las the desired indorsement. Some of the members of that caucus 
 bolted — would not stand it — and they now divulge the secrets. 
 They say that the caucus fairly confessed that the Repeal was 
 wrong; and they placed their determination to indorse it, solely on 
 the ground that it was necessary to sustain Douglas. Here we have 
 the direct evidence of how the Nebraska-bill obtained its strength 
 
HIS SPEECHES AND WRITINGS 351 
 
 in Illinois. It was given, not in a sense of right, but in the teeth of 
 a sense of wrong, to sustain Douglas. So Illinois was divided. So 
 New England, for Pierce; Michigan for Cass, Pensylvania [sic] for 
 Buchan [sic], and all for the Democratic party. 
 
 And when, by such means, they have got a large portion of 
 the Northern people into a position contrary to their own honest 
 impulses, and sense of right; they have the impudence to turn 
 upon those who do stand firm, and call them sectional. 
 
 Were it not too serious a matter, this cool impudence would 
 be laughable, to say the least. 
 
 Recurring to the question "Shall slavery be allowed to extend 
 into U. S. terrtory [sic] now legal [sic] free? 
 
 This is a sectional question — that is to say, it is a question, in 
 its nature calculated to divide the American people geographically. 
 Who is to blame for that? Who can help it? Either side can help 
 it; but how? Simply by yielding to the other side. There is no 
 other way. In the whole range of possibility, there is no other way. 
 Then, which side shall yield? To this again, there can be but one 
 answer — the side which is in the wrong. True, we differ, as to 
 which side is wrong; and we boldly say, let all who really think 
 slavery ought to spread into free terrtory [sic], openly go over 
 against us. There is where they rightfully belong. 
 
 But why should any go, who really think slavery ought not 
 to spread? Do they really think the right ought to yield to the 
 wrong? Are they afraid to stand by the right? Do they fear that 
 the constitution is too weak to sustain them in the right? Do they 
 really think that by right surrendering to wrong, the hopes of our 
 Constitution, our Union, and our liberties, can possibly be bet- 
 tered? 
 
 The date of this speech or portion of a speech is 
 given as above by Nicolay and Hay. Earlier at Galena, 
 on July 23, Lincoln had spoken much to the same effect, 
 as indicated by the report in the Galena Advertiser and 
 copied by the Illinois State Journal, August 8, 1856. Also, 
 on September 2, a speech on sectionalism was delivered 
 at Lincoln, Illinois, as reported in the Journal, September 
 
352 ABRAHAM LINCOLN: 
 
 4, 1856. Perhaps the substance of the manuscript was 
 thus used several times. In any event the date October 1 
 is not very well supported by evidence, as Lincoln was 
 most probably traveling to Alton, where he spoke the 
 next day during the State Fair, perhaps using the general 
 contents if not the actual manuscript of "Sectionalism" 
 as part of the speech. 
 
 THE DRED SCOTT DECISION: 
 
 SPEECH AT SPRINGFIELD, ILLINOIS. JUNE 26, 1857 
 
 Fellow-citizens : — 
 
 I am here to-night, partly by the invitation of some of you, 
 and partly by my own inclination. Two weeks ago Judge Doug- 
 las spoke here on the several subjects of Kansas, the Dred Scott 
 decision, and Utah. I listened to the speech at the time, and have 
 read the report of it since. It was intended to controvert opinions 
 which I think just, and to assail (politically, not personally,) 
 those men who, in common with me, entertain those opinions. 
 For this reason I wished then, and still wish, to make some an- 
 swer to it, which I now take the opportunity of doing. 
 
 I begin with Utah. If it prove to be true, as is probable, that 
 the people of Utah are in open rebellion to the United States, 
 then Judge Douglas is in favor of repealing their territorial 
 organization, and attaching them to the adjoining States for 
 judicial purposes. I say, too, if they are in rebellion, they ought 
 to be somehow coerced to obedience; and I am not now prepared 
 to admit or deny that the Judge's mode of coercing them is not as 
 good as any. The Republicans can fall in with it without taking 
 back anything they have ever said. To be sure, it would be a con- 
 siderable backing down by Judge Douglas from his much-vaunted 
 doctrine of self-government for the territories; but this is only 
 
HIS SPEECHES AND WRITINGS 353 
 
 additional proof of what was very plain from the beginning, that 
 that doctrine was a mere deceitful pretense for the benefit of 
 slavery. Those who could not see that much in the Nebraska act 
 itself, which forced Governors, and Secretaries, and Judges on the 
 people of the territories, without their choice or consent, could not 
 be made to see, though one should rise from the dead to testify. 
 
 But in all this, it is very plain the Judge evades the only 
 question the Republicans have ever pressed upon the Democracy 
 in regard to Utah. That question the Judge well knows to be this: 
 "If the people of Utah shall peacefully form a State Constitution 
 tolerating polygamy, will the Democracy admit them into the 
 Union?" There is nothing in the United States Constitution or 
 law against polygamy; and why is it not a part of the Judge's 
 "sacred right of self-government" for that people to have it, or 
 rather to keep it, if they choose? These questions, so far as I know, 
 the Judge never answers. It might involve the Democracy to 
 answer them either way, and they go unanswered. 
 
 As to Kansas. The substance of the Judge's speech on Kansas 
 is an effort to put the free State men in the wrong for not voting 
 at the election of delegates to the Constitutional Convention. He 
 says: "There is every reason to hope and believe that the law will 
 be fairly interpreted and impartially executed, so as to insure to 
 every bona fide inhabitant the free and quiet exercise of the elec- 
 tive franchise." 
 
 It appears extraordinary that Judge Douglas should make 
 such a statement. He knows that, by the law, no one can vote who 
 has not been registered; and he knows that the free State men 
 place their refusal to vote on the ground that but few of them 
 have been registered. It is possible this is not true, but Judge 
 Douglas knows it is asserted to be true in letters, newspapers, and 
 public speeches, and borne by every mail, and blown by every 
 breeze to the eyes and ears of the world. He knows it is boldly 
 declared that the people of many whole counties, and many whole 
 neighborhoods in others, are left unregistered; yet, he does not 
 venture to contradict the declaration, nor to point out how they 
 can vote without being registered; but he just slips along, not 
 seeming to know there is any such question of fact, and com- 
 placently declares: "There is every reason to hope and believe 
 
354 ABRAHAM LINCOLN: 
 
 that the law will be fairly and impartially executed, so as to insure 
 to every bona fide inhabitant the free and quiet exercise of the 
 elective franchise." 
 
 I readily agree that if all had a chance to vote, they ought 
 to have voted. If, on the contrary, as they allege, and Judge Doug- 
 las ventures not to particularly contradict, few only of the free 
 State men had a chance to vote, they were perfectly right in stay- 
 ing from the polls in a body. 
 
 By the way since the Judge spoke, the Kansas election has 
 come off. The Judge expressed his confidence that all the Demo- 
 crats in Kansas would do their duty — including "free state Demo- 
 crats'* of course. The returns received here as yet are very incom- 
 plete; but so far as they go, they indicate that only about one 
 sixth of the registered voters, have really voted; and this too, 
 when not more, perhaps, than one half of the rightful voters have 
 been registered, thus snowing the thing to have been altogether the 
 most exquisite farce ever enacted. I am watching with considera- 
 ble interest, to ascertain what figure "the free-state Democrats" 
 cut in the concern. Of course they voted — all democrats do their 
 duty — and of course they did not vote for slave-state candidates. 
 We soon shall know how many delegates they elected, how many 
 candidates they had, pledged for a free state; and how many votes 
 were cast for them. 
 
 Allow me to barely whisper my suspicion that there were no 
 such things in Kansas as "free state Democrats" — that they were 
 altogether mythical, good only to figure in newspapers and 
 speeches in the free states. If there should prove to be one real 
 living free state Democrat in Kansas, I suggest that it might be well 
 to catch him, and stuff and preserve his skin, as an interesting 
 specimen of that soon-to-be-extinct variety of the genus, Democrat. 
 
 And now as to the Dred Scott decision. That decision declares 
 two propositions — first, that a negro cannot sue in the U. S. Cpurts; 
 and secondly, that Congress cannot prohibit slavery in the Ter- 
 ritories. It was made by a divided court — dividing differently on 
 the different points. Judge Douglas does not discuss the merits of 
 the decision; and, in that respect, I shall follow his example, be- 
 lieving I could no more improve on McLean and Curtis, than he 
 could on Taney. 
 
HIS SPEECHES AND WRITINGS 355 
 
 He denounces all who question the correctness of that deci- 
 sion, as offering violent resistance to it. But who resists it? Who 
 has, in spite of the decision, declared Dred Scott free, and resisted 
 the authority of his master over him? 
 
 Judicial decisions have two uses — first, to absolutely determine 
 the case decided; and secondly, to indicate to the public how 
 other similar cases will be decided when they arise. For the latter 
 use, they are called "precedents" and "authorities. " 
 
 We believe, as much as Judge Douglas, (perhaps more) in 
 obedience to, and respect for, the judicial department of govern- 
 ment. We think its decisions on Constitutional questions, when 
 fully settled, should control, not only the particular cases decided, 
 but the general policy of the country, subject to be disturbed only 
 by amendments of the Constitution as provided in that instrument 
 itself. More than this would be revolution. But we think the Dred 
 Scott decision is erroneous. We know the court that made it, has 
 often overruled its own decisions, and we shall do what we can 
 to have it to over rule this. We offer no resistance to it. 
 
 Judicial decisions are of greater or less authority as precedents, 
 according to circumstances. That this should be so, accords both 
 with common sense, and the customary understanding of the legal 
 profession. 
 
 If this important decision had been made by the unanimous 
 concurrence of the judges, and without any apparent partisan bias, 
 and in accordance with legal public expectation, and with the 
 steady practice of the departments throughout our history, and had 
 been in no part, based on assumed historical facts which are not 
 really true; or, if wanting in some of these, it had been before the 
 court more than once, and had there been affirmed and re-affirmed 
 through a course of years, it then might be, perhaps would be, 
 factious, nay, even revolutionary, not to acquiesce in it as a prece- 
 dent. 
 
 But when, as it is true we find it wanting in all these claims 
 to the public confidence, it is not resistance, it is not factious, 
 it is not even disrespectful, to treat it as not having yet quite 
 established a settled doctrine for the country. But Judge Douglas 
 considers this view awful. Hear him: 
 
 "The courts are the tribunals prescribed by the Constitution 
 
356 ABRAHAM LINCOLN: 
 
 and created by the authority of the people to determine, expound 
 and enforce the law. Hence, whoever resists the final decision of 
 the highest judicial tribunal, aims a deadly blow to our whole 
 Republican system of government — a blow, which if successful 
 would place all our rights and liberties at the mercy of passion, 
 anarchy and violence. I repeat, therefore, that if resistance to the 
 decisions of the Supreme Court of the United States, in a matter 
 like the points decided in the Dred Scott case, clearly within their 
 jurisdiction as defined by the Constitution, shall be forced upon 
 the country as a political issue, it will become a distinct and 
 naked issue between the friends and enemies of the Constitution 
 — the friends and the enemies of the supremacy of the laws." 
 
 Why, this same Supreme court once decided a national bank 
 to be constitutional; but Gen. Jackson, as President of the United 
 States, disregarded the decision, and voted a bill for a re-charter, 
 partly on constitutional ground, declaring that each public func- 
 tionary must support the Constitution, "as he understands it." But 
 hear the General's own words. Here they are, taken from his veto 
 message: 
 
 "It is maintained by the advocates of the bank, that its con- 
 stitutionality, in all its features, ought to be considered as settled 
 by precedent, and by the decision of the Supreme Court. To this 
 conclusion I cannot assent. Mere precedent is a dangerous source 
 of authority, and should not be regarded as deciding questions 
 of constitutional power, except where the acquiescence of the 
 people and the States can be considered as well settled. So far 
 from this being the case on this subject, an argument against the 
 bank might be based on precedent. One Congress in 1791, decided 
 in favor of a bank; another in 1811, decided against it. One Con- 
 gress in 1815 decided against a bank; another in 1816 decided in 
 its favor. Prior to the present Congress, therefore, the precedents 
 drawn from that source were equal. If we resort to the States, the 
 expressions of legislative, judicial and executive opinions against 
 the bank have been probably to those in its favor as four to one. 
 There is nothing in precedent, therefore, which if its authority 
 were admitted, ought to weigh in favor of the act before me." 
 
 I drop the quotations merely to remark that all there ever 
 was, in the way of precedent up to the Dred Scott decision, on the 
 
HIS SPEECHES AND WRITINGS 357 
 
 points therein decided, had been against that decision. But hear 
 Gen. Jackson further — 
 
 "If the opinion of the Supreme Court covered the whole 
 ground of this act, it ought not to control the co-ordinate authori- 
 ties of this Government. The Congress, the executive and the court 
 must each for itself be guided by its own opinion of the Constitu- 
 tion. Each public officer, who takes an oath to support the Con- 
 stitution, swears that he will support it as he understands it, and 
 not as it is understood by others." 
 
 Again and again have I heard Judge Douglas denounce that 
 bank decision, and applaud Gen. Jackson for disregarding it. It 
 would be interesting for him to look over his recent speech, and 
 see how exactly his fierce philippics against us for resisting Su- 
 preme Court decisions, fall upon his own head. It will call to his 
 mind a long and fierce political war in this country, upon an issue 
 which, in his own language, and, of course, in his own changeless 
 estimation, was "a distinct and naked issue between the friends 
 and the enemies of the Constitution," and in which war he fought 
 in the ranks of the enemies of the Constitution. 
 
 I have said, in substance, that the Dred Scott decision was, 
 in part, based on assumed historical facts which were not really 
 true; and I ought not to leave the subject without giving some 
 reasons for saying this; I therefore give an instance or two, which 
 I think fully sustain me. Chief Justice Taney, in delivering the 
 opinion of the majority of the Court, insists at great length that 
 negroes were no part of the people who made, or for whom was 
 made, the Declaration of Independence, or the Constitution of the 
 United States. 
 
 On the contrary, Judge Curtis, in his dissenting opinion, 
 shows that in five of the then thirteen States, to wit, New Hamp- 
 shire, Massachusetts, New York, New Jersey and North Carolina, 
 free negroes were voters, and, in proportion to their numbers, had 
 the same part in making the Constitution that the white people 
 had. He shows this with so much particularity as to leave no doubt 
 of its truth; and, as a sort of conclusion on that point, holds the 
 following language: 
 
 "The Constitution was ordained and established by the people 
 of the United States, through the action, in each State, of those 
 
358 ABRAHAM LINCOLN: 
 
 persons who were qualified by its laws to act thereon in behalf of 
 themselves and all other citizens of the State. In some of the States, 
 as we have seen, colored persons were among those qualified by 
 law to act on the subject. These colored persons were not only 
 included in the body of 'the people of the United States/ by whom 
 the Constitution was ordained and established; but in at least five 
 of the States they had the power to act, and, doubtless, did act, 
 by their suffrages, upon the question of its adoption." 
 
 Again, Chief Justice Taney says: "It is difficult, at this day, to 
 realize the state of public opinion in relation to that unfortunate 
 race, which prevailed in the civilized and enlightened portions 
 of the world at the time of the Declaration of Independence, and 
 when the Constitution of the United States was framed and 
 adopted." And again, after quoting from the Declaration, he says: 
 "The general words above quoted would seem to include the 
 whole human family, and if they were used in a similar instrument 
 at this day, would be so understood/' 
 
 In these the Chief Justice does not directly assert, but plainly 
 assumes, as a fact, that the public estimate of the black man is 
 more favorable now than it was in the days of the Revolution. 
 This assumption is a mistake. In some trifling particulars, the con- 
 dition of that race has been ameliorated; but, as a whole, in this 
 country, the change between then and now is decidedly the other 
 way; and their ultimate destiny has never appeared so hopeless as 
 in the last three or four years. In two of the five States — New 
 Jersey and North Carolina — that then gave the free negro the right 
 of voting, the right has since been taken away; and in a third — 
 New York — it has been greatly abridged; while it has not been 
 extended, so far as I know, to a single additional State, though the 
 number of the States has more than doubled. In those days, as I 
 understand, masters could, at their own pleasure, emancipate their 
 slaves; but since then, such legal restraints have been made upon 
 emancipation, as to amount almost to prohibition. In those days, 
 Legislatures held the unquestioned power to abolish slavery in 
 their respective States, but now it is becoming quite fashionable 
 for State Constitutions to withhold that power from the Legisla- 
 tures. In those days, by common consent, the spread of the black 
 man's bondage to new countries was prohibited; but now, Congress 
 
HIS SPEECHES AND WRITINGS 359 
 
 decides that it will not continue the prohibition, and the Supreme 
 Court decides that it could not if it would. In those days, our 
 Declaration of Independence was held sacred by all, and thought 
 to include all; but now, to aid in making the bondage of the negro 
 universal and eternal, it is assailed, and sneered at, and con- 
 strued, and hawked at, and torn, till, if its framers could rise 
 from their graves, they could not at all recognize it. All the powers 
 of earth seem rapidly combining against him. Mammon is after 
 him; ambition follows, and philosophy follows, and the Theology 
 of the day is fast joining the cry. They have him in his prison 
 house; they have searched his person, and left no prying instru- 
 ment with him. One after another they have closed the heavy iron 
 doors upon him, and now they have him, as it were, bolted in with 
 a lock of a hundred keys, which can never be unlocked without 
 the concurrence of every key; the keys in the hands of a hundred 
 different men, and they scattered to a hundred different and dis- 
 tant places; and they stand musing as to what invention, in all 
 the dominions of mind and matter, can be produced to make 
 the impossibility of his escape more complete than it is. 
 
 It is grossly incorrect to say or assume, that the public esti- 
 mate of the negro is more favorable now than it was at the origin 
 of the government. 
 
 Three years and a half ago, Judge Douglas brought forward 
 his famous Nebraska bill. The country was at once in a blaze. He 
 scorned all opposition, and carried it through Congress. Since then 
 he has seen himself superseded in a Presidential nomination, by 
 one indorsing the general doctrine of his measure, but at the same 
 time standing clear of the odium of its untimely agitation, and its 
 gross breach of national faith; and he has seen that successful 
 rival Constitutionally elected, not by the strength of friends, but 
 by the division of adversaries, being in a popular minority of 
 nearly four hundred thousand votes. He has seen his chief aids 
 in his own State, Shields and Richardson, politically speaking, 
 successively tried, convicted, and executed, for an offense not 
 their own, but his. And now he sees his own case, standing next 
 on the docket for trial. 
 
 There is a natural disgust in the minds of nearly all white peo- 
 ple, to the idea of an indiscriminate amalgamation of the white 
 
360 ABRAHAM LINCOLN: 
 
 and black races; and Judge Douglas evidently is basing his chief 
 hope upon the chances of his being able to appropriate the benefit 
 of this disgust to himself. If he can, by much drumming and re- 
 peating, fasten the odium of that idea upon his adversaries, he 
 thinks he can struggle through the storm. He therefore clings to 
 this hope, as a drowning man to the last plank. He makes an occa- 
 sion for lugging it in from the opposition to the Dred Scott deci- 
 sion. He finds the Republicans insisting that the Declaration of 
 Independence includes all men, black as well as white; and 
 forthwith he boldly denies that it includes negroes at all, and pro- 
 ceeds to argue gravely that all who contend it does, do so only 
 because they want to vote, and eat, and sleep, and marry with 
 negroes! He will have it that they cannot be consistent else. Now I 
 protest against that counterfeit logic which concludes that, be- 
 cause I do not want a black woman for a slave I must necessarily 
 want her for a wife. I need not have her for either, I can just leave 
 her alone. In some respects she certainly is not my equal; but in 
 her natural right to eat the bread she earns with her own hands 
 without asking leave of any one else, she is my equal, and the 
 equal of all others. 
 
 Chief Justice Taney, in his opinion in the Dred Scott case, ad- 
 mits that the language of the Declaration is broad enough to in- 
 clude the whole human family, but he and Judge Douglas argue 
 that the authors of that instrument did not intend to include 
 negroes, by the fact that they did not at once, actually place them 
 on an equality with the whites. Now this grave argument comes 
 to just nothing at all, by the other fact, that they did not at once, 
 or ever afterwards, actually place all white people on an equality 
 with one another. And this is the staple argument of both the 
 Chief Justice and the Senator, for doing this obvious violence to 
 the plain, unmistakable language of the Declaration. I think the 
 authors of that notable instrument intended to include all men, 
 but they did not intend to declare all men equal in all respects. 
 They did not mean to say all were equal in color, size, intellect, 
 moral developments, or social capacity. They defined with toler- 
 able distinctness, in what respects they did consider all men cre- 
 ated equal — equal in "certain inalienable rights, among which are 
 life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness." This they said, and this 
 
HIS SPEECHES AND WRITINGS 361 
 
 meant. They did not mean to assert the obvious untruth, that all 
 were then actually enjoying that equality, nor yet, that they were 
 about to confer it immediately upon them. In fact they had no 
 power to confer such a boon. They meant simply to declare the 
 right, so that the enforcement of it might follow as fast as circum- 
 stances should permit. They meant to set up a standard maxim for 
 free society, which could be familiar to all, and revered by all; 
 constantly looked to, constantly labored for, and even though 
 never perfectly attained, constantly approximated, and thereby 
 constantly spreading and deepening its influence, and augmenting 
 the happiness and value of life to all people of all colors every- 
 where. The assertion that "all men are created equal" was of no 
 practical use in effecting our separation from Great Britain; and 
 it was placed in the Declaration, not for that, but for future use. 
 Its authors meant it to be, thank God, it is now proving itself, a 
 stumbling block to those who in after times might seek to turn a 
 free people back into the hateful paths of despotism. They knew 
 the proneness of prosperity to breed tyrants, and they meant 
 when such should re-appear in this fair land and commence their 
 vocation they should find left for them at least one hard nut to 
 crack. 
 
 I have now briefly expressed my view of the meaning and ob- 
 jects of that part of the Declaration of Independence which de- 
 clares that "all men are created equal." 
 
 Now let us hear Judge Douglas' view of the same subject, as I 
 find it in the printed report of his late speech. Here it is: 
 
 "No man can vindicate the character, motives and conduct of 
 the signers of the Declaration of Independence, except upon the 
 hypothesis that they referred to the white race alone, and not to 
 the African, when they declared all men to have been created 
 equal — that they were speaking of British subjects on this con- 
 tinent being equal to British subjects born and residing in Great 
 Britain — that they were entitled to the same inalienable rights, 
 and among them were enumerated life, liberty and the pursuit of 
 happiness. The Declaration was adopted for the purpose of jus- 
 tifying the colonists in the eyes of the civilized world in with- 
 drawing their allegiance from the British crown, and dissolving 
 their connection with the mother country ." 
 
362 ABRAHAM LINCOLN: 
 
 My good friends, read that carefully over some leisure hour, 
 and ponder well upon it — see what a mere wreck — mangled ruin 
 — it makes of our once glorious Declaration. 
 
 "They were speaking of British subjects on this continent being 
 equal to British subjects born and residing in Great Britain !" Why, 
 according to this, not only negroes but white people outside of 
 Great Britain and America are not spoken of in that instrument. 
 The English, Irish and Scotch, along with white Americans, were 
 included to be sure, but the French, Germans and other white 
 people of the world are all gone to pot along with the Judge's 
 inferior races. 
 
 I had thought the Declaration promised something better than 
 the condition of British subjects; but no, it only meant that we 
 should be equal to them in their own oppressed and unequal 
 condition. According to that, it gave no promise that having kicked 
 off the King and Lords of Great Britain, we should not at once be 
 saddled with a King and Lords of our own. 
 
 I had thought the Declaration contemplated the progressive 
 improvement in the condition of all men everywhere; but no, it 
 merely "was adopted for the purpose of justifying the colonists 
 in the eyes of the civilized world in withdrawing their allegiance 
 from the British crown, and dissolving their connection with the 
 mother country.'' Why, that object having been effected some 
 eighty years ago, the Declaration is of no practical use now — 
 mere rubbish — old wadding left to rot on the battle-field after the 
 victory is won. 
 
 I understand you are preparing to celebrate the "Fourth," to- 
 morrow week. What for? The doings of that day had no reference 
 to the present; and quite half of you are not even descendants of 
 those who were referred to at that day. But I suppose you will 
 celebrate; and will even go so far as to read the Declaration. 
 Suppose after you read it once in the old fashioned way, you 
 read it once more with Judge Douglas' version. It will then run 
 thus: "We hold these truths to be self-evident that all British sub- 
 jects who were on this continent eighty-one years ago, were cre- 
 ated equal to all British subjects born and then residing in Great 
 Britain." 
 
 And now I appeal to all — to Democrats as well as others, — are 
 
HIS SPEECHES AND WRITINGS 363 
 
 you really willing that the Declaration shall be thus frittered 
 away? — thus left no more at most, than an interesting memorial of 
 the dead past? thus shorn of its vitality, and practical value; and 
 left without the germ or even the suggestion of the individual 
 rights of man in it? 
 
 But Judge Douglas is especially horrified at the thought of the 
 mixing of blood by the white and black races: agreed for once — a 
 thousand times agreed. There are white men enough to marry all 
 the white women, and black men enough to marry all the black 
 women; and so let them be married. On this point we fully agree 
 with the Judge; and when he shall show that his policy is better 
 adapted to prevent amalgamation than ours we shall drop ours, 
 and adopt his. Let us see. In 1850 there were in the United States 
 405,751 mulattoes. Very few of these are the offspring of whites 
 and free blacks; nearly all have sprung from black slaves and 
 white masters. A separation of the races is the only perfect pre- 
 ventive of amalgamation; but as an immediate separation is im- 
 possible the next best thing is to keep them apart where they are 
 not already together. If white and black people never get together 
 in Kansas, they will never mix blood in Kansas. That is at least 
 one self-evident truth. A few free colored persons may get into 
 the free States, in any event; but their number is too insignificant 
 to amount to much in the way of mixing blood. In 1850 there were 
 in the free States, 56,649 mulattoes; but for the most part they 
 were not born there — they came from the slave States, ready 
 made up. In the same year the slave States had 348,874 mulattoes, 
 all of home production. The proportion of free mulattoes to free 
 blacks — the only colored classes in the free states — is much 
 greater in the slave than in the free states. It is worthy of note too, 
 that among the free states those which make the colored man the 
 nearest to equal the white, have proportionably the fewest mulat- 
 toes, the least of amalgamation. In New Hampshire, the State 
 which goes farthest toward equality between the races, there are 
 just 184 mulattoes, while there are in Virginia — how many do 
 you think?— -79,775, being 23,126 more than in all the free States 
 together. 
 
 These statistics show that slavery is the greatest source of 
 amalgamation; and next to it, not the elevation, but the degrada- 
 
364 ABRAHAM LINCOLN: 
 
 tion of the free blacks. Yet Judge Douglas dreads the slightest re- 
 straints on the spread of slavery, and the slightest human recogni- 
 tion of the negro, as tending horribly to amalgamation. 
 
 The very Dred Scott case affords a strong test as to which 
 party most favors amalgamation, the Republicans or the dear 
 Union-saving Democracy. Dred Scott, his wife and two daughters 
 were all involved in the suit. We desired the court to have held 
 that they were citizens so far at least as to entitle them to a hear- 
 ing as to whether they were free or not; and then, also, that they 
 were in fact and in law really free. Could we have had our way, 
 the chances of these black girls ever mixing their blood with that 
 of white people, would have been diminished at least to the ex- 
 tent that it could not have been without their consent. But Judge 
 Douglas is delighted to have them decided to be slaves, and not 
 human enough to have a hearing, even if they were free, and thus 
 left subject to the forced concubinage of their masters, and liable 
 to become the mothers of mulattoes in spite of themselves^ — the 
 very state of case that produces nine tenths of all the mulattoes 
 — all the mixing of blood in the nation. 
 
 Of course, I state this case as an illustration only, not mean- 
 ing to say or intimate that the master of Dred Scott and his fam- 
 ily, or any more than a per centage of masters generally, are in- 
 clined to exercise this particular power which they hold over their 
 female slaves. 
 
 I have said that the separation of the races is the only perfect 
 preventive of amalgamation. I have no right to say all the mem- 
 bers of the Republican party are in favor of this, nor to say that 
 as a party they are in favor of it. There is nothing in their plat- 
 form directly on the subject. But I can say a very large proportion 
 of its members are for it, and that the chief plank in their platform 
 — opposition to the spread of slavery — is most favorable to that 
 separation. 
 
 Such separation, if ever effected at all, must be effected by 
 colonization; and no political party, as such, is now doing any- 
 thing directly for colonization. Party operations at present only 
 favor or retard colonization incidentally. The enterprise is a diffi- 
 cult one; but "where there is a will there is a way," and what 
 colonization needs most is a hearty will. Will springs from the two 
 
HIS SPEECHES AND WRITINGS 365 
 
 elements of moral sense and self-interest. Let us be brought to be- 
 lieve it is morally right, and at the same time, favorable to, or, at 
 least, npt against, our interest, to transfer the African to his native 
 clime, and we shall find a way to do it, however great the task 
 may be. The children of Israel, to such numbers as to include four 
 hundred thousand fighting men, went out of Egyptian bondage in 
 a body. 
 
 How differently the respective courses of the Democratic and 
 Republican parties incidentally bear on the question of forming a 
 will — a public sentiment — for colonization, is easy to see. The Re- 
 publicans inculcate, with whatever of ability they can, that the 
 negro is a man, that his bondage is cruelly wrong, and that the 
 field of his oppression ought not to be enlarged. The Democrats 
 deny his manhood; deny, or dwarf to insignificance, the wrong 
 of his bondage; so far as possible, crush all sympathy for him, 
 and cultivate and excite hatred and disgust against him; compli- 
 ment themselves as Union-savers for doing so; and call the in- 
 definite outspreading of his bondage "a sacred right of self-gov- 
 ernment." 
 
 The plainest print cannot be read through a gold eagle; and 
 it will be ever hard to find many men who will send a slave to 
 Liberia, and pay his passage, while they can send him to a new 
 country Kansas, for instance, and sell him for fifteen hundred 
 dollars, and the rise. 
 
 The circumstances under which Lincoln delivered 
 this speech are generally indicated by the context. Doug- 
 las had spoken on the subject two weeks earlier, arguing 
 as usual that popular sovereignty was the solution to 
 the problem of slavery extension and taking an ultra- 
 conservative position in regard to the sanctity of a Su- 
 preme Court decision. The reference to unrest among the 
 Mormons in Utah recalls that twenty years earlier they 
 had fled from their city of Zion at Independence, Mis- 
 souri, in order to escape the persecutions of the non- 
 Mormon inhabitants and the jurisdiction of federal laws. 
 Many of the Mormons had come originally from New 
 
366 ABRAHAM LINCOLN: 
 
 York to Ohio and while there and en route to Missouri 
 had proselyted in central Illinois. During the thirties 
 numerous references appear in the Journal to their dif- 
 ficulties and disturbances. The treaty concluded with 
 Mexico in 1847-48 brought them again under federal 
 jurisdiction almost as soon as their advanced guard had 
 settled in Utah. Accordingly, under the leadership of 
 Brigham Young, a convention was called and a constitu- 
 tion adopted for a state to be called "Deseret." Congress, 
 however, refused recognition of the state, and instead 
 organized the Territory of Utah. By 1857, the people of 
 the territory, largely Mormon, were indignant and rest- 
 less, to say the least, and hence the "rebellion" alluded 
 to in the speech. 
 
 LETTER TO E. B. WASHBURNE 
 APRIL 26, 1858 
 
 Urbana, Ills. April 26. 1858. 
 Hon. E. B. Washburne. 
 My dear Sir: 
 
 I am rather a poor correspondent, but I think perhaps I ought 
 to write you a letter just now. I am here at this time; but I was at 
 home during the sitting of the two democratic conventions. The 
 day before those conventions I received a letter from Chicago 
 having, among other things, on other subjects, the following in it: 
 "A reliable republican, but an old line whig lawyer, in this city 
 told me to-day that he himself had seen a letter from one of our 
 republican congressmen, advising us all to go for the re-election 
 of Judge Douglass [sic]. He said he was informed to keep the 
 author a secret & he was going to do so. From him I learnt that 
 he was not an old line democrat, or abolitionist This narrows the 
 
HIS SPEECHES AND WRITINGS 367 
 
 contest down to the congressmen from the Galena and Fulton 
 Dists." 
 
 The above is a litteral [sic] copy of all the letter contained 
 on that subject. The morning of the conventions Mr. Herndon 
 showed me your letter of the 15th. to him, which convinced me 
 that the story in the letter from Chicago was based upon some 
 mistake, misconstruction of language, or the like. Several of our 
 friends were down from Chicago, and they had something of the 
 same story amongst them, some half suspecting that you were in- 
 clined to favor Douglas, and others thinking there was an effort 
 to wrong you. 
 
 I thought neither was exactly the case; that the whole had 
 originated in some misconstruction, coupled with a high degree of 
 sensitiveness on the point, and that the whole matter was not 
 worth another moment's consideration. Such is my opinion now, 
 and I hope you will have no concern about it. I have written this 
 because Charley Wilson told me he was writing you, and because 
 I expect Dr. Ray, (who was a little excited about the matter) has 
 also written you; and because I think, I perhaps, have taken a 
 calmer view of the thing than they may have done. I am satisfied 
 you have done no wrong, and nobody has intended any wrong 
 to you. 
 
 A word about the conventions. The democracy parted in not 
 a very encouraged state of mind. 
 
 On the contrary, our friends, a good many of whom were 
 present, parted in high spirits. They think if we do not triumph 
 the fault will be our own, and so I really think. 
 
 Your friend as ever 
 
 A Lincoln 
 
 The Charlie Wilson alluded to was Charles Lush 
 Wilson, editor of the Chicago Journal and a supporter of 
 Lincoln s candidacy. The letter referred to here and in 
 the two succeeding letters to Washburne, May 15 and 
 May 27, apparently caused Lincoln considerable uneasi- 
 ness for the reasons indicated in the context. 
 
368 ABRAHAM LINCOLN 
 
 LETTER TO E. B. WASHBURNE 
 MAY 15, 1858 
 
 Springfield, May 15. 1858. 
 Hon. E. B. Washburne 
 My dear Sir 
 
 Yours of the 6th. accompanied by yours of April 12th. to 
 C. L. Wilson was received day-before-yesterday. 
 
 There certainly is nothing in the letter to Wilson, which I, in 
 particular, or republicans in general, could complain of. Of that, 
 I was quite satisfied before I saw the letter. I believe there has 
 been no malicious intent to misrepresent you; I hope there is no 
 longer any misunderstanding, and that the matter may drop. 
 
 Eight or ten days ago I wrote Kellogg from Beardstown. 
 Get him to show you the letter. It gave my view of the field, as it 
 appeared then. Nothing has occurred since, except that it grows 
 more and more quiet since the passage of the English contrivance. 
 The State Register, here, is evidently laboring to bring it's old 
 friends into what the doctors call the "comatose state" — that is, 
 a sort of drowsy, dreamy condition, in which they may not per- 
 ceive or remember that there has ever been, or is, any difference 
 between Douglas & the President. This could be done, if the 
 Buchanan men would allow it — which, however, the latter seem 
 determined not to do. 
 
 I think our prospects gradually, and steadily, grow better; 
 though we are not yet clear out of the woods by a great deal. 
 There is still some effort to make trouble out of "Americanism." 
 If that were out of the way, for all the rest, I believe we should 
 be "out of the woods" 
 
 Yours very truly 
 
 A. Lincoln 
 
HIS SPEECHES AND WRITINGS 369 
 
 LETTER TO JEDIAH F. ALEXANDER 
 MAY 15, 1858 
 
 Springfield, May 15. 1858 
 J. F. Alexander, Esq 
 Greenville, Ills. 
 My dear Sir 
 
 I reached home a week ago and found yours of the 1st. in- 
 viting me to name a time to meet and address a political meeting 
 in Bond county. It is too early, considering that when I once 
 begin making political speeches I shall have no respite till 
 November. The labor of that I might endure, but I really can not 
 spare the time from my business. 
 
 Nearer the time I will try to meet the people of Bond, if they 
 desire. 
 
 I will only say now that, as I understand, there remains all 
 the difference there ever was between Judge Douglas & the Re- 
 publicans — they insisting that Congress shall, and he insisting 
 that congress shall not, keep slavery out of the Teritories [sic] 
 before & up to the time they form State constitutions. No republi- 
 can has ever contended that, when sl constitution is to be formed, 
 any but the people of the teritory [sic] shall form it. Republicans 
 have never contended that congress should dictate sl constitu- 
 tion to any state or teritory [sic]; but they have contended that 
 the people should be perfectly free to form their constitution in 
 their own way — as perfectly free from the presence of slavery 
 amongst them, as from every other improper influence. 
 
 In voting together in opposition to a constitution being 
 forced upon the people of Kansas, neither Judge Douglas nor 
 the Republicans, has conceded anything which was ever in dis- 
 pute between them. 
 
 Yours very truly 
 
 A. Lincoln 
 
370 ABRAHAM LINCOLN: 
 
 Alexander was founder and editor of the Green- 
 ville Advocate. Greenville, county seat of Bond County 
 in southern Illinois, was in a region generally strong 
 for Dougjas, and the Republican editor was anxious to 
 get Lincoln committed to a speaking engagement even 
 in advance of the campaign, presuming, of course, that 
 Lincoln would he the party candidate even though no 
 formal announcement had yet been made. 
 
 LETTER TO E. B. WASHBURNE 
 
 MAY 27, 1858 
 
 Springfield, May 27—1858— 
 Hon. E. B. Washburne 
 My dear Sir 
 
 Yours requesting me to return you the now some what noted 
 "Charley Wilson letter' is received; and I herewith return that 
 letter. 
 
 Political matters just now bear a very mixed and incongruous 
 aspect. For several days the signs have been that Douglas and 
 the President had probably buried the hatchet. Doug's friends at 
 Washington going over to the President's side, and his friends 
 here & South of here, talking as if there never had been any 
 serious difficulty, while the President himself does nothing for his 
 own peculiar friends here. But this morning my partner, Mr. 
 Herndon, receives a letter from Mr. Medill of the Chicago 
 Tribune, showing the writer to be in great alarm at the prospect 
 North of Republicans going over to Douglas, on the idea that 
 Douglas is going to assume steep free-soil ground, and furiously 
 assail the administration on the stump when he comes home. 
 
 There certainly is a double game being played some how. 
 Possibly — even probably — Douglas is temporarily deceiving the 
 
HIS SPEECHES AND WRITINGS 371 
 
 President in order to crush out the 8th. of June convention here. 
 Unless he plays his double game more successfully than we 
 have often seen done, he can not carry many republicans North; 
 without at the same time losing a larger number of his old friends 
 South. 
 
 Let this be confidential. 
 
 Yours as ever 
 
 A. Lincoln 
 r 
 
 LETTER TO SAMUEL WILKINSON 
 JUNE 10, 1858 
 
 Springfield, June 10. 1858 
 Samuel Wilkinson Esq 
 My dear Sir 
 
 Yours of the 26th. May came to hand only last night. I know 
 of no effort to unite the Reps. & Buc. men, and believe there is 
 none. Of course the Republicans do not try to keep the com- 
 mon enemy from dividing; but, so far as I know, or believe, they 
 will not unite with either branch of the division. Indeed it is 
 difficult for me to see, on what ground they could unite; but it is 
 useless to spend words, there is simply nothing of it. It is a 
 trick of our enemies to try to excite all sorts of suspicions and 
 jealosies [sic] amongst us. We hope that our Convention on the 
 16th. bringing us together, and letting us hear each other talk 
 will put an end to most of this. 
 
 Yours truly 
 
 A. Lincoln 
 
 "When Douglas refused to support the Lecompton 
 Constitution he precipitated a bitter battle with the 
 
372 ABRAHAM LINCOLN: 
 
 Buchanan administration In many counties Buchanan 
 
 candidates for the legislature were put forward with 
 the scarcely hidden purpose of so dividing the Democ- 
 racy that a Republican victory would be certain. The 
 situation seemed to make a combination between Re- 
 publicans and Buchanan Democrats almost unavoid- 
 able, yet in the following letter to Samuel Wilkinson, an 
 acquaintance who lived at Farmington in Fulton County, 
 Lincoln emphatically denied that one existed" (Paul M. 
 Angle, editor, New Letters and Papers of Lincoln, 
 pp. 177-8). 
 
 A HOUSE DIVIDED: SPEECH DELIVERED AT SPRING- 
 FIELD, ILLINOIS, AT THE CLOSE OF THE REPUBLI- 
 CAN STATE CONVENTION. JUNE 16, 1858 
 
 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 constantly 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 opponents of slavery, will arrest the further spread 
 of it, and place it where the public mind shall rest in the belief 
 
HIS SPEECHES AND WRITINGS 373 
 
 that it is in course of ultimate extinction; or its advocates will 
 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 complete 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 ma- 
 chinery 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 con- 
 cert of action, among its chief bosses, from the beginning. 
 
 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 pro- 
 vided for, as well as might be, in the notable argument of "squat- 
 ter sovereignty," otherwise called "sacred right of self govern- 
 ment" 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 it- 
 self, 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; hut 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! 9 
 
 Then opened the roar of loose declamation in favor of 
 "Squatter Sovereignty," and "Sacred right of self government." 
 
374 ABRAHAM LINCOLN: 
 
 "But," said opposition members, "let us be more specific — 
 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 a territory covered by the congressional prohibition, 
 and held him as a slave for a long time in each, was passing 
 through the U. S. Circuit Court for the District of Missouri; 
 and both Nebraska bill and law suit 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 Trumbull, on the floor of the Senate, requests 
 the leading advocate 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 in- 
 dorsement, 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 over-whelmingly reliable and satisfactory. 
 
 The outgoing President, in his last annual message, as im- 
 pressively as possible echoed back upon the people the weight 
 and authority of the indorsement. 
 
 The Supreme Court met again; did not announce their deci- 
 sion, but ordered a re-argument. 
 
 The Presidential inauguration came, and still no decision of 
 the court; but the incoming President, in his inaugural address, 
 fervently exhorted the people to abide by the forthcoming deci- 
 sion, whatever it might be. 
 
 Then, in a few days, came the decision. 
 
 The reputed author of the Nebraska bill finds an early occa- 
 
HIS SPEECHES AND WRITINGS 375 
 
 sion to make a speech at this capitol indorsing the Dred Scott 
 Decision, and vehemently denouncing all opposition to it. 
 
 The new President, too, seizes the early occasion 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 declaration that he cares not whether slavery 
 be voted down or voted up, to be intended by him other than as 
 an apt definition of the policy he would impress upon the public 
 mind — the principle for which he declares he has suffered 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 
 foundry 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 Lecomp- 
 ton Constitution, involves nothing of the original Nebraska 
 doctrine. That struggle was made on a point, the right of a people 
 to make their own constitution, upon which he and the Republi- 
 cans have never differed. 
 
 The several points of the Dred Scott decision, in connection 
 with Senator Douglas' "care not" policy, constitute the piece of 
 machinery, in its present state of advancement. 
 
 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 
 
376 ABRAHAM LINCOLN: 
 
 possible event, of the benefit of that provision of the United 
 States Constitution, which declares that — 
 
 "the citizens of each State shall be entitled to all privileges 
 and immunities of citizens in the several States." 
 
 Secondly, that "subject to the Constitution of the United 
 States," neither Congress nor a Territorial Legislature can ex- 
 clude 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 Illinois, 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 mould 
 public opinion, at least Northern public opinion, to not 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, and 
 run the mind over the string of historical facts already stated. 
 Several things will now appear less dark and mysterious than 
 they did when they were transpiring. The people 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 nitch for the Dred 
 Scott decision to afterward come in, and declare that perfect 
 freedom of the people, to be just no freedom at all. 
 
HIS SPEECHES AND WRITINGS 377 
 
 Why was the amendment, expressly declaring the right of 
 the people to exclude slavery, voted down? Plainly enough now, 
 the adoption of it, would have spoiled the nitch 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? 
 Plainly enough now, the speaking out then would have damaged 
 the "perfectly 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 indorsements of the decision by the 
 President and others? 
 
 We cannot absolutely know that all these exact adaptations 
 are the result of preconcert. But when we see a lot of framed 
 timbers, different portions of which we know have been gotten 
 out at different times and places and by different 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 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 to yet 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 lick 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 
 
378 ABRAHAM LINCOLN: 
 
 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 Constitution of the United 
 States neither permits Congress nor a territorial legislature to ex- 
 clude slavery from any United States territory, they all omit to 
 declare whether or not 4 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 approaches it 
 more than once, using the precise idea, and almost the language 
 too, of the Nebraska act. On one occasion his exact language is, 
 "except in cases where the power is restrained by the Constitu- 
 tion 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 states is so restrained by the 
 U. S. Constitution is left an open question, precisly [sic] as the 
 same question, as to the restraint on the power of the territories 
 was left open in the Nebraska act. Put that and that together, and 
 we have another nice little nitch, 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 ex- 
 clude 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 
 
HIS SPEECHES AND WRITINGS 379 
 
 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 pleas- 
 antly 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. 
 
 But 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 in- 
 strument there is, with which to effect that object. They do not 
 tell us, nor has he told us, that he wishes any such object to be 
 effected. They wish us to infer all, from the facts, 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 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' 
 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? 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 terri- 
 tories. Can he possibly show that it is less a sacred right to buy 
 
380 ABRAHAM LINCOLN: 
 
 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 the home production? And as the home pro- 
 ducers will probably not ask the protection, he will be wholly 
 without a ground of opposition. 
 
 Senator Douglas holds, we know, that a man may rightfully 
 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 to not misrepresent Judge Douglas' 
 position, question his motives, or do aught that can be personally 
 offensive to him. 
 
 Whenever, if ever, he and we can come together on prin- 
 ciple so that our great cause may have assistance from his great 
 ability, I hope to have interposed no adventitious obstacle. 
 
 But clearly, he is not now with us — he does not pretend to 
 be — he does not promise to ever 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 Republicans of the nation mustered over 
 thirteen hundred thousand strong. 
 
 We did this under the single impulse of resistance to a com- 
 mon 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 constant hot fire 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? 
 
HIS SPEECHES AND WRITINGS 381 
 
 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. 
 
 The text of this speech is basically that of the 
 Illinois State Journal, but with a few emendations taken 
 from the later printing, Political Debates (Columbus: 
 Follet, Foster and Company, 1860). The puctuation of 
 the Journal text is so typical of Lincoln's punctuation in 
 speech manuscripts as to leave no doubt that it is gen- 
 erally accurate. Horace White's account of the printing 
 of this version, as given by Herndon, specifies that the 
 Journal text was set up from the manuscript and the final 
 proof read by Lincoln himself. The superiority of this 
 version over later printings lies chiefly in the extent to 
 which it reproduces, in so far as can be, the oral emphasis 
 Lincoln gave to each sentence, phrase, and word. This 
 emphasis is well illustrated by the comma (omitted in 
 later versions) which divides the famous sentence, "I be- 
 lieve this government cannot endure, permanently half 
 slave and half free/' 
 
 In addition, the personal "scrap book" of news- 
 paper clippings of the debates and preceding speeches, 
 which Lincoln prepared and which was used in prepara- 
 tion of the Follett, Foster Debates, has been checked 
 (through the kindness of Mr. Oliver R. Barrett), par- 
 ticularly for Lincoln's personal emendations, in this 
 and the succeeding speeches of July 10 and July 17, and 
 the debate of August 21. 
 
 In each of these speeches, the numerous interrup- 
 tions as indicated in newspaper versions — heckling, 
 cheers and applause — have been omitted except when 
 necessary to the context. 
 
382 
 
 ABRAHAM LINCOLN 
 
 LETTER TO JOSEPH MEDILL 
 JUNE 25, 1858 
 
 Springfield, June 25 1858 
 J Medill, Esq. 
 My dear Sir 
 
 Your note of the 23rd. did not reach me till last evening. The 
 Times article I saw yesterday morning. I will give you a brief 
 history of facts, upon which you may rely with entire confidence, 
 and from which you can frame such articles or paragraphs as you 
 see fit. 
 
 I was in Congress but a single term. I was a candidate when 
 the Mexican war broke out — and I then took the ground, which 
 I never varied from, that the Administration had done wrong in 
 getting us into the war, but that the Officers and soldiers who 
 went to the field must be supplied and sustained at all events. I 
 was elected the first Monday of August 1846, but, in regular 
 course, only took my seat December 6, 1847. In the interval all 
 the battles had been fought, and the war was substantially ended, 
 though our army was still in Mexico, and the treaty of peace 
 was not finally concluded till May 30. 1848. Col. E. D. Baker had 
 been elected to congress from the same district, for the regular 
 term next preceding mine; but having gone to Mexico himself, 
 and having resigned his seat in Congress, a man by the name 
 of John Henry, was elected to fill Bakers vacancy, and so came 
 into congress before I did. On the 23rd. day of February 1847 (the 
 very day I believe, Col. John Hardin was killed at Buena Vista, 
 and certainly more than nine months before I took a seat in 
 congress) a bill corresponding with great accuracy to that men- 
 tioned by the Times, passed the House of Representatives, and 
 John Henry voted against it, as may be seen in the Journal 
 of that session at pages 406-7. The bill became a law; and is found 
 in the U. S. Statutes at Large— Vol. 9. Page 149. 
 
 This I suppose is the real origin of the Times' attack upon 
 
HIS SPEECHES AND WRITINGS 383 
 
 me. In its blind rage to assail me, it has seized on a vague recol- 
 lection of Henry's vote, and appropriated it to me. I scarcely think 
 any one is quite vile enough to make such a charge in such terms, 
 without some slight belief in the truth of it. 
 
 Henry was my personal and political friend, and, as I 
 thought, a very good man; and when I first learned of that vote, 
 I well remember how astounded and mortified I was. This very 
 bill, voted against by Henry, passed into a law, and made the ap- 
 propriations for the year ending June 30. 1848 — extending a full 
 month beyond the actual and formal ending of the war. When 
 I came into Congress, money was needed to meet the appropria- 
 tions made, and to be made; and accordingly on the 17th. day of 
 Feb. 1848, a bill to borrow 18,500 000— passed the House of 
 Representatives, for which I voted, as will appear by the Journal 
 of that session page 426, 427. The act itself, reduced to 16,000 000 
 (I suppose in the Senate) is found in U. S. Statutes at Large Vol. 
 9-217. 
 
 Again, on the 8th of March 1848, a bill passed the House 
 of Representatives, for which I voted as may be seen by the 
 Journal 520-521 It passed into a law, and is found in U. S. 
 Statutes at Large Page 215 and forward. The last section of the 
 act on page 217 — contains an appropriation of 800 000 — for cloth- 
 ing the volunteers. 
 
 It is impossible to refer to all the votes I gave but the above 
 I think are sufficient as specimens; and you may safely deny that 
 I ever gave any vote for withholding any supplies whatever, from 
 officers or soldiers of the Mexican war. I have examined the Jour- 
 nals a good deal; and hence I can not be mistaken; for I have my 
 eye always upon it. I must close to get this into the mail. 
 
 Yours very truly 
 
 A. Lincoln 
 
 Lincoln's opposition to the Mexican War had 
 cropped up to plague him again during his campaign 
 against Douglas, the Chicago Times, Douglas's spokes- 
 man in Chicago, making false charges that Lincoln had 
 voted against a bill appropriating money for medicines 
 
384 ABRAHAM LINCOLN: 
 
 and the employment of nurses for wounded American 
 soldiers. Medill, one of the owners of the Chicago Daily 
 Press and Tribune, immediately wrote Lincoln for a 
 refutation, which Lincoln supplied promptly in this 
 letter. 
 
 LETTER TO JAMES W. SOMERS 
 JUNE 25, 1858 
 
 Springfield, June 25. 1858. 
 James W. Somers, Esq 
 My dear Sir 
 
 Yours of the 22nd. enclosing a draft of $200 was duly re- 
 ceived. I have paid it on the judgment, and herewith you have the 
 receipt. 
 
 I do not wish to say any thing as to who shall be the 
 Republican candidate for the Legislature in your District, further 
 than that I have full confidence in Dr. Hull. Have you ever got 
 in the way of consulting with McKinley, in political matters? He 
 is true as steel, and his judgment is very good. The last I heard 
 from him he rather thought Weldon of DeWitt was our best 
 timber for representative, all things considered. But you there, 
 must settle it among yourselves. 
 
 It may well puzzle older heads than yours to understand 
 how, as the Dred Scott decision holds, Congress can authorize 
 a tentorial [sic] Legislature to do every thing else, and can not 
 authorize them to prohibit slavery. That is one of the things the 
 court can decide, but can never give an intelligible reason for. 
 
 Yours very truly, • 
 
 A. Lincoln 
 
 James W. Somers was a lawyer of Urbana, Illinois, 
 who after Lincoln s election was appointed to a position 
 
HIS SPEECHES AND WRITINGS 385 
 
 in the pension office which he held for more than a 
 quarter of a century. Lincoln's succinct comment at 
 the end of this letter is perhaps his briefest statement 
 of the essential contradiction involved in the Dred 
 Scott decision. 
 
 SPEECH IN REPLY TO DOUGLAS AT 
 CHICAGO, ILLINOIS. JULY 10, 1858 
 
 My Fellow-Citizens: — 
 
 On yesterday evening, upon the occasion of the reception 
 given to Senator Douglas, I was furnished with a seat very con- 
 venient for hearing him, and was otherwise very courteously 
 treated by him and by his friends, and for which I thank him 
 and them. During the course of his remarks my name was men- 
 tioned in such a way, as I suppose renders it at least not improper 
 that I should make some sort of reply to him. I shall not attempt 
 to follow him in the precise order in which he addressed the as- 
 sembled multitude upon that occasion, though I shall perhaps 
 do so in the main. 
 
 There was one question to which he asked the attention of 
 the crowd, which I deem of somewhat less importance — at least 
 of propriety for me to dwell upon — than the others, which he 
 brought in near the close of his speech, and which I think it 
 would not be entirely proper for me to omit attending to, and 
 yet if I were not to give some attention to it now, I should prob- 
 ably forget it altogether. While I am upon this subject, allow me 
 to say that I do not intend to indulge in that inconvenient mode 
 sometimes adopted in public speaking, of reading from docu- 
 ments; but I shall depart from that rule so far as to read a little 
 scrap from his speech, which notices this first topic of which 
 I shall speak — that is, provided I can find it in the paper: 
 
386 
 
 ABRAHAM LINCOLN 
 
 "I have made up my mind to appeal to the people against 
 the combination that has been made against me: — the Republican 
 leaders having formed an alliance, an unholy and unnatural 
 alliance, with a portion of unscrupulous federal office-holders. 
 I intend to fight that allied army wherever I meet them. I know 
 they deny the alliance, but yet these men who are trying to divide 
 the Democratic party for the purpose of electing a Republican 
 Senator in my place, are just as much the agents and tools of the 
 supporters of Mr. Lincoln. Hence, I shall deal with this allied 
 army just as the Russians dealt with the Allies at Sebastopol — 
 that is, the Russians did not stop to inquire, when they fired a 
 broadside, whether it hit an Englishman, a Frenchman, or a 
 Turk. Nor will I stop to inquire, nor shall I hesitate, whether my 
 blows shall hit these Republican leaders or their allies who are 
 holding the federal offices and yet acting in concert with them." 
 
 Well, now, gentlemen, is not that very alarming? Just to 
 think of it! right at the outset of his canvass, I, a poor, kind, 
 amiable, intelligent gentlemen, I am to be slain in this way. Why, 
 my friend, the Judge, is not only, as it turns out, not a dead 
 lion; nor even a living one — he is the rugged Russian Bear! 
 
 But if they will have it — for he says that we deny it — that 
 there is any such alliance, as he says there is — and I don't propose 
 hanging very much upon this question of veracity — but if he will 
 have it that there is such an alliance — that the Administration 
 men and we are allied, and we stand in the attitude of English, 
 French, and Turk, and he occupying the position of the Rus- 
 sian, in that case, I beg that he will indulge us while we barely 
 suggest to him, that these allies took Sebastopol. 
 
 Gentlemen, only a few more words as to this alliance. For 
 my part, I have to say, that whether there be such an alliance, 
 depends, so far as I know, upon what may be a right definition 
 of the term alliance. If for the Republican party to see the other 
 great party to which they are opposed divided among them- 
 selves, and not try to stop the division and rather be glad of it — 
 if that is an alliance I confess I am in; but if it is meant to be 
 said that the Republicans had formed an alliance going beyond 
 that, by which there is contribution of money or sacrifice of prin- 
 
HIS SPEECHES AND WRITINGS 387 
 
 ciple on the one side or the other, so far as the Republican party 
 is concerned, if there be any such thing, I protest that I neither 
 know of it, nor do I believe it. I will however say — as I think 
 this branch of the argument is lugged in — I would, before I leave 
 it, state, for the benefit of those concerned, that one of those 
 same Buchanan men did once tell me of an argument that he 
 made for his opposition to Judge Douglas. He said that a friend 
 of our Senator Douglas has been talking to him, and had among 
 other things said to him: "Why, you don't want to beat Douglas?" 
 "Yes" said he, "I do want to beat him, and I will tell you why. I 
 believe his original Nebraska Bill was right in the abstract, but 
 it was wrong in the time that it was brought forward. It was wrong 
 in the application to a Territory in regard to which the ques- 
 tion had been settled; it was brought forward at a time when no- 
 body asked him; it was tendered to the South when the South had 
 not asked for it, but when they could not well refuse it; and for 
 this same reason he forced that question upon our party: it has 
 sunk our best men all over the nation, everywhere; and now 
 when our President, struggling with the difficulties of this man's 
 getting up, has reached the very hardest point to turn in the 
 case, he deserts him, and I am for putting him where he will 
 trouble us no more." 
 
 Now, gentlemen, that is not my argument — that is not my 
 argument at all. I have only been stating to you an argument of a 
 Buchanan man. You will judge if there is any force in it. Popular 
 Sovereignty! everlasting Popular Sovereignty! Let us for a mo- 
 ment inquire into this vast matter of Popular Sovereignty. What 
 is Popular Sovereignty? We recollect that at an early period in 
 the history of this struggle there was another name for this same 
 thing — Squatter Sovereignty. It was not exactly Popular Sover- 
 eignty, but Squatter Sovereignty. What do those terms mean? 
 What do they mean when used now? And vast credit is taken 
 by our friend, the Judge, in regard to his support of it, when 
 he declares the last years of his life have been, and all the future 
 years of his life shall be, devoted to this matter of Popular 
 Sovereignty. What is it? Why, it is the sovereignty of the people. 
 What was Squatter Sovereignty? I suppose if it had any signifi- 
 cance at all, it was the right of the people to govern themselves, 
 
388 ABRAHAM LINCOLN: 
 
 to be sovereign over their own affairs, while they were squatted 
 down in a country not their own, while they had squatted 
 on a territory that did not belong to them, in the sense that a 
 State belongs to the people who inhabit it, — when it belonged to 
 the nation — such right to govern themselves was called "Squatter 
 Sovereignty." 
 
 Now, I wish you to mark. What has become of that Squatter 
 Sovereignty? What has become of it? Can you get anybody to 
 tell you now that the people of a Territory have any authority 
 to govern themselves, in regard to this mooted question of 
 slavery, before they form a State Constitution? No such thing 
 at all, although there is a general running fire, and although there 
 has been a hurrah made in every speech on that side, assuming 
 that that policy had given the people of a Territory the right to 
 govern themselves upon this question: yet the point is dodged. 
 To-day it has been decided — no more than a year ago it was de- 
 cided by the Supreme Court of the United States, and is in- 
 sisted upon to-day, that the people of a Territory have no right 
 to exclude slavery from a Territory, that if any one man chooses 
 to take slaves into a Territory, all the rest of the people have no 
 right to keep them out. This being so, and this decision being 
 made one of the points that the Judge approved, and one in the 
 approval of which he says he means to keep me down — put me 
 down I should not say, for I have never been up. He says he 
 is in favor of it, and sticks to it, and expects to win his battle 
 on that decision, which says that there is no such thing as Squatter 
 Sovereignty, but that any one man may take slaves into a Terri- 
 tory, and all the other men of the Territory may be opposed to 
 it, and yet by reason of the constitution they cannot prohibit it. 
 When that is so, how much is left of this vast matter of Squatter 
 Sovereignty, I should like to know? 
 
 When we get back, we get to the point of the right of the 
 people to make a constitution. Kansas was settled, for example, in 
 1854. It was a Territory yet, without having formed a constitu- 
 tion, in a very regular way, for three years. All this time negro 
 slavery could be taken in by any few individuals, and by that de- 
 cision of the Supreme Court, which the Judge approves, all the 
 rest of the people cannot keep it out; but when they come to 
 
HIS SPEECHES AND WRITINGS 389 
 
 make a constitution, they may say they will not have slavery. But 
 it is there; they are obliged to tolerate it in some way, and all 
 experience shows that it will be so — for they will not take the 
 negro slaves and absolutely deprive the owners of them. All ex- 
 perience shows this to be so. All that space of time that runs from 
 the beginning of the settlement of the Territory until there is a 
 sufficiency of people to make a State Constitution— all that por- 
 tion of time Popular Sovereignty is given up. The seal is abso- 
 lutely put down upon it by the Court decision, and Judge 
 Douglas puts his on the top of that; yet he is appealing to the 
 people to give him vast credit for his devotion to Popular 
 Sovereignty. 
 
 Again, when we get to the question of the right of the people 
 to form a State Constitution as they please, to form it with 
 slavery or without slavery — if that is anything new, I confess 
 I don't know it. Has there ever been a time when any one said 
 that anybody other than the people of a Territory itself should 
 form their constitution? What is new in it, that Judge Douglas 
 should have fought several years of his life, and pledge himself 
 to fight all the remaining years of his life for? Can Judge Douglas 
 find anybody on earth that said that anybody else should form 
 a constitution for a people? (A voice, "Yes.") Well, I should like 
 you to name him; I should like to know who he was. (Same voice, 
 "John Calhoun.") 
 
 Mr. Lincoln — No, Sir, I never heard of even John Calhoun 
 saying such a thing. He insisted on the same principle as Judge 
 Douglas; but his mode of applying it in fact, was wrong. It is 
 enough for my purpose to ask this crowd, when ever a Republican 
 said anything against it? They never said anything against it, but 
 they have constantly spoken for it; and whosoever will undertake 
 to examine the platform, and the speeches of responsible men of 
 the party, and of irresponsible men, too, if you please, will be un- 
 able to find one word from anybody in the Republican ranks, 
 opposed to that Popular Sovereignty which Judge Douglas thinks 
 that he has invented. I suppose that Judge Douglas will claim, 
 in a little while, that he is the inventor of the idea that the people 
 should govern themselves; that nobody ever thought of such 
 a thing until he brought it forward. We do remember that in that 
 
390 ABRAHAM LINCOLN: 
 
 old Declaration of Independence, it is said that "We hold these 
 truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal; that they 
 are endowed by their Creator with certain inalienable rights; that 
 among these are life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness; that 
 to secure these rights, governments are instituted among men, 
 deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed/' 
 There is the origin of Popular Sovereignty. Who, then, shall come 
 in at this day and claim that he invented it? 
 
 The Lecompton Constitution connects itself with this ques- 
 tion, for it is in this matter of the Lecompton Constitution that 
 our friend Judge Douglas claims such vast credit. I agree that in 
 opposing the Lecompton Constitution, so far as I can perceive, 
 he was right. I do not deny that at all; and gentlemen, you will 
 readily see why I could not deny it, even if I wanted to. But I 
 do not wish to; for all the Republicans in the nation opposed it, 
 and they would have opposed it just as much without Judge 
 Douglas' aid, as with it. They had all taken ground against it 
 long before he did. Why, the reason that he urges against 
 that Constitution, I urged against him a year before. I have the 
 printed speech in my hand. The argument that he makes, why 
 that Constitution should not be adopted, that the people were 
 not fairly represented nor allowed to vote, I pointed out in a 
 speech a year ago, which I hold in my hand now, that no fair 
 chance was to be given the people. ("Read it, Read it.") I shall 
 not waste your time by trying to read it. ("Read it, Read it.") 
 Gentlemen, reading from speeches is a very tedious business, 
 particularly for an old man that has to put on spectacles, and 
 the more so if the man be so tall that he has to bend over to the 
 light. 
 
 A little more, now, as to this matter of popular sovereignty 
 and the Lecompton Constitution. The Lecompton Constitution, 
 as the Judge tells us, was defeated. The defeat of it was a good 
 thing or it was not. He thinks the defeat of it was a good thing 
 and so do I, and we agree in that. Who defeated it? 
 
 A voice — "Judge Douglas." 
 
 Mr. Lincoln — Yes, he furnished himself, and if you suppose 
 he controlled the other Democrats that went with him, he fur- 
 nished three votes; while the Republicans furnished twenty. 
 
HIS SPEECHES AND WRITINGS 391 
 
 That is what he did to defeat it. In the House of Represen- 
 tatives he and his friends furnished some twenty votes, and the 
 Republicans furnished ninety odd. Now who was it that did the 
 work? 
 
 A voice — "Douglas." 
 
 Mr. Lincoln — Why yes, Douglas did it! To be sure he did. 
 
 Let us, however, put that proposition another way. -The Re- 
 publicans could not have done it without Judge Douglas. Could 
 he have done it without them? Which could have come the 
 nearest to doing it without the other? 
 
 A voice — "Who killed the bill?" 
 
 Another voice — "Douglas." 
 
 Mr. Lincoln — Ground was taken against it by the Republi- 
 cans long before Douglas did it. The proportion of opposition 
 to that measure is about five to one. 
 
 A voice — "Why don't they come out on it?" 
 
 Mr. Lincoln — You don't know what you are talking about, 
 my friend. I am quite willing to answer any gentleman in the 
 crowd who asks an intelligent question. 
 
 Now, who in all this country has ever found any of our 
 friends of Judge Douglas' way of thinking, and who have acted 
 upon this main question, that has ever thought of uttering a word 
 in behalf of Judge Trumbull? (A voice — "We have.") I defy 
 you to show a printed resolution passed in a Democratic meet- 
 ing — I take it upon myself to defy any man to show a printed 
 resolution of a Democratic meeting, large or small, in favor of 
 Judge Trumbull, or any of the five to one Republicans who beat 
 that bill. Everything must be for the Democrats! They did every- 
 thing, and the five to one that really did the thing, they snub 
 over, and they do not seem to remember that they have an 
 existence upon the face of the earth. 
 
 Gentlemen: I fear that I shall become tedious. I leave this 
 branch of the subject to take hold of another. I take up that 
 part of Judge Douglas' speech in which he respectfully attended 
 to me. 
 
 Judge Douglas makes two points upon my recent speech at 
 Springfield. He says they are to be the issues of this cam- 
 paign. The first one of these points he bases upon the language 
 
392 ABRAHAM LINCOLN: 
 
 in a speech which I delivered at Springfield, which I believe I 
 can quote correctly from memory. I said there that "we are 
 now far into the fifth year since a policy was instituted for the 
 avowed object and with the confident promise of putting an end 
 to slavery agitation; under the operation of that policy, that 
 agitation had [not?] only not ceased, but has constantly aug- 
 mented. .1 believe 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 am 
 quoting from my speech — "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 opponents of slavery will arrest 
 the 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 push it forward until it shall become alike lawful 
 in all the States North as well as South." 
 
 What is the paragraph? In this paragraph which I have 
 quoted in your hearing, and to which I ask the attention of all, 
 Judge Douglas thinks he discovers great political heresy. I want 
 your attention particularly to what he has inferred from it. 
 He says I am in favor of making all the States of this Union uni- 
 form in all their internal regulations; that in all their domestic con- 
 cerns I am in favor of making them entirely uniform. He draws 
 this inference from the language I have quoted to you. He says 
 that I am in favor of making war by the North upon the South 
 for the extinction of slavery; that I am also in favor of inviting, as 
 he expresses it, the South to a war upon the North for the pur- 
 pose of nationalizing slavery. Now, it is singular enough, if you 
 will carefully read that passage over, that I did not say that I 
 was in favor of anything in it. I only said what I expected would 
 take place. I made a prediction only — it may have been a foolish 
 one perhaps. I did not even say that I desired that slavery should 
 be put in course of ultimate extinction. I do say so now, however, 
 so there need be no longer any difficulty about that. It may be 
 written down in the next speech. 
 
 Gentlemen, Judge Douglas informed you that this speech 
 of mine was probably carefully prepared. I admit that it was. 
 
HIS SPEECHES AND WRITINGS 393 
 
 I am not master of language; I have not a fine education; I am 
 not capable of entering into a disquisition upon dialectics, as I 
 believe you call it; but I do not believe the language I employed 
 bears any such construction as Judge Douglas put upon it. But 
 I don't care about a quibble in regard to words. I know what I 
 meant, and I will not leave this crowd in doubt, if I can explain 
 it to them, what I really meant in the use of that paragraph. 
 
 I am not, in the first place, unaware that this Government 
 has endured eighty-two years, half slave and half free. I know 
 that. I am tolerably well acquainted with the history of the coun- 
 try, and I know that it has endured eighty-two years, half slave 
 and half free. I believe — and that is what I meant to allude to 
 there — I believe it has endured because, during all that time, 
 until the introduction of the Nebraska Bill, the public mind did 
 rest, all the time, in the belief that slavery was in course of 
 ultimate extinction. That was what gave us the rest that we had 
 through that period of eighty-two years; — at least, so I believe. 
 I have always hated slavery, I think, as much as any Abolition- 
 ist. I have been an Old Line Whig. I have always hated it, but 
 I have always been quiet about it until this new era of the 
 introduction of the Nebraska Bill began. I always believed that 
 everybody was against it, and that it was in course of ultimate 
 extinction. (Pointing to Mr. Browning, who stood near by,) 
 Browning thought so; the great mass of the nation have rested 
 in the belief that slavery was in course of ultimate extinction. 
 They had reason so to believe. 
 
 The adoption of the Constitution and its attendant history 
 led the people to believe so; and that such was the belief of the 
 framers of the Constitution itself. Why did those old men, about 
 the time of the adoption of the Constitution, decree that slavery 
 should not go into the new Territory, where it had not already 
 gone? Why declare that within twenty years the African Slave 
 Trade, by which slaves are supplied, might be cut off by Congress? 
 Why were all these acts? I might enumerate more of such acts 
 — but enough. What were they but a clear indication that the 
 framers of the Constitution intended and expected the ultimate 
 extinction of that institution? And now when I say, as I say in 
 this speech, that Judge Douglas has quoted from, when I say 
 
394 ABRAHAM LINCOLN: 
 
 that I think the opponents of slavery will resist the farther spread 
 of it, and place it where the public mind shall rest with the belief 
 that it is in course of ultimate extinction, I only mean to say, that 
 they will place it where the founders of this government originally 
 placed it. 
 
 I have said a hundred times, and I have now no inclination 
 to take it back, that I believe there is no right, and ought to be no 
 inclination, in the people of the free States to enter into the 
 slave States, and interfere with the question of slavery at all. I 
 have said that always. Judge Douglas has heard me say it — if 
 not quite a hundred times, at least as good as a hundred times; 
 and when it is said that I am in favor of interfering with slavery 
 where it exists, I know it is unwarranted by anything I have ever 
 intended, and, as I believe, by anything I have ever said. If, by 
 any means, I have ever used language which could fairly be so 
 construed, ( as, however, I believe I never have, ) I now correct it. 
 
 So much, then, for the inference that Judge Douglas draws, 
 that I am in favor of setting the sections at war with one another. 
 I know that I never meant any such thing, and I believe that no 
 fair mind can infer any such thing from anything I have ever 
 said. 
 
 Now, in relation to his inference that I am in favor of a 
 general consolidation of all the local institutions of the various 
 States. I will attend to that for a little while, and try to inquire 
 if I can how on earth it could be that any man could draw such 
 an inference from anything I said. I have said, very many times, 
 in Judge Douglas' hearing, that no man believed more than I in 
 the principle of self-government; that it lies at the bottom of all 
 my ideas of just government from beginning to end. I have denied 
 that his use of that term applies properly. But for the thing it- 
 self I deny that any man has ever gone ahead of me in his devo- 
 tion to the principle, whatever he may have done in efficiency 
 in advocating it. I think that I have said it in your hearing — that I 
 believe each individual is naturally entitled to do as he pleases 
 with himself and the fruit of his labor, so far as it in no wise 
 interferes with any other man's rights, that each community, as a 
 State, has a right to do exactly as it pleases with all the concerns 
 within that State that interfere with the rights of no other State, 
 
HIS SPEECHES AND WRITINGS 395 
 
 and that the general government, upon principle, has no right 
 to interfere with any thing other than that general class of things 
 that does concern the whole. I have said that at all times. I 
 have said, as illustrations, that I do not believe in the right of 
 Illinois to interfere with the cranberry laws of Indiana, the oyster 
 laws of Virginia, or the Liquor Laws of Maine. I have said these 
 things over and over again and I repeat them here as my senti- 
 ments. 
 
 How is it, then, that Judge Douglas infers, because I hope to 
 see slavery put where the public mind shall rest in the belief 
 that it is in the course of ultimate extinction, that I am in favor 
 of Illinois going over and interfering with the cranberry laws of 
 Indiana? What can authorize him to draw any such inference? 
 I suppose there might be one thing that at least enabled him to 
 draw such an inference that would not be true with me or with 
 many others — that is, because he looks upon all this matter of 
 slavery as an exceedingly little thing — this matter of keeping one 
 sixth of the population of the whole nation in a state of oppres- 
 sion and tyranny unequalled in the world. He looks upon it as 
 being an exceedingly little thing — only equal to the question of 
 the cranberry laws of Indiana — as something having no moral 
 question in it — as something on a par with the question of 
 whether a man shall pasture his land with cattle, or plant it with 
 tobacco — so little and so small a thing, that he concludes if I 
 could desire that anything should be done to bring about the 
 ultimate extinction of that little thing, I must be in favor of bring- 
 ing about an amalgamation of all the other little things in the 
 Union. Now, it so happens — and there, I presume, is the foun- 
 dation of this mistake — that the Judge thinks thus; and it so 
 happens that there is a vast portion of the American people that 
 do not look upon that matter as being this very little thing. They 
 look upon it as a vast moral evil; they can prove it is such by the 
 writings of those who gave us the blessings of liberty which we 
 enjoy, and that they so looked upon it and not as an evil merely 
 confining itself to the States where it is situated; and while we 
 agree that, by the Constitution we assented to, in the States 
 where it exists we have no right to interfere with it because it is 
 in the Constitution and we are by both duty and inclination to 
 
396 ABRAHAM LINCOLN: 
 
 stick by that Constitution in all its letter and spirit from beginning 
 to end. 
 
 So much then as to my disposition — my wish — to have all 
 the State legislatures blotted out, and to have one general con- 
 solidated government, and a uniformity of domestic regulations 
 in all the States, by which I suppose it is meant if we raise corn 
 here, we must make sugar-cane grow here too, and we must 
 make those which grow North, grow in the South. All this I sup- 
 pose the Judge understands I am in favor of doing. Now, so much 
 for all this nonsense — for I must call it so. The Judge can have no 
 issue with me on a question of establishing uniformity in the 
 domestic regulations of the States. 
 
 A little now on the other point — the Dred Scott Decision. 
 Another one of the issues he says that is to be made with me, is 
 upon his devotion to the Dred Scott Decision, and my opposition 
 to it. 
 
 I have expressed heretofore, and I now repeat, my opposition 
 to the Dred Scott Decision, but I should be allowed to state the 
 nature of that opposition, and I ask your indulgence while I do 
 so. What is fairly implied by the term Judge Douglas has used, 
 "resistance to the Decision?" I do not resist it. If I wanted to take 
 Dred Scott from his master, I would be interfering with property, 
 and that terrible difficulty that Judge Douglas speaks of, of inter- 
 fering with property, would arise. But I am doing no such thing 
 as that, but all that I am doing is refusing to obey it as a political 
 rule. If I were in Congress, and a vote should come up on a 
 question whether slavery should be prohibited in a new Territory, 
 in spite of that Dred Scott Decision, I would vote that it should. 
 
 That is what I would do. Judge Douglas said last night, that 
 before the Decision he might advance his opinion, and it might 
 be contrary to the decision when it was made; but after it was 
 made he would abide by it until it was reversed. Just so! We let 
 this property abide by the decision, but we will try to reverse that 
 decision. We will try to put it where Judge Douglas would not 
 object, for he says he will obey it until it is reversed. Somebody 
 has to reverse that decision, since it is made, and we mean to 
 reverse it, and we mean to do it peaceably. 
 
 What are the uses of decisions of courts? They have two uses. 
 
HIS SPEECHES AND WRITINGS 397 
 
 As rules of property they have two uses. First — they decide upon 
 the question before the court. They decide in this case that Dred 
 Scott is a slave. Nobody resists that. Not only that, but they say 
 to everybody else, that persons standing just as Dred Scott stands, 
 are as he is. That is, they say that when a question comes up 
 upon another person it will be so decided again, unless the court 
 decides another way, unless the court overrules its decision. Well, 
 we mean to do what we can to have the court decide the other 
 way. That is one thing we mean to try to do. 
 
 The sacredness that Judge Douglas throws around this de- 
 cision, is a degree of sacredness that has never been before thrown 
 around any other decision. I have never heard of such a thing. 
 Why, decisions apparently contrary to that decision, or that good 
 lawyers thought were contrary to that decision, have been made 
 by that very court before. It is the first of its kind; it is an 
 astonisher in legal history. It is a new wonder of the world. It is 
 based upon falsehood in the main as to the facts — allegations of 
 facts upon which it stands are not facts at all in many instances, 
 and no decision made on any question — the first instance of a 
 decision made under so many unfavorable circumstances — thus 
 placed has ever been held by the profession as law, and it has 
 always needed confirmation before the lawyers regarded it as a 
 settled law. But Judge Douglas will have it that all hands must 
 take this extraordinary decision, made under these extraordinary 
 circumstances, and give their vote in Congress in accordance with 
 it, yield to it and obey it in every possible sense. Circumstances 
 alter cases. Do not gentlemen here remember the case of that 
 same Supreme Court, some twenty-five or thirty years ago, decid- 
 ing that a National Bank was constitutional? I ask, if somebody 
 does not remember that a National Bank was declared to be con- 
 stitutional? Such is the truth, whether it be remembered or not. 
 The Bank charter ran out, and a re-charter was granted by Con- 
 gress. That re-charter was laid before Gen. Jackson. It was urged 
 upon him, when he denied the constitutionality of the bank, that 
 the Supreme Court had decided that it was constitutional; and 
 Gen. Jackson then said that the Supreme Court had no right to 
 lay down a rule to govern a co-ordinate branch of the govern- 
 ment, the members of which had sworn to support the Consti- 
 
398 ABRAHAM LINCOLN: 
 
 tution — that each member had sworn to support that Consti- 
 tution as he understood it. I will venture here to say, that I have 
 heard Judge Douglas say that he approved of Gen. Jackson for 
 that act. What has now become of all his tirade about "resistance 
 to the Supreme Court?" 
 
 My fellow-citizens, getting back a little, for I pass from these 
 points, when Judge Douglas makes his threat of annihilation 
 upon the "alliance," he is cautious to say that that warfare of his 
 is to fall upon the leaders of the Republican party. Almost every 
 word he utters and every distinction he makes, has its significance. 
 He means for the Republicans that do not count themselves as 
 leaders, to be his friends; he makes no fuss over them; it is the 
 leaders that he is making war upon. He wants it understood that 
 the mass of the Republican party are really his friends. It is only 
 the leaders that are doing something, that are intolerant, and that 
 require extermination at his hands. As this is clearly and unques- 
 tionably the light in which he presents that matter, I want to ask 
 your attention, addressing myself to the Republicans here, that I 
 may ask you some questions, as to where you, as the Republican 
 party, would be placed if you sustained Judge Douglas in his 
 present position by a re-election? I do not claim, gentlemen, to be 
 unselfish; I do not pretend that I would not like to go to the 
 United States Senate, I make no such hypocritical pretense, but 
 I do say to you that in this mighty issue, it is nothing to you— 
 nothing to the mass of the people of the nation, whether or not 
 Judge Douglas or myself shall ever be heard of after this night; 
 it may be a trifle to either of us, but in connection with this 
 mighty question, upon which hang the destinies of the nation, 
 perhaps, it is absolutely nothing; but where will you be placed 
 if you re-endorse Judge Douglas? Don't you know how apt he is 
 — how exceedingly anxious he is at all times to seize upon any- 
 thing and everything to persuade you that something he has done 
 you did yourselves? Why, he tried to persuade you last night that 
 our Illinois Legislature instructed him to introduce the Nebraska 
 Bill. There was nobody in that Legislature ever thought of such 
 a thing; and when he first introduced the bill, he never thought 
 of it; but still he fights furiously for the proposition, and that he 
 did it because there was a standing instruction to our Senators to 
 
HIS SPEECHES AND WRITINGS 399 
 
 be always introducing Nebraska bills. He tells you he is for the 
 Cincinnati Platform, he tells you he is for the Dred Scott Deci- 
 sion. He tells you, not in his speech last night, but substantially 
 in a former speech, that he cares not if slavery is voted up or 
 down — he tells you the struggle on Lecompton is passed — it may 
 come up again or not and if it does he stands where he stood 
 when in spite of him and his opposition you built up the Repub- 
 lican party. If you endorse him, you tell him you do not care 
 whether slavery be voted up or down, and he will close, or try 
 to close your mouths with his declaration, repeated by the day, 
 the week, the month, and the year. Is that what you mean? ( Cries 
 of "no;" one voice "yes.") Yes, I have no doubt you who have 
 always been for him, if you mean that. No doubt of that, soberly 
 I have said, and I repeat it. I think, in the position in which Judge 
 Douglas stood in opposing the Lecompton Constitution he was 
 right; he does not know that it will return, but if it does we may 
 know where to find him, and if it does not we may know where 
 to look for him, and that is on the Cincinnati Platform. Now I 
 could ask the Republican party, after all the hard names that 
 Judge Douglas has called them by — all his repeated charges of 
 their inclination to marry with and hug negroes, all his declara- 
 tions of Black Republicanism — by the way, we are improving, 
 the black has got rubbed off — but with all that, if he be endorsed 
 by Republican votes, where do you stand? Plainly, you stand 
 ready saddled, bridled and harnessed and waiting to be driven 
 over into the slavery extension camp of the nation, — just ready 
 to be driven over, tied together in a lot — to be driven over, 
 every man with a rope around his neck, that halter being held by 
 Judge Douglas. That is the question. If Republican men have 
 been in earnest in what they have done, I think they had better 
 not do it, but I think that the Republican party is made up of 
 those who, as far as they can peaceably, will oppose the extension 
 of slavery, and who will hope for its ultimate extinction — who 
 will believe, if it ceases to spread, that it is in course of ultimate 
 extinction. If they believe it is wrong in grasping up the new 
 lands of the continent, and keeping them from the settlement of 
 free white laborers, who want the land to bring up their families 
 upon; if they are in earnest, although they may make a mistake, 
 
400 ABRAHAM LINCOLN: 
 
 they will grow restless, and the time will come when they will 
 come back again and reorganize, if not by the same name, at 
 least upon the same principles as their party now has. It is better, 
 then, to save the work while it is begun. You have done the labor; 
 maintain it — keep it. If men choose to serve you, go with them; 
 but as you have made up your organization upon principle, stand 
 by it; for, as surely as God reigns over you, and has inspired your 
 mind, and given you a sense of propriety, and continues to give 
 you hope, so surely will you still cling to these ideas, and you will 
 at last come back again after your wanderings, merely to do your 
 work over again. 
 
 We were often — more than once, at least — in the course of 
 Judge Douglas* speech last night, reminded that this government 
 was made for white men — that he believed it was made for white 
 men! Well, that is putting it in a shape in which no one wants to 
 deny it; but the Judge then goes into his passion for drawing 
 inferences that are not warranted. I protest, now and forever, 
 against that counterfeit logic which presumes that because I did 
 not want a negro woman for a slave, I do necessarily want her 
 for a wife. My understanding is that I need not have her for either, 
 but, as God made us separate, we can leave one another alone, 
 and do one another much good thereby. There are white men 
 enough to marry all the white women, and enough black men 
 to marry all the black women, and in God's name let them be so 
 married. The Judge regales us with the terrible enormities that 
 take place by the mixture of races; that the inferior race bears the 
 superior down. Why, Judge, if we will not let them get together 
 in the Territories, they won't mix there. 
 
 A voice — "Three cheers for Lincoln." (The cheers were given 
 with a hearty good-will.) 
 
 Mr. Lincoln — I should say at least that that is a self-evident 
 truth. 
 
 Now, it happens that we meet together once every year, 
 sometimes about the 4th of July, for some reason or other. These 
 4th of July gatherings, I suppose, have their uses. If you will in- 
 dulge me, I will state what I suppose to be some of them. 
 
 We are now a mighty nation, we are thirty — or about thirty 
 millions of people, and we own and inhabit about one-fifteenth 
 
HIS SPEECHES AND WRITINGS 401 
 
 part of the dry land of the whole earth. We run our memory back 
 over the pages of history for about eighty-two years, and we 
 discover that we were then a very small people in point of num- 
 bers, vastly inferior to what we are now, with a vastly less extent 
 of country, — with vastly less of everything we deem desirable 
 among men, — we look upon the change as exceedingly advan- 
 tageous to us and to our posterity, and we fix upon something 
 that happened away back, as in some way or other being con- 
 nected with this rise of prosperity. We find a race of men living 
 in that day whom we claim as our fathers and grandfathers; they 
 were iron men; they fought for the principle that they were con- 
 tending for; and we understand that by what they then did it has 
 followed that the degree of prosperity that we now enjoy has 
 come to us. We hold this annual celebration to remind ourselves 
 of all the good done in this process of time, of how it was done 
 and who did it, and how we are historically connected with it; 
 and we go from these meetings in better humor with ourselves — 
 we feel more attached the one to the other, and more firmly 
 bound to the country we inhabit. In every way we are better men 
 in the age, and race, and country in which we live, for these 
 celebrations. But after we have done all this we have not yet 
 reached the whole. There is something else connected with it. We 
 have besides these men — descended by blood from our ancestors 
 — among us perhaps half our people who are not descendants at 
 all of these men, they are men who have come from Europe — 
 German, Irish, French and Scandinavian — men that have come 
 from Europe themselves, or whose ancestors have come hither 
 and settled here, finding themselves our equals in all things. If 
 they look back through this history to trace their connection with 
 those days by blood, they find they have none, they cannot carry 
 themselves back into that glorious epoch and make themselves 
 feel that they are part of us, but when they look through that old 
 Declaration of Independence, they find that those old men say 
 that "We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are 
 created equal," and then they feel that that moral sentiment 
 taught in that day evidences their relation to those men, that it is 
 the father of all moral principle in them, and that they have a 
 right to claim it as though they were blood of the blood, and 
 
402 ABRAHAM LINCOLN: 
 
 flesh of the flesh, of the men who wrote that Declaration, and so 
 they are. That is the electric cord in that Declaration that links 
 the hearts of patriotic and liberty-loving men together, that will 
 link those patriotic hearts as long as the love of freedom exists in 
 the minds of men throughout the world. 
 
 Now, sirs, for the purpose of squaring things with this idea 
 of "don't care if slavery is voted up or voted down," for sustaining 
 the Dred Scott Decision, for holding that the Declaration of 
 Independence did not mean anything at all, we have Judge 
 Douglas giving his exposition of what the Declaration of Inde- 
 pendence means, and we have him saying that the people of 
 America were equal to the people of England. According to his 
 construction, you Germans are not connected with it. Now, I ask 
 you in all soberness, if all these things, if indulged in, if ratified, 
 if confirmed and endorsed, if taught to our children and repeated 
 to them, do not tend to rub out the sentiment of liberty in the 
 country, and to transform this government into a government of 
 some other form. These arguments that are made, that the inferior 
 race are to be treated with as much allowance as they are capable 
 of enjoying; that as much is to be done for them as their condition 
 will allow. What are these arguments? They are the arguments 
 that kings have made for enslaving the people in all ages of the 
 world. You will find that all the arguments in favor of kingcraft 
 were of this class; they always bestrode the necks of the people, 
 not that they wanted to do it, but because the people were better 
 off for being ridden. That is their argument, and this argument of 
 the Judge is the same old serpent that says, you work, and I eat, 
 you toil, and I will enjoy the fruits of it. Turn it whatever way 
 you will — whether it come from the mouth of a King, an excuse 
 for enslaving the people of his country, or from the mouth of men 
 of one race as a reason for enslaving the men of another race, it 
 is all the same old serpent, and I hold if that course of argumenta- 
 tion that is made for the purpose of convincing the public mind 
 that we should not care about this, should be granted, it does not 
 stop with the negro. I should like to know if taking this old 
 Declaration of Independence, which declares that all men are 
 equal upon principle, and making exceptions to it, where will it 
 
HIS SPEECHES AND WRITINGS 403 
 
 stop? If one man says it does not mean a negro, why may not 
 another say it does not mean some other man? If that Declaration 
 is not the truth, let us get the Statute book in which we find it 
 and tear it out! Who is so bold as to do it! If it is not true let us 
 tear it out! (cries of "no, no,") let us stick to it then (cheers). Let 
 us stand firmly by it then (applause). 
 
 It may be argued that there are certain conditions that make 
 necessities and impose them upon us, and to the extent that a 
 necessity is imposed upon a man, he must submit to it. I think that 
 was the condition in which we found ourselves when we estab- 
 lished this government. We had slavery among us, we could not 
 get our Constitution unless we permitted them to remain in 
 slavery, we could not secure the good we did secure if we grasped 
 for more, and having by necessity submitted to that much, it does 
 not destroy the principle that is the charter of our liberties. Let 
 that charter stand as our standard. 
 
 My friend has said to me that I am a poor hand to quote 
 Scripture. I will try it again, however. It is said in one of the 
 admonitions of the Lord, "As your Father in heaven is perfect, be 
 ye also perfect." The Saviour, I suppose, did not expect that any 
 human creature could be perfect as the Father in Heaven; but He 
 said, "As your Father in Heaven is perfect, be ye also perfect." 
 He set that up as a standard, and he who did most towards reach- 
 ing that standard, attained the highest degree of moral perfection. 
 So I say in relation to the principle that all men are created equal, 
 let it be as nearly reached as we can. If we cannot give freedom 
 to every creature, let us do nothing that will impose slavery upon 
 any other creature. Let us then turn this government back into 
 the channel in which the framers of the Constitution originally 
 placed it. Let us stand firmly by each other. If we do not do so, 
 we are turning in the contrary direction, that our friend Judge 
 Douglas proposes — not intentionally — as working in the traces 
 that tend to make this one universal Slave Nation. He is one that 
 runs in that direction, and as such I resist him. 
 
 My friends, I have detained you about as long as I desired 
 to do, and I have only to say, let us discard all this quibbling 
 about this man and the other man — this race and that race and 
 
404 ABRAHAM LINCOLN: 
 
 the other race being inferior, and therefore they must be placed 
 in an inferior position — discarding our standard that we have 
 left us. Let us discard all these things, and unite as one people 
 throughout this land, until we shall once more stand up declaring 
 that all men are created equal. 
 
 My friends, I could not, without launching off upon some 
 new topic, which would detain you too long, continue to-night. 
 I thank you for this most extensive audience that you have fur- 
 nished me to-night. I leave you, hoping that the lamp of liberty 
 will burn in your bosoms until there shall no longer be a doubt 
 that all men are created free and equal. 
 
 The Lecompton Constitution, which occupies so 
 much of Lincoln s attention in this speech of July 10 and 
 the next speech of July 17, was drawn up by the con- 
 stitutional convention of the Kansas Territory convened 
 in the town of Lecompton. The principal fault in the 
 document, as free-state men saw it, was its guaranteeing 
 property in slaves already in Kansas. In addition, it 
 contained a special clause that would have prohibited 
 both the possibility of legally emancipating slaves with- 
 out consent of the owners and the possibility of legally 
 denying further entrance of slaves into the state. This 
 clause was the only part of the document submitted to 
 the voters following the convention in 1857, and hence 
 the opponents of slavery denounced the whole docu- 
 ment as a trick, inasmuch as, whether the clause was 
 voted in or out, the constitution would still guarantee 
 property in slaves already in the state. As a result, Kan- 
 sas free-state voters stayed away from the polls and 
 denounced the election as a fraud. Although Douglas 
 opposed, the Democratic majority in the United States 
 Senate voted to admit Kansas under the Lecompton 
 Constitution. The House of Representatives did not con- 
 cur, however, and when the Lecompton Constitution 
 was resubmitted to the voters in August, 1858, it was 
 rejected by an overwhelming majority, in spite of the 
 
HIS SPEECHES AND WRITINGS 405 
 
 English Bill, which offered Kansans what was in effect 
 a bribe in the form of public lands, provided that they 
 accept the Lecompton Constitution. 
 
 SPEECH IN REPLY TO DOUGLAS AT 
 SPRINGFIELD, ILLINOIS. JULY 17, 1858 
 
 Fellow-citizens: 
 
 Another election which is deemed an important one is ap- 
 proaching, and, as I suppose, the Republican party will without 
 much difficulty elect their State ticket. But in regard to the 
 Legislature, we, the Republicans, labor under some disadvan- 
 tages. In the first place, we have a Legislature to elect upon 
 an apportionment of the representation made several years ago, 
 when the proportion of the population was far greater in the 
 south (as compared with the north) than it now is; and in as much 
 as our opponents hold almost entire sway in the south, and we 
 a correspondingly large majority in the north, the fact that we are 
 now to be represented as we were years ago, when the population 
 was different, is to us a very great disadvantage. We had, in the 
 year 1855, according to law, a census or an enumeration of the 
 inhabitants, taken for the purpose of a new apportionment of rep- 
 resentation. We know what a fair apportionment of representation 
 upon that census would give us. We know that it could not, if 
 fairly made, fail to give the Republican party from six to ten 
 more members of the Legislature than they can probably get as 
 the law now stands. It so happened at the last session of the 
 Legislature, that our opponents, holding the control of both 
 branches of the Legislature, steadily refused to give us such an 
 apportionment as we were rightfully entitled to have upon the 
 census then taken. The Legislature steadily refused to give us 
 such an apportionment as we were rightfully entitled to have 
 upon the census taken of the population of the State. The Legis- 
 
406 ABRAHAM LINCOLN: 
 
 lature would pass no bill upon that subject, except such as was at 
 least as unfair to us as the old one, and in which, in some in- 
 stances, two men in the Democratic regions were allowed to go 
 as far toward sending a member to the Legislature as three were 
 in the Republican regions. Comparison was made at the time as 
 to representative and senatorial districts, which completely 
 demonstrated that such was the fact. Such a bill was passed, and 
 tendered to the Republican Governor for his signature; but prin- 
 cipally for the reasons I have stated, he withheld his approval, 
 and the bill fell without becoming a law. 
 
 Another disadvantage under which we labor, is, that there 
 are one or two Democratic Senators who will be members of the 
 next legislature, and will vote for the election of Senator, who are 
 holding over in districts in which we could, on all reasonable 
 calculation, elect men of our own, if we only had the chance of 
 an election. When we consider that there are but twenty-five 
 Senators in the Senate, taking two from the side where they right- 
 fully belong, and adding them to the other, is to us a disadvantage 
 not to be lightly regarded. Still, so it is. We have this to contend 
 with. Perhaps there is no ground of complaint on our part. In 
 attending to the many things involved in the last general election 
 for President, Governor, Auditor, Treasurer, Superintendent of 
 Public Instruction, Members of Congress, of the Legislature, 
 county officers and so on, we allowed these things to happen by 
 want of sufficient attention, and we have no cause to complain of 
 our adversaries, so far as this matter is concerned. But we have 
 some cause to complain of the refusal to give us a fair apportion- 
 ment. 
 
 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 candi- 
 dates for the Senate. Senator Douglas 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 very distant day to be the President of the United States. 
 They have seen in his round, jolly, fruitful face, postoffices, land 
 offices, marshalships and cabinet appointments, chargeships and 
 foreign missions, bursting and sprouting out in wonderful exuber- 
 
HIS SPEECHES AND WRITINGS 407 
 
 ance, 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 quite 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, no body 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 disadvantages all 
 taken together that the Republicans labor under. We have to 
 fight this battle upon principle, and upon 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 — fifty — 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. 
 
 After Senator Douglas left Washington, as his movements 
 were made known by the public prints, he tarried a considerable 
 time in the city of New York; and it was heralded that, like 
 another Napoleon, he was lying by, and framing the plan of his 
 campaign. It was telegraphed to Washington City, and published 
 in the Union, that he was framing this plan for the purpose of 
 going to Illinois to pounce upon and annihilate the treasonable 
 and disunion speech which Lincoln had made here on the 16th 
 of June. Now, I do suppose that the Judge really spent some time 
 in New York maturing the plan of the campaign, as his friends 
 heralded for him. I have been able, by noting his movements 
 since his arrival in Illinois, to discover evidences confirmatory 
 of that allegation. I think I have been able to see what are the 
 material points of that plan. I will, for a little while, ask your 
 attention to some of them. What I shall point out, though not 
 
408 ABRAHAM LINCOLN: 
 
 showing the whole plan, are, nevertheless, the main points, as 
 I suppose. 
 
 They are not very numerous. The first is popular sovereignty. 
 The second and third are attacks upon my speech made on the 
 16th of June. Out of these three points — drawing within the range 
 of popular sovereignty the question of the Lecompton Consti- 
 tution — he makes his principal assault. Upon these his successive 
 speeches are substantially one and the same. On this matter of 
 popular sovereignty I wish to be a little careful. Auxiliary to these 
 main points, to be sure, are their thunderings of cannon, their 
 marching and music, their fizzle-gigs and fireworks; but I will not 
 waste time with them. They are but the little trappings of the 
 campaign. 
 
 Coming to the substance — the first point — "popular sover- 
 eignty." It is to be labeled upon the cars in which he travels; put 
 upon the hacks he rides in; to be flaunted upon the arches he 
 passes under, and the banners which wave over him. It is to be 
 dished up in as many varieties as a French cook can produce 
 soups from potatoes. Now, as this is so great a staple of the plan 
 of the campaign, it is worth while to examine it carefully; and if 
 we examine only a very little, and do not allow ourselves to be 
 misled, we shall be able to see that the whole thing is the most 
 arrant Quixotism that was ever enacted before a community. 
 What is this matter of popular sovereignty? The first thing, in 
 order to understand it, is to get a good definition of what it is, and 
 after that to see how it is applied. 
 
 I suppose almost every one knows, that in this controversy, 
 whatever has been said, has had reference to the question of 
 negro slavery. We have not been in a controversy about the right 
 of the people to govern themselves in the ordinary matters of 
 domestic concern in the States and Territories. Mr. Buchanan in 
 one of his late messages ( I think when he sent up the Lecompton 
 Constitution), urged that the main points to which the public 
 attention had been directed, was not in regard to the great variety 
 of small domestic matters, but was directed to the question of 
 negro slavery; and he asserted, that if the people had had a fair 
 chance to vote on that question, there was no reasonable ground 
 of objection in regard to minor questions. Now, while I think that 
 
HIS SPEECHES AND WRITINGS 409 
 
 the people had not had given, or offered them, a fair chance upon 
 that slavery question; still, if there had been a fair submission to 
 a vote upon that main question, the President's proposition would 
 have been true to the uttermost. Hence, when hereafter, I speak 
 of popular sovereignty, I wish to be understood as applying what 
 I say to the question of slavery only, and not to other minor 
 domestic matters of a territory or a State. 
 
 Does Judge Douglas, when he says that several of the past 
 years of his life have been devoted to the question of "popular 
 sovereignty," and that all the remainder of his life shall be de- 
 voted to it, does he mean to say that he has been devoting his life 
 to securing to the people of the Territories the right to exclude 
 slavery from the Territories? If he means so to say, he means to 
 deceive; because he, and every one knows that the decision of 
 the Supreme Court, which he approves and makes special ground 
 of attack upon me for disapproving, forbids the people of a 
 Territory to exclude slavery. This covers the whole ground, from 
 the settlement of a Territory till it reaches the degree of maturity 
 entitling it to form a State Constitution. So far as all that ground 
 is concerned, the Judge is not sustaining popular sovereignty, but 
 absolutely opposing it. He sustains the decision which declares 
 that the popular will of the Territories has no constitutional 
 power to exclude slavery during their territorial existence. This 
 being so, the period of time from the first settlement of a Terri- 
 tory, till it reaches the point of forming a State Constitution, is 
 not the thing that the Judge has fought for, or is fighting for, but 
 on the contrary, he has fought for, and is fighting for, the thing 
 that annihilates and crushes out that same popular sovereignty. 
 
 Well, so much being disposed of, what is left? Why, he is 
 contending for the right of the people, when they come to make 
 a State Constitution, to make it for themselves, and precisely as 
 best suits themselves. I say again, that is Quixotic. I defy contra- 
 diction when I declare that the Judge can find no one to oppose 
 him on that proposition. I repeat, there is no body opposing that 
 proposition on principle. Let me not be misunderstood. I know 
 that, with reference to the Lecompton Constitution, I may be mis- 
 understood; but when you understand me correctly, my prop- 
 osition will be true and accurate. No body is opposing or has 
 
410 ABRAHAM LINCOLN: 
 
 opposed the right of the people, when they form a constitution, 
 to form it for themselves. Mr. Buchanan and his friends have not 
 done it; they, too, as well as the Republicans and the anti-Le- 
 compton Democrats, have not done it; but, on the contrary, they 
 together have insisted on the right of the people to form a con- 
 stitution for themselves. The difference between the Buchanan 
 men on the one hand, and the Douglas men and the Republicans 
 on the other, has not been on a question of principle, but on a 
 question of fact. 
 
 The dispute was upon the question of fact, whether the 
 Lecompton Constitution had been fairly formed by the people or 
 not. Mr. Buchanan and his friends have not contended for the 
 contrary principle any more than the Douglas men or the Repub- 
 licans. They have insisted that whatever of small irregularities 
 existed in getting up the Lecompton Constitution, were such as 
 happen in the settlement of all new Territories. The question was, 
 was it a fair emanation of the people? It was a question of fact 
 and not of principle. As to the principle, all were agreed. Judge 
 Douglas voted with the Republicans upon that matter of fact. 
 
 He and they, by their voices and votes, denied that it was a 
 fair emanation of the people. The Administration affirmed that it 
 was. With respect to the evidence bearing upon that question of 
 fact, I readily agree that Judge Douglas and the Republicans had 
 the right on their side, and that the Administration was wrong. 
 But I state again that as a matter of principle, there is no dispute 
 upon the right of the people in a Territory merging into a State 
 to form a Constitution for themselves without outside interference 
 from any quarter. This being so, what is Judge Douglas going to 
 spend his life for? — Is he going to spend his life in maintaining a 
 principle that no body on earth opposes? — Does he expect to 
 stand up in majestic dignity, and go through his apotheosis and 
 become a God, in the maintaining of a principle which, neither 
 a man nor a mouse in all God's creation is opposing? Now some- 
 thing in regard to the Lecompton Constitution more specifically; 
 for I pass from this other question of popular sovereignty as the 
 most arrant humbug that has ever been attempted on an intel- 
 ligent community. 
 
 As to the Lecompton Constitution I have already said that on 
 
HIS SPEECHES AND WRITINGS 411 
 
 the question of fact as to whether it was a fair emanation of the 
 people or not, Judge Douglas with the Republicans and some 
 Americans had greatly the argument against the Administration; 
 and while I repeat this, I wish to know what there is in the oppo- 
 sition of Judge Douglas to the Lecompton Constitution that 
 entitles him to be considered the only opponent to it — as being 
 par excellence the very quintessence of that opposition. I agree 
 to the rightfulness of his opposition. He in the Senate and his 
 class of men there formed the number three and no more. In the 
 House of Representatives his class of men — the anti-Lecompton 
 Democrats — formed a number of about twenty. It took one hun- 
 dred and twenty to defeat the measure against one hundred and 
 twelve. Of the votes of that one hundred and twenty, Judge 
 Douglas' friends furnished twenty, to add to which there were 
 six Americans and ninety-four Republicans. I do not say that I 
 am precisely accurate in their numbers, but I am sufficiently so 
 for any use I am making of it. 
 
 Why is it that twenty shall be entitled to all the credit of 
 doing that work, and the hundred none of it? Why, if, as Judge 
 Douglas says, the honor is to be divided and due credit is to be 
 given to other parties, why, is just so much given as is consonant 
 with the wishes, the interests and advancement of the twenty? 
 My understanding is, when a common job is done, or a common 
 enterprize prosecuted, that if I put in five dollars to your one, I 
 have a right to take out five dollars to your one. But he does not 
 so understand it. He declares the dividend of credit for defeating 
 Lecompton upon a basis which seems unprecedented and incom- 
 prehensible. 
 
 Let us see. Lecompton, in the run was defeated. It afterwards 
 took a sort of cooked up shape, and was passed in the English 
 bill. It is said by the Judge, that the defeat was a good and 
 proper thing. If it was a good thing, why is he entitled to more 
 credit than others, for the performance of that good act, unless 
 there was something in the antecedents of the Republicans that 
 might induce every one to expect that they would join in that 
 good work, and at the same time, something leading them to doubt 
 that he would? Does he place his superior claim to credit, on the 
 ground that he performed a good, which was never expected of 
 
412 ABRAHAM LINCOLN: 
 
 him? He says I have a proneness for quoting scripture. If I should 
 do so now, it occurs, that perhaps he places himself somewhat up- 
 on the ground of the parable of the lost sheep which went astray 
 upon the mountains, and when the owner of the hundred sheep 
 found the one that was lost, and threw it upon his shoulders, and 
 came home rejoicing, it was said that there was more rejoicing over 
 the one sheep that was lost and had been found, than over the 
 ninety and nine in the fold. The moral is applied by the Saviour in 
 this parable, thus — "Verily, I say unto you, there is more rejoicing 
 in Heaven, over one sinner that repenteth, than over ninety and 
 nine just persons that need no repentance." And now, if the Judge 
 claims the benefit of this parable, let him repent. Let him not 
 come up here and say: "I am the only just person; and you are the 
 ninety-nine sinners!" Repentance, before forgiveness is a pro- 
 vision of the Christian system, and on that condition alone will 
 the Republicans grant his forgiveness. 
 
 How will he prove that we have ever occupied a different 
 position in regard to this Lecompton Constitution or any principle 
 in it? He says he did not make his opposition on the ground as to 
 whether it was a free or slave constitution, and he would have 
 you understand that the Republicans made their opposition, be- 
 cause it ultimately became a slave constitution. To make proof in 
 favor of himself on this point, he reminds us that he opposed 
 Lecompton before the vote was taken declaring whether the 
 State was to be free or slave. But he forgets to say that our Repub- 
 lican Senator, Trumbull, made a speech against Lecompton, even 
 before he did. 
 
 Why did he oppose it? Partly, as he declares, because the 
 members of the Convention who framed it were not fairly elected 
 by the people; that the people were not allowed to vote unless 
 they had been registered; and that the people of whole counties, 
 in some instances, were not registered. For these reasons he 
 declares the constitution was not an emanation, in any true sense, 
 from the people. He also has an additional objection as to the 
 mode of submitting the constitution back to the people. But bear- 
 ing on the question of whether the delegates were fairly elected, 
 a speech of his, made something more than twelve months ago, 
 from this stand, becomes important. It was made a little while 
 
HIS SPEECHES AND WRITINGS 413 
 
 before the election of the delegates who made Lecompton. In 
 that speech he declared there was every reason to hope and 
 believe the election would be fair; and if any one failed to vote, it 
 would be his own culpable fault. 
 
 I, a few days after, made a sort of answer to that speech. 
 In that answer, I made, substantially, the very argument with 
 which he combatted his Lecompton adversaries in the Senate last 
 winter. I pointed to the facts that the people could not vote with- 
 out being registered, and that the time for registering had gone 
 by. I commented on it as wonderful that Judge Douglas could 
 be ignorant of these facts, which every one else in the nation so 
 well knew. 
 
 I now pass from popular sovereignty and Lecompton. I may 
 have occasion to refer to one or both. 
 
 When he was preparing his plan of campaign, Napoleon like, 
 in New York, as appears by two speeches I have heard him deliver 
 since his arrival in Illinois, he gave special attention to a speech 
 of mine, delivered here on the 16th of June last. He says that he 
 carefully read that speech. He told us that at Chicago a week ago 
 last night, and he repeated it at Bloomington last night. Doubt- 
 less, he repeated it again to-day, though I did not hear him. In 
 the two first places — Chicago and Bloomington — I heard him; 
 to-day I did not. He said he had carefully examined that speech; 
 when, he did not say; but there is no reasonable doubt it was 
 when he was in New York preparing his plan of campaign. I am 
 glad he did read it carefully. He says it was evidently prepared 
 with great care. I freely admit it was prepared with care. I claim 
 not to be more free from errors than others — perhaps scarcely so 
 much; but I was very careful not to put anything in that speech 
 as a matter of fact, or make any inferences which did not appear 
 to me to be true, and fully warrantable. If I had made any mis- 
 take, I was willing to be corrected; if I had drawn any inference 
 in regard to Judge Douglas, or any one else, which was not war- 
 ranted, I was fully prepared to modify it as soon as discovered. 
 I planted myself upon the truth, and the truth only, so far as I 
 knew it, or could be brought to know it. 
 
 Having made that speech, with the most kindly feelings 
 towards Judge Douglas, as manifested therein, I was gratified 
 
414 ABRAHAM LINCOLN: 
 
 when I found that he had carefully examined it, and had detected 
 no error of fact, nor any inference against him, nor any mis- 
 representations, oi : which he thought fit to complain. In neither of 
 the two speeches I have mentioned, did he make any such com- 
 plaint. I will thank any one who will inform me that he, in his 
 speech to-day, pointed out anything I had stated, respecting him, 
 as being erroneous. I presume there is no such thing. I have rea- 
 son to be gratified that the care and caution used in that speech, 
 left it so that he, most of all others interested in discovering error, 
 has not been able to point out one thing against him, which he 
 could say was wrong. He seizes upon the doctrines he supposes 
 to be included in that speech, and declares that upon them will 
 turn the issues of this campaign. He then quotes, or attempts to 
 quote from my speech. I will not say that he willfully misquotes, 
 but he does fail to quote accurately. His attempt at quoting is 
 from a passage which I believe I can quote accurately from 
 memory. I shall make the quotation now, with some comments 
 upon it, as I have already said, in order that the Judge shall be 
 left entirely without excuse for misrepresenting me. I do so now, 
 as I hope, for the last time. I do this, in great caution, in order 
 that if he repeats his misrepresentation, it shall be plain to all 
 that he does so willfully. If, after all, he still persists, I shall be 
 compelled to reconsider the course I have marked out for myself, 
 and draw upon such humble resources as I have, for a new course, 
 better suited to the real exigencies of the case. I set out in this 
 campaign, with the intention of conducting it, strictly as a gen- 
 tleman, in substance at least, if not in the outside polish. The 
 latter, I shall never be, but that which constitutes the inside of a 
 gentleman, I hope I understand, and am not less inclined to prac- 
 tice than others. It was my purpose and expectations that this 
 canvass would be conducted upon principle, and with fairness on 
 both sides; and it shall not be my fault, if this purpose and expec- 
 tation shall be given up. 
 
 He charges, in substance, that I invite a war of sections; that 
 I propose all the local institutions of the different States shall 
 become consolidated and uniform. What is there in the language 
 of that speech which expresses such purpose, or bears such con- 
 struction? I have again and again said that I would not enter into 
 
Meserve No. 6S. A photograph by Mathew B. Brady made 
 in Washington on February 23, 1861, the day the Presi- 
 dent-elect arrived for the inauguration. The original glass 
 negative is in the Meserve Collection. 
 
HIS SPEECHES AND WRITINGS 415 
 
 any of the States to disturb the institution of slavery. Judge 
 Douglas said, at Bloomington, that I used language most able 
 and ingenious for concealing what I really meant; and that while 
 I had protested against entering into the slave States, I never- 
 theless did mean to go on the banks of the Ohio and throw mis- 
 siles into Kentucky, to disturb them in their domestic institutions. 
 
 I said in that speech, and I meant no more, that the insti- 
 tution of slavery ought to be placed in the very attitude where the 
 framers of this government placed it, and left it. I do not under- 
 stand that the framers of our Constitution left the people of the 
 free States in the attitude of firing bombs or shells into the slave 
 States. I was not using that passage for the purpose for which he 
 infers I did use it. I said, "We are now far advanced into the 
 fifth year since a policy was created for the avowed object and 
 with the confident promise of putting an end to slavery agitation. 
 Under the operation of that policy that agitation has not only not 
 ceased, but has constantly augmented. In my opinion it will not 
 cease till a crisis shall have been reached and passed. 'A house 
 divided against itself cannot stand.' I believe that this government 
 cannot endure permanently half slave and half free. It will be- 
 come all one thing or all the other. Either the opponents 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 ulti- 
 mate extinction, or its advocates will push it forward till it shall 
 become alike lawful in all the States, old as well as new, North 
 as well as South/' 
 
 Now you all see, from that quotation, I did not express my 
 wish on any thing. In that passage I indicated no wish or purpose 
 of my own; I simply expressed my expectation. Can not the Judge 
 perceive a distinction between a purpose and an expectation? I 
 have often expressed an expectation to die, but I have never 
 expressed a wish to die. I said at Chicago, and now repeat, that 
 I am quite aware this government has endured, half slave and 
 half free, for eighty two years. I understand that little bit of 
 history. I expressed the opinion I did, because I perceived — or 
 thought I perceived — a new set of causes introduced. I did say, 
 at Chicago, in my speech then, that I do wish to see the spread 
 of slavery arrested, and to see it placed where the public mind 
 
416 ABRAHAM LINCOLN: 
 
 shall rest in the belief that it is in the course of ultimate ex- 
 tinction. I said that because I supposed, when the public mind 
 shall rest in that belief, we shall have peace on the slavery ques- 
 tion. I have believed — and now believe — the public mind did rest 
 in that belief up to the introduction of the Nebraska bill. 
 
 Although I have ever been opposed to slavery, so far I rested 
 in the hope and belief that it was in the course of ultimate ex- 
 tinction. For that reason, it had been a minor question with me. 
 I might have been mistaken; but I had believed, and now believe, 
 that the whole public mind, that is, the mind of the great majority, 
 had rested in that belief up to the repeal of the Missouri Com- 
 promise. But, upon that event, I became convinced, that either 
 I had been resting in a delusion, or the institution was being 
 placed on a new basis; a basis for making it perpetual, national, 
 and universal. Subsequent events have greatly confirmed me in 
 that belief. I believe that bill to be the beginning of a conspiracy 
 for that purpose. So believing, I have since then, considered that 
 question a paramount one. So believing, I have thought the 
 public mind will never rest till the power of Congress to restrict 
 the spread of it, shall again be acknowledged and exercised on 
 the one hand; or on the other, all resistance be entirely crushed 
 out. I have expressed that opinion, and I entertain it to-night. 
 It is denied that there is any tendency to the nationalization of 
 slavery in these States. 
 
 Mr. Brooks of South Carolina, in one of his speeches, when 
 they were presenting him with canes, silver plate, gold pitchers 
 and the like, for assaulting Senator Sumner, distinctly affirmed his 
 opinion that when this Constitution was formed, it was the belief 
 of no man that slavery would last to the present day. 
 
 He said what I think, that the framers of our Constitution 
 placed the institution of slavery where the public mind rested in 
 the hope that it was in course of ultimate extinction. But he went 
 on to say that the men of the present age, by their experience, 
 have become wiser than the framers of the Constitution; and the 
 inventor of the cotton-gin had made the perpetuity of slavery a 
 necessity in this country. 
 
 As another piece of evidence tending to the same point, quite 
 recently in Virginia, a man — the owner of slaves — made a will 
 
HIS SPEECHES AND WRITINGS 417 
 
 providing that after his death certain of his slaves should have 
 their freedom, if they should so choose, and go to Liberia, rather 
 than remain in slavery. They chose to be liberated. But the 
 persons to whom they would descend as property, claimed them 
 as slaves. A suit was instituted, which finally came to the Supreme 
 Court of Virginia, and was therein decided against the slaves, 
 upon the ground that a negro cannot make a choice — that they 
 had no legal power to choose — could not perform the condition 
 upon which their freedom depended. 
 
 I do not mention this with any purpose of criticizing, but to 
 connect it with the arguments as affording additional evidence 
 of the change of sentiment upon this question, of slavery in the 
 direction of making it perpetual and national. I argue now as I 
 did before, that there is such a tendency, and I am backed, not 
 merely, by the facts, but by the open confession in the slave 
 States. 
 
 And now as to the Judge's inference, that because I wish to 
 see slavery placed in the course of ultimate extinction — placed 
 where our fathers originally placed it — I wish to annihilate the 
 State Legislatures — to force the cotton to grow upon the tops of 
 the Green Mountains — to freeze ice in Florida — to cut timber on 
 the broad Illinois prairies — that I am in favor of all these ridicu- 
 lous and impossible things. 
 
 It seems to me it is a complete answer to all this, to ask if, 
 when Congress did have the fashion of restricting slavery from 
 free territory, when courts did have the fashion of deciding that 
 taking a slave into a free country made him free, I say it is a 
 sufficient answer, to ask, if any of this ridiculous nonsense about 
 consolidation, and uniformity, did actually follow. Who heard 
 of any such thing, because of the ordinance of '87? because of the 
 Missouri Restriction? because of the numerous court decisions of 
 that character? 
 
 Now as to the Dred Scott decision: for upon that he makes 
 his last point upon 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 
 
418 ABRAHAM LINCOLN: 
 
 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 a comparison with that of Judge Douglas. He would have the 
 citizen conform his vote, to that decision; the member of Con- 
 gress, his; the President his use of the veto power. He would 
 make it a rule of political action, for the people and all the depart- 
 ments 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. 
 
 When he spoke at Chicago, on Friday evening of last week, 
 he made this same point upon me. On Saturday evening I replied 
 and reminded him of a Supreme Court decision which he opposed 
 for at least several years. Last night at Bloomington he took some 
 notice of that reply; but entirely forgot to remember that part of it. 
 
 He renews his onslaughts upon me, forgetting to remember 
 that I have turned the tables against himself on that very point. 
 I renew the effort to draw his attention to it. I wish to stand erect 
 before the country, as well as before Judge Douglas, on this 
 question of judicial authority, and therefore I add something to 
 the authority in favor of my own position. I wish to show that I 
 am sustained by authority, in addition to that heretofore pre- 
 sented. I do not expect to convince the Judge. It is part of the 
 plan of his campaign, and he will cling to it with a desperate 
 grip. Even, turn it upon him — turn the sharp point against him, 
 and gaff him through — he will still cling to it till he can invent 
 some new dodge to take the place of it. 
 
 In public speaking it is tedious reading from documents; but 
 I must beg to indulge the practice to a limited extent. I shall read 
 from a letter written by Mr. Jefferson in 1820, and now to be 
 found in the seventh volume of his correspondence, at page 177. 
 It seems he had been presented by a gentleman of the name of 
 Jarvis with a book, or essay, or periodical, called the "Repub- 
 lican," and he was writing in acknowledgment of the present, and 
 noting some of its contents. After expressing the hope that the 
 
HIS SPEECHES AND WRITINGS 419 
 
 work will produce a favorable effect upon the minds of the young, 
 he proceeds to say: 
 
 "That it will have this tendency may be expected, and for 
 that reason I feel an urgency to note what I deem an error in it, 
 the more requiring notice as your opinion is strengthened by that 
 of many others. You seem, in pages 84 and 148, to consider the 
 judges as the ultimate arbiters of all constitutional questions — a 
 very dangerous doctrine indeed, and one which would place us 
 under the despotism of an oligarchy. Our judges are as honest as 
 other men, and not more so. They have, with others, the same 
 passions for party, for power, and the privilege for their corps. 
 Their maxim is, l)oni judicis est ampliare jurisdictionem;' and 
 their power the more dangerous as they are in office for life, and 
 not responsible, as the other functionaries are, to the elective 
 control. The Constitution has erected no such single tribunal, 
 knowing that to whatever hands confided, with the corruptions of 
 time and party, its members would become despots. It has more 
 wisely made all the departments co-equal and co-sovereign within 
 themselves." 
 
 Thus we see the power claimed for the Supreme Court by 
 Judge Douglas, Mr. Jefferson holds, would reduce us to the 
 despotism of an oligarchy. 
 
 Now, I have said no more than this — in fact, never quite so 
 much as this — at least, I am sustained by Mr. Jefferson. 
 
 Let us go a little further. You remember we once had a 
 national bank. Some man owed the bank a debt, he was sued 
 and sought to avoid payment, on the ground that the bank was 
 unconstitutional. The case went to the Supreme Court, and then 
 it was decided that the bank was constitutional. The whole 
 Democratic party revolted against that decision. General Jackson 
 himself asserted that he, as President, would not be bound to 
 hold a national bank to be constitutional, even though the court 
 had decided it to be so. He fell in precisely with the view of 
 Mr. Jefferson, and acted upon it under his official oath, in vetoing 
 a charter for a national bank. The declaration* that Congress does 
 not possess this constitutional power to charter a bank, has gone 
 
420 ABRAHAM LINCOLN: 
 
 into the Democratic platforms, at their national conventions, and 
 was brought forward and reaffirmed in their last convention at 
 Cincinnati. They have contended for that declaration, in the very 
 teeth of the Supreme Court, for more than a quarter of a century. 
 In fact, they have reduced the decision to an absolute nullity. 
 That decision, I repeat, is repudiated in the Cincinnati platform; 
 and still, as if to show that effrontery can go no farther, Judge 
 Douglas vaunts in the very speeches in which he denounces me 
 for opposing the Dred Scott decision, that he stands on the Cin- 
 cinnati platform. 
 
 Now, I wish to know what the Judge can charge upon me, 
 with respect to decisions of the Supreme Court which does not 
 lie in all its length, breadth, and proportions at his own door. The 
 plain truth is simply this: Judge Douglas is for Supreme Court 
 decisions when he likes them, and against them when he does 
 not like them. He is for the Dred Scott decision because it tends 
 to nationalize slavery — because it is part of the original combina- 
 tion for that object. It so happens singularly enough, that I never 
 stood opposed to a decision of the Supreme Court till this. On 
 the contrary, I have no recollection that he was ever particularly 
 in favor of one till this. He never was in favor of any, nor I op- 
 posed to any, till the present one, which helps to nationalize 
 slavery. 
 
 Free men of Sangamon, free men of Illinois — free men every- 
 where — judge ye between him and me, upon this issue. 
 
 He says this Dred Scott case is a very small matter at most — 
 that it has no practical effect; that at best, or rather, I suppose, 
 at worst, it is but an abstraction. I submit that the proposition 
 that the thing which determines whether a man is free or a slave, 
 is rather concrete than abstract. I think you would conclude that 
 it was, if your liberty depended upon it, and so would Judge 
 Douglas if his liberty depended upon it. But suppose it was on 
 the question of slavery over the new Territories that he considers 
 it as being merely an abstract matter, and one of no practical 
 importance. How has the planting of slavery in new countries 
 always been effected? It has now been decided that slavery can- 
 not be kept out of our new Territories by any legal means. In 
 what do our new Territories now differ in this respect, from the 
 
HIS SPEECHES AND WRITINGS 421 
 
 old Colonies when slavery was first planted within them? It was 
 planted, as Mr. Clay once declared, and as history proves true, 
 by industrious men in spite of the wishes of the people; the 
 mother government refusing to prohibit it, and withholding 
 from the people of the Colonies the authority to prohibit it for 
 themselves. Mr. Clay says this was one of the great and just 
 causes of complaint, against Great Britain by the Colonies, and 
 the best apology we can now make for having the institution 
 amongst us. In that precise condition, our Nebraska politicians 
 have at last succeeded in placing our own new Territories: the 
 government will not prohibit slavery within them, nor allow the 
 people to prohibit it. — 
 
 I defy any man to find any difference between the policy 
 which originally planted slavery in these Colonies and that policy 
 which now prevails in our new Territories. If it does not go into 
 them, it is only because no individual wishes it to go. The Judge 
 indulged himself, doubtless, to-day, with the question as to what 
 I am going to do with or about the Dred Scott decision. Well, 
 Judge, will you please tell me what you did about the Bank de- 
 cision? Will you not graciously allow us to do with the Dred 
 Scott decision precisely as you did with the Bank decision? You 
 succeeded in breaking down the moral effect of that decision; did 
 you find it necessary to amend the Constitution? or to set up a 
 court of negroes in order to do it? 
 
 There is one other point. Judge Douglas has a very affec- 
 tionate leaning towards the Americans and old Whigs. Last 
 evening, in a sort of weeping tone, he described to us a death- 
 bed scene. He had been called to the side of Mr. Clay, in his last 
 moments, in order that the genius of "popular sovereignty" might 
 duly descend from the dying man and settle upon him, this loving 
 and most worthy successor. He could do no less than promise 
 that he would devote the remainder of his life to "popular sover- 
 eignty;" and then the great statesman departed in peace. By 
 this part of the "plan of the campaign," the Judge has evidently 
 promised himself, that tears shall be drawn down the cheeks of 
 all old Whigs, as large as half -grown apples. 
 
 Mr. Webster, too, was mentioned; but it did not quite come 
 to a death-bed scene, as to him. It would be amusing, if it were 
 
422 ABRAHAM LINCOLN: 
 
 not disgusting, to see how quick these compromise-breakers ad- 
 minister on the political effects of their dead adversaries, trump- 
 ing up claims never before heard of, and dividing the assets 
 among themselves. If I should be found dead to-morrow morning, 
 nothing but my insignificance could prevent a speech being made 
 on my authority, before the end of next week. It so happens that 
 in that "popular sovereignty" with which Mr. Clay was identified, 
 the Missouri Compromise was expressly reserved; and it was a 
 little singular if Mr. Clay cast his mantle upon Judge Douglas on 
 purpose to have that compromise repealed. 
 
 Again, the Judge did not keep faith with Mr. Clay when he 
 first brought in his Nebraska bill. He left the Missouri Com- 
 promise unrepealed, and in his report accompanying the bill, he 
 told the world he did it on purpose. The manes of Mr. Clay must 
 have been in great agony, till thirty days later, when "popular 
 sovereignty" stood forth in all its glory. 
 
 One more thing. Last night Judge Douglas tormented him- 
 self with horrors about my disposition to make negroes perfectly 
 equal with white men in social and political relations. He did not 
 stop to show that I have said any such things, or that they legit- 
 imately follow from anything I have said, but he rushes on with 
 his assertions. I adhere to the Declaration of Independence. If 
 Judge Douglas and his 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 he 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 
 
HIS SPEECHES AND WRITINGS 423 
 
 does not endanger trie 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 said 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." Certainly 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 can not 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. 
 
 When our government was established, we had the insti- 
 tution of slavery among us. We were in a certain sense compelled 
 to tolerate its existence. It was a sort of necessity. We had gone 
 through our struggle and secured our own independence. The 
 framers 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 it 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 would most desire would be the separation of the white 
 and black races. 
 
 One more point in this Springfield speech which Judge 
 Douglas says he has read so carefully. I had expressed my belief 
 in the existence of a conspiracy to perpetuate and nationalize 
 slavery. I did not profess to know it, nor do I now. I showed the 
 part Judge Douglas had played in the string of facts, constituting 
 to my mind, the proof of that conspiracy. I showed the parts 
 played by others. 
 
424 ABRAHAM LINCOLN: 
 
 I charged that the people had been deceived into carrying 
 the last Presidential election, by the impression that the people 
 of the Territories might exclude slavery if they chose, when it 
 was known in advance by the conspirators, that the court was to 
 decide that neither Congress nor the people could so exclude 
 slavery. These charges are more distinctly made than anything 
 else in the speech. 
 
 Judge Douglas has carefully read and re-read that speech. 
 He has not, so far as I know, contradicted those charges. In the 
 two speeches which I heard, he certainly did not. On his own 
 tacit admission I renew that charge. I charge him with having 
 been a party to that conspiracy and to that deception for the 
 sole purpose of nationalizing slavery. 
 
 LETTER TO JOHN MATHERS 
 JULY 20, 1858 
 
 Springfield, July 20 1858 
 Jno. Mathers, Esq. 
 My dear Sir: 
 
 Your kind and interesting letter of the 19th was duly received. 
 Your suggestions as to placing one's self on the offensive, rather 
 than the defensive, are certainly correct. That is a point which I 
 shall not disregard. I spoke here on Saturday-night. The speech, 
 not very well reported, appears in the State Journal of this morn- 
 ing. You, doubtless, will see it; and I hope you will perceive in it, 
 that I am already improving. I would mail you a copy now, but I 
 have not one at hand. 
 
 I thank you for your letter; and shall be pleased to hear 
 from you again. 
 
 Yours very truly 
 
 A. Lincoln — 
 
HIS SPEECHES AND WRITINGS 425 
 
 Mathers was a resident of Jacksonville, Illinois, who 
 upon reading Douglas's opening speech at Chicago on 
 July 9, and Lincoln's reply on the following night, wrote 
 Lincoln advising that he saw in Douglas's tactics the 
 effort to put Lincoln on the defensive by attacking the 
 "House Divided Speech" and the "alliance" referred to 
 in the Chicago speeches. He suggested that Lincoln 
 should "turn the tables" by assailing Dougjlas "and hold- 
 ing up before the people his (Douglass' fsic/) political 
 record." (Mathers' "Letter to Richard Mills" January 11, 
 187S, Jacksonville Daily Journal, February 13, 1909.) 
 
 LETTER TO HENRY ASBURY 
 JULY 31, 1858 
 
 Springfield, July 31, 1858 
 Henry Asbury, Esq 
 My dear Sir 
 
 Yours of the 28th is received. The points you propose to 
 press upon Douglas, he will be very hard to get up to. But I think 
 you labor under a mistake when you say no one cares how he 
 answers. This implies that it is equal with him whether he is 
 injured here or at the South. That is a mistake. He cares noth- 
 ing for the South — he knows he is already dead there. He only 
 leans Southward now to keep the Buchanan party from growing 
 in Illinois. You shall have hard work to get him directly to the 
 point whether a territorial Legislature has or has not the power 
 to exclude slavery. But if you succeed in bringing him to it, 
 though he will be compelled to say it possesses no such power; 
 he will instantly take ground that slavery can not actually exist in 
 the territories, unless the people desire it, and so give it protec- 
 tive territorial legislation. If this offends the South he will let it 
 
426 ABRAHAM LINCOLN: 
 
 offend them; as at all events he means to hold on to his chances in 
 Illinois. You will soon learn by the papers that both the Judge 
 and myself, are to be in Quincy on the 13th of October, when & 
 where I expect the pleasure of seeing you. 
 
 Yours very truly 
 
 A. Lincoln 
 
 The manuscript of this letter, now owned by Mr. 
 Oliver R. Barrett of Chicago, has on the back an interest- 
 ing notation by Asbury as follows: 
 
 "July 1883— 
 
 "The main question I had urged Mr. Lincoln to put 
 to Judge Douglas — as may be perceived from his letter to 
 me was the question 2 at Freeport "Can the people of a 
 United States territory in any lawful way against the wish 
 of any citizen of the United States exclude Slavery from 
 its limits prior to the formation of a state constitution' 
 
 "The Judge answered that they could, and went on 
 to state how, but the answer I think lapped over and 
 went further than Mr. Lincoln expected it would, when 
 he answered my letter of the 31 of July. I have always 
 thought that the Judge's answer whilst it probably se- 
 cured his reelection to the Senate laid the foundation of 
 his defeat for the Presidency. Whilst on the other hand 
 it made a large factor in securing to Mr. Lincoln his own 
 nomination & election in 1860. 
 
 "Henry Asbury" 
 
HIS SPEECHES AND WRITINGS 427 
 
 FRAGMENT: ON SLAVERY 
 [AUGUST 1, 1858?] 
 
 As I would not be a slave, so I would not be a master. This 
 expresses my idea of democracy. Whatever differs from this, to the 
 extent of the difference, is not democracy. 
 
 A. Lincoln — 
 
 LETTER TO HENRY E. DUMMER 
 AUGUST 5, 1858 
 
 Springfield, Aug: 5. 1858 
 Friend Dummer 
 
 Yours, not dated, just received. No accident preventing, I 
 shall be at Beardstown on the 12th. I thank you for the contents 
 of your letter generally. I have not time now to notice the various 
 points you suggest, but I will say I do not understand the Repub- 
 lican party to be committed to the proposition "No more slave 
 States." I think they are not so committed. Most certainly they 
 prefer there should be no more; but I know there are many of 
 them who think we are under obligation to admit slave states from 
 Texas, if such shall be presented for admission; but I think the 
 party as such is not committed either way. 
 
 Your friend as ever 
 
 A. Lincoln 
 
428 ABRAHAM LINCOLN: 
 
 FIRST DEBATE, AT OTTAWA, ILLINOIS 
 AUGUST 21, 1858 
 
 mr. Douglas's opening speech 
 
 Ladies and Gentlemen: 
 
 I appear before you to-day for the purpose of discussing the 
 leading political topics which now agitate the public mind. By an 
 arrangement between Mr. Lincoln and myself, we are present here 
 to-day for the purpose of having a joint discussion, as the repre- 
 sentatives of the two great political parties , of the State and 
 Union, upon the principles in issue between those parties, and 
 this vast concourse of people shows the deep feeling which per- 
 vades the public mind in regard to the questions dividing us. 
 
 Prior to 1854 this country was divided into two great political 
 parties, known as the Whig and Democratic parties. Both were 
 national and patriotic, advocating principles that were universal 
 in their application. An Old Line Whig could proclaim his prin- 
 ciples in Louisiana and Massachusetts alike. Whig principles had 
 no boundary sectional line; they were not limited by the Ohio 
 River, nor by the Potomac, nor by the line of the Free and Slave 
 States, but applied and were proclaimed wherever the Constitu- 
 tion ruled or the American flag waved over the American soil. So 
 it was, and so it is with the great Democratic party, which, from 
 the days of Jefferson until this period, has proven itself to be the 
 historic party of this nation. While the Whig and Democratic 
 parties differed in regard to a bank, the tariff, distribution, the 
 specie circular, and the sub-treasury, they agreed on the great 
 slavery question which now agitates the Union. I say that the 
 Whig party and the Democratic party agreed on this slavery 
 question, while they differed on those matters of expediency to 
 which I have referred. The Whig party and the Democratic party 
 jointly adopted the compromise measures of 1850 as the basis of 
 a proper and just solution of this slavery question in all its forms. 
 
, HIS SPEECHES AND WRITINGS 429 
 
 Clay was the great leader, with Webster on his right and Cass on 
 his left, and sustained by the patriots in the Whig and Democratic 
 ranks who had devised and enacted the Compromise measures of 
 1850. 
 
 In 1851 the Whig party and the Democratic party united in 
 Illinois in adopting resolutions indorsing and approving the 
 principles of the Compromise measures of 1850, as the proper 
 adjustment of that question. In 1852, when the Whig party assem- 
 bled in Convention at Baltimore for the purpose of nominating 
 a candidate for the Presidency, the first thing it did was to declare 
 the Compromise measures of 1850, in substance and in principle, 
 a suitable adjustment of that question. [Here the speaker was 
 interrupted by loud and long continued applause] My friends, 
 silence will be more acceptable to me in the discussion of these 
 questions than applause. I desire to address myself to your judg- 
 ment, your understanding, and your consciences, and not to your 
 passions or your enthusiasm. When the Democratic convention 
 assembled in Baltimore in the same year, for the purpose of 
 nominating a Democratic candidate for the Presidency, it also 
 adopted the Compromise measures of 1850 as the basis of Demo- 
 cratic action. Thus you see that up to 1853-'54, the Whig party 
 and the Democratic party both stood on the same platform with 
 regard to the slavery question. That platform was the right of the 
 people of each State and each Territory to decide their local and 
 domestic institutions for themselves, subject only to the Federal 
 Constitution. 
 
 During the session of Congress of 1853-'54, I introduced into 
 the Senate of the United States a bill to organize the Territories 
 of Kansas and Nebraska on that principle which had been adopted 
 in the Compromise measures of 1850, approved by the Whig party 
 and the Democratic party in Illinois in 1851, and indorsed by the 
 Whig party and the Democratic party in National Convention in 
 1852. In order that there might be no misunderstanding in relation 
 to the principle involved in the Kansas and Nebraska bill, I put 
 forth the true intent and meaning of the Act in these words: "It 
 is the true intent and meaning of this Act not to legislate slavery 
 into any State or Territory, or to exclude it therefrom, but to leave 
 the people thereof perfectly free to form and regulate their domes- 
 
430 ABRAHAM LINCOLN: 
 
 tic institutions in their own way, subject only to the Federal Con- 
 stitution." Thus you see that up to 1854, when the Kansas and 
 Nebraska bill was brought into Congress for the purpose of carry- 
 ing out the principles which both parties had up to that time 
 indorsed and approved, there had been no division in this coun- 
 try in regard to that principle except the opposition of the Aboli- 
 tionists. In the House of Representatives of the Illinois Legisla- 
 ture, upon a resolution asserting that principle, every Whig and 
 every Democrat in the House voted in the affirmative, and only 
 four men voted against it, and those four were Old Line Aboli- 
 tionists. 
 
 In 1854, Mr. Abraham Lincoln and Mr. Trumbull entered 
 into an arrangement, one with the other, and each with his respec- 
 tive friends, to dissolve the Old Whig party on the one hand, and 
 to dissolve the old Democratic party on the other, and to connect 
 the members of both into an Abolition party, under the name and 
 disguise of a Republican party. The terms of that arrangement 
 between Mr. Lincoln and Mr. Trumbull have been published to 
 the world by Mr. Lincoln's special friend, James H. Matheny, 
 Esq., and they were, that Lincoln should have Shields's place in 
 the United States Senate, which was then about to become vacant, 
 and that Trumbull should have my seat when my term expired. 
 Lincoln went to work to Abolitionize the old Whig party all over 
 the State, pretending that he was then as good a Whig as ever; 
 and Trumbull went to work in his part of the State preaching 
 Abolitionism in its milder and lighter form, and trying to Aboli- 
 tionize the Democratic party, and bring old Democrats hand- 
 cuffed and bound hand and foot into the Abolition camp. 
 
 In pursuance of the arrangement, the parties met at Spring- 
 field in October, 1854, and proclaimed their new platform. Lin- 
 coln was to bring into the Abolition camp the Old Line Whigs, 
 and transfer them over to Giddings, Chase, Fred Douglass, and 
 Parson Lovejoy, who were ready to receive them and christen 
 them in their new faith. They laid down on that occasion a plat- 
 form for their new Republican party, which was to be thus con- 
 structed. I have the resolutions of the State Convention then held, 
 which was the first mass State Convention ever held in Illinois 
 by the Black Republican party, and I now hold them in my hands, 
 
HIS SPEECHES AND WRITINGS 431 
 
 and will read a part of them, and cause the others to be printed. 
 Here are the most important and material resolutions of this 
 Abolition platform: 
 
 "1. Resolved, That we believe this truth to be self-evident, 
 that when parties become subversive of the ends for which they 
 are established, or incapable of restoring the government to the 
 true principles of the Constitution, it is the right and duty of the 
 people to dissolve the political bands by which they may have 
 been connected therewith, and to organize new parties, upon 
 such principles and with such views as the circumstances and the 
 exigencies of the nation may demand. 
 
 "2. Resolved, That the times imperatively demand the re- 
 organization of parties, and, repudiating all previous party 
 attachments, names and predilections, we unite ourselves together 
 in defense of the liberty and Constitution of the country, and will 
 hereafter cooperate as the Republican party, pledged to the ac- 
 complishment of the following purposes: To bring the adminis- 
 tration of the government back to the control of first principles; 
 to restore Nebraska and Kansas to the position of Free Territories, 
 that, as the Constitution of the United States vests in the States, 
 and not in Congress, the power to legislate for the extradition of 
 fugitives from labor, to repeal and entirely abrogate the Fugitive- 
 Slave law; to restrict slavery to those States in which it exists; to 
 prohibit the admission of any more Slave States into the Union; 
 to abolish slavery in the District of Columbia; to exclude slavery 
 from all the Territories over which the General Government has 
 exclusive jurisdiction; and to resist the acquirement of any more 
 Territories, unless the practice of slavery therein forever shall 
 have been prohibited. 
 
 "3. Resolved, That in furtherance of these principles we will 
 use such constitutional and lawful means as shall seem best 
 adapted to their accomplishment, and that we will support no 
 man for office, under the General or State government, who is 
 not positively and fully committed to the support of these prin- 
 ciples, and whose personal character and conduct is not a guar- 
 antee that he is reliable, and who shall not have abjured old party 
 allegiance and ties." 
 
432 ABRAHAM LINCOLN: 
 
 Now, gentlemen, your Black Republicans have cheered every 
 one of those propositions, and yet I venture to say that you cannot 
 get Mr. Lincoln to come out and say that he is now in favor of 
 each one of them. That these propositions, one and all, constitute 
 the platform of the Black Republican party of this day, I have no 
 doubt; and when you were not aware for what purpose I was 
 reading them, your Black Republicans cheered them as good 
 Black Republican doctrines. My object in reading these reso- 
 lutions was to put the question to Abraham Lincoln this day, 
 whether he now stands and will stand by each article in that 
 creed and carry it out. I desire to know whether Mr. Lincoln 
 to-day stands, as he did in 1854, in favor of the unconditional 
 repeal of the Fugitive-Slave law. I desire him to answer whether 
 he stands pledged to-day, as he did in 1854, against the admis- 
 sion of any more Slave States into the Union, even if the people 
 want them. I want to know whether he stands pledged against 
 the admission of a new State into the Union with such a consti- 
 tution as the people of that State may see fit to make. I want to 
 know whether he stands to-day pledged to the abolition of slavery 
 in the District of Columbia. I desire him to answer whether he 
 stands pledged to the prohibition of the slave-trade between the 
 different States. I desire to know whether he stands pledged to 
 prohibit slavery in all the Territories of the United States, North 
 as well as South of the Missouri Compromise line. I desire him 
 to answer whether he is opposed to the acquisition of any more 
 territory, unless slavery is prohibited therein. 
 
 I want his answer to these questions. Your affirmative cheers 
 in favor of this Abolition platform are not satisfactory. I ask 
 Abraham Lincoln to answer these questions, in order that, when 
 I trot him down to lower Egypt, I may put the same questions 
 to him. My principles are the same everywhere. I can proclaim 
 them alike in the North, the South, the East, and the West. My 
 principles will apply wherever the Constitution prevails, and the 
 American flag waves. I desire to know whether Mr. Lincoln's 
 principles will bear transplanting from Ottawa to Jonesboro? I 
 put these questions to him to-day distinctly, and ask an answer. 
 I have a right to an answer, for I quote from the platform of the 
 Republican party, made bv himself and others at the time that 
 
HIS SPEECHES AND WRITINGS 433 
 
 party was formed, and the bargain made by Lincoln to dissolve 
 and kill the old Whig party, and transfer its members, bound 
 hand and foot, to the Abolition party, under the direction of 
 Giddings and Fred Douglass. 
 
 In the remarks I have made on this platform, and the posi- 
 tion of Mr. Lincoln upon it, I mean nothing personally disrespect- 
 ful or unkind to that gentleman. I have known him for nearly 
 twenty-five years. There were many points of sympathy between 
 us when we first got acquainted. We were both comparatively 
 boys, and both struggling with poverty in a strange land. I was 
 a school-teacher in the town of Winchester, and he a flourishing 
 grocery-keeper in the town of Salem. He was more successful in 
 his occupation than I was in mine, and hence more fortunate in 
 this world's goods. Lincoln is one of those peculiar men who 
 perform with admirable skill everything which they undertake. 
 I made as good a school-teacher as I could, and when a cabinet- 
 maker I made a good bedstead and tables, although my boss 
 said I succeeded better with bureaus and secretaries than with 
 anything else; but I believe that Lincoln was always more suc- 
 cessful in business than I, for his business enabled him to get into 
 the Legislature. I met him there, however, and had a sympathy 
 with him, because of the up-hill struggle we both had in life. He 
 was then just as good at telling an anecdote as now. He could 
 beat any of the boys wrestling, or running a foot-race, in pitching 
 quoits or tossing a copper; could ruin more liquor than all the 
 boys of the town together, and the dignity and impartiality with 
 which he presided at a horse-race or fist-fight excited the admira- 
 tion and won the praise of everybody that was present and par- 
 ticipated. I sympathized with him because he was struggling with 
 difficulties, and so was I. 
 
 Mr. Lincoln served with me in the Legislature in 1836, when 
 we both retired, and he subsided, or became submerged, and he 
 was lost sight of as a public man for some years. In 1846, when 
 Wilmot introduced his celebrated proviso, and the Abolition tor- 
 nado swept over the country, Lincoln again turned up as a 
 member of Congress from the Sangamon district. I was then in 
 the Senate of the United States, and was glad to welcome my old 
 friend and companion. Whilst in Congress, he distinguished him- 
 
434 ABRAHAM LINCOLN: 
 
 self by his opposition to the Mexican war, taking the side of the 
 common enemy against his own country; and when he returned 
 home, he found that the indignation of the people followed him 
 everywhere, and he was again submerged, or obliged to retire 
 into private life, forgotten by his former friends. He came up 
 again in 1854, just in time to make this Abolition or Black Repub- 
 lican platform, in company with Giddings, Lovejoy, Chase, and 
 Fred Douglass, for the Republican party to stand upon. 
 
 Trumbull, too, was one of our own contemporaries. He was 
 born and raised in old Connecticut, was bred a Federalist, but 
 removing to Georgia, turned Nullifier when Nullification was 
 popular, and as soon as he disposed of his clocks and wound up 
 his business, migrated to Illinois, turned politician and lawyer 
 here, and made his appearance in 1841 as a member of the 
 Legislature. He became noted as the author of the scheme to 
 repudiate a large portion of the State debt of Illinois, which, if 
 successful, would have brought infamy and disgrace upon the 
 fair escutcheon of our glorious State. The odium attached to that 
 measure consigned him to oblivion for a time. I helped to do it. 
 I walked into a public meeting in the hall of the House of Repre- 
 sentatives, and replied to his repudiating speeches, and reso- 
 lutions were carried over his head denouncing repudiation, and 
 asserting the moral and legal obligation of Illinois to pay every 
 dollar of the debt she owed, and every bond that bore her seal. 
 Trumbull's malignity has followed me since I thus defeated his 
 infamous scheme. 
 
 These two men having formed this combination to Aboli- 
 tionize the Old Whig party and the old Democratic party, and 
 put themselves into the Senate of the United States, in pursuance 
 of their bargain, are now carrying out that arrangement. 
 Matheny states that Trumbull broke faith; that the bargain was 
 that Lincoln should be the senator in Shields's place, and Trum- 
 bull was to wait for mine; and the story goes that Trumbull 
 cheated Lincoln, having control of four or five Abolitionized 
 Democrats who were holding over in the Senate; he would not 
 let them vote for Lincoln, which obliged the rest of the Aboli- 
 tionists to support him in order to secure an Abolition senator. 
 There are a number of authorities for the truth of this besides 
 
HIS SPEECHES AND WRITINGS 435 
 
 Matheny, and I suppose that even Mr. Lincoln will not deny it. 
 
 Mr. Lincoln demands that he shall have the place intended 
 for Trumbull, as Trumbull cheated him and got his, and Trumbull 
 is stumping the State traducing me for the purpose of securing 
 the position for Lincoln, in order to quiet him. It was in conse- 
 quence of this arrangement that the Republican convention was 
 empaneled to instruct for Lincoln and nobody else, and it was on 
 this account that they passed resolutions that he was their first, 
 their last, and their only choice. Archy Williams was nowhere, 
 Browning was nobody, Wentworth was not to be considered; 
 they had no man in the Republican party for the place except 
 Lincoln, for the reason that he demanded that they should carry 
 out the arrangement. 
 
 Having formed this new party for the benefit of deserters 
 from Whiggery, and deserters from Democracy, and having laid 
 down the Abolition platform which I have read, Lincoln now 
 takes his stand and proclaims his Abolition doctrines. Let me read 
 a part of them. In his speech at Springfield to the convention 
 which nominated him for the Senate, he said: 
 
 "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 permanenthj 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 he 
 divided. It will become all one thing, or all the other. Either the 
 opponents 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 push it forward 
 till it shall become alike lawful in all the States — old as well as 
 new, North as well as South." ["Good," "good," and cheers.] 
 
 I am delighted to hear you Black Republicans say "good." I 
 have no doubt that doctrine expresses your sentiments, and I will 
 prove to you now, if you will listen to me, that it is revolutionary 
 and destructive of the existence of this government. Mr. Lincoln, 
 in the extract from which I have read, says that this government 
 cannot endure permanently in the same condition in which it was 
 made by its framers, — divided into Free and Slave States. He says 
 
436 ABRAHAM LINCOLN: 
 
 that it has existed for about seventy years thus divided, and yet 
 he tells you that it cannot endure permanently on the same prin- 
 ciples and in the same relative condition in which our fathers 
 made it. Why can it not exist divided into Free and Slave States? 
 Washington, Jefferson, Franklin, Madison, Hamilton, Jay, and 
 the great men of that day, made this government divided into 
 Free States and Slave States, and left each State perfectly free 
 to do as it pleased on the subject of slavery. Why can it not 
 exist on the same principles on which our fathers made it? They 
 knew when they framed the Constitution that in a country as 
 wide and broad as this, with such a variety of climate, production, 
 and interest, the people necessarily required different laws and 
 institutions in different localities. They knew that the laws and 
 regulations which would suit the granite hills of New Hampshire 
 would be unsuited to the rice plantations of South Carolina, and 
 they therefore provided that each State should retain its own 
 Legislature and its own sovereignty, with the full and complete 
 power to do as it pleased within its own limits, in all that was 
 local and not national. 
 
 One of the reserved rights of the States was the right to 
 regulate the relations between master and servant, on the slavery 
 question. At the time the Constitution was framed, there were 
 thirteen States in the Union, twelve of which were slaveholding 
 States and one a free State. Suppose this doctrine of uniformity 
 preached by Mr. Lincoln, that the States should all be free or all 
 be slave, had prevailed, and what would have been the result? 
 Of course, the twelve slaveholding States would have overruled 
 the one Free State, and slavery would have been fastened by a 
 Constitutional provision on every inch of the American republic, 
 instead of being left, as our fathers wisely left it, to each State 
 to decide for itself. Here I assert that uniformity in the local laws 
 and institutions of the different States is neither possible or 
 desirable. If uniformity had been adopted when the government 
 was established, it must inevitably have been the uniformity of 
 slavery everywhere, or else the uniformity of negro citizenship 
 and negro equality everywhere. 
 
 We are told by Lincoln that he is utterly opposed to the Dred 
 Scott decision, and will not submit to it, for the reason that he 
 
HIS SPEECHES AND WRITINGS 437 
 
 says it deprives the negro of the rights and privileges of citizen- 
 ship. That is the first and main reason which he assigns for his 
 warfare on the Supreme Court of the United States and its de- 
 cision. I ask you, are you in favor of conferring upon the negro 
 the rights and privileges of citizenship? Do you desire to strike 
 out of our State Constitution that clause which keeps slaves and 
 free negroes out of the State, and allows the free negroes to flow 
 in, and cover your prairies with black settlements? Do you 
 desire to turn this beautiful State into a free negro colony, in 
 order that when Missouri abolishes slavery she can send one 
 hundred thousand emancipated slaves into Illinois, to become 
 citizens and voters, on an equality with yourselves? If you desire 
 negro citizenship, if you desire to allow them to come into the 
 State and settle with the white man, if you desire them to vote on 
 an equality with yourselves, and to make them eligible to office, 
 to serve on juries, and to adjudge your rights, then support Mr. 
 Lincoln and the Black Republican party, who are in favor of the 
 citizenship of the negro. For one, I am opposed to negro citizen- 
 ship in any and every form. I believe this Government was made 
 on the white basis. I believe it was made by white men, for the 
 benefit of white men and their posterity forever, and I am in 
 favor of confining citizenship to white men, men of European 
 birth and descent, instead of conferring it upon negroes, Indians, 
 and other inferior races. 
 
 Mr. Lincoln, following the example and lead of all the little 
 Abolition orators, who go around and lecture in the basements of 
 schools and churches, reads from the Declaration of Independence 
 that all men were created equal, and then asks, How can you 
 deprive a negro of that equality which God and the Declaration 
 of Independence award to him? He and they maintain that negro 
 equality is guaranteed by the laws of God, and that it is asserted in 
 the Declaration of Independence. If they think so, of course they 
 have a right to say so, and so vote. I do not question Mr. Lin- 
 coln's conscientious belief that the negro was made his equal, and 
 hence is his brother; but for my own part, I do not regard the negro 
 as my equal, and positively deny that he is my brother, or any kin 
 to me whatever. Lincoln has evidently learned by heart Parson 
 Love joy's catechism. He can repeat it as well as Farns worth, and 
 
438 ABRAHAM LINCOLN: 
 
 he is worthy of a medal from Father Giddings and Fred Douglass 
 for his Abolitionism. He holds that the negro was born his equal 
 and yours, and that he was endowed with equality by the 
 Almighty, and that no human law can deprive him of these rights, 
 which were guaranteed to him by the Supreme Ruler of the 
 universe. 
 
 Now, I do not believe that the Almighty ever intended the 
 negro to be the equal of the white man. If he did, he has been a 
 long time demonstrating the fact. For thousands of years the 
 negro has been a race upon the earth, and during all that time, 
 in all latitudes and climates, wherever he has wandered or been 
 taken, he has been inferior to the race which he has there met. 
 He belongs to an inferior race, and must always occupy an 
 inferior position. I do not hold that because the negro is our 
 inferior therefore he ought to be a slave. By no means can such 
 a conclusion be drawn from what I have said. On the contrary, 
 I hold that humanity and Christianity both require that the negro 
 shall have and enjoy every right, every privilege, and every 
 immunity consistent with the safety of the society in which he 
 lives. On that point, I presume, there can be no diversity of 
 opinion. You and I are bound to extend to our inferior and de- 
 pendent beings every right, every privilege, every facility and 
 immunity consistent with the public good. 
 
 The question then arises, What rights and privileges are 
 consistent with the public good? This is a question which each 
 State and each Territory must decide for itself — Illinois has 
 decided it for herself. We have provided that the negro shall not 
 be a slave, and we have also provided that he shall not be a 
 citizen, but protect him in his civil rights, in his life, his person 
 and his property, only depriving him of all political rights what- 
 soever, and refusing to put him on an equality with the white 
 man. That policy of Illinois is satisfactory to the Democratic party 
 and to me, and if it were to the Republicans, there would then be 
 no question upon the subject. But the Republicans say that he 
 ought to be made a citizen, and when he becomes a citizen he 
 becomes your equal, with all your rights and privileges. They 
 assert the Dred Scott decision to be monstrous because it denies 
 
HIS SPEECHES AND WRITINGS 439 
 
 that the negro is or can be a citizen under the Constitution. Now, 
 I hold that Illinois had a right to abolish and prohibit slavery as 
 she did, and I hold that Kentucky has the same right to continue 
 and protect slavery that Illinois had to abolish it. I hold that New 
 York had as much right to abolish slavery as Virginia has to 
 continue it, and that each and every State of this Union is a 
 sovereign power, with the right to do as it pleases upon this 
 question of slavery, and upon all its domestic institutions. 
 
 Slavery is not the only question which comes up in this con- 
 troversy. There is a far more important one to you, and that is, 
 what shall be done with the free negro? We have settled the 
 slavery question as far as we are concerned; we have prohibited 
 it in Illinois forever; and in doing so, I think we have done wisely, 
 and there is no man in the State who would be more strenuous 
 in his opposition to the introduction of slavery than I would. 
 But when we settled it for ourselves, we exhausted all our power 
 over that subject. We have done our whole duty, and can do no 
 more. We must leave each and every other State to decide for 
 itself the same question. In relation to the policy to be pursued 
 toward the free negroes, we have said that they shall not vote; 
 whilst Maine, on the other hand, has said that they shall vote. 
 Maine is a sovereign State, and has the power to regulate the 
 qualifications of voters within her limits. I would never consent 
 to confer the right of voting and of citizenship upon a negro, but 
 still I am not going to quarrel with Maine for differing from me 
 in opinion. Let Maine take care of her own negroes, and fix the 
 qualifications of her own voters to suit herself, without interfering 
 with Illinois, and Illinois will not interfere with Maine. So with 
 the State of New York. She allows the negro to vote, provided he 
 owns two hundred and fifty dollars' wordi of property, but not 
 otherwise. W 7 hile I would not make any distinction whatever 
 between a negro who held property and one who did not; yet if 
 the sovereign State of New York chooses to make that distinction, 
 it is her business and not mine, and I will not quarrel with her 
 for it. She can do as she pleases on this question if she minds 
 her own business, and we will do the same thing. 
 
 Now, my friends, if we will only act conscientiously and 
 
440 ABRAHAM LINCOLN: 
 
 rigidly upon this great principle of popular sovereignty, which 
 guarantees to each State and Territory the right to do as it pleases 
 on all things, local and domestic, instead of Congress interfering, 
 we will continue at peace one with another. Why should Illinois 
 be at war with Missouri, or Kentucky with Ohio, or Virginia with 
 New York, merely because their institutions differ? Our fathers 
 intended that our institutions should differ. They knew that the 
 North and the South, having different climates, productions, and 
 interests, required different institutions. This doctrine of Mr. 
 Lincoln, of uniformity among the institutions of the different 
 states, is a new doctrine, never dreamed of by Washington, Madi- 
 son, or the framers of this government. Mr. Lincoln and the 
 Republican party set themselves up as wiser than these men who 
 made this government, which has flourished for seventy years 
 under the principle of popular sovereignty, recognizing the right 
 of each State to do as it pleased. Under that principle, we have 
 grown from a nation of three or four millions to a nation of about 
 thirty millions of people; we have crossed the Allegheny moun- 
 tains and filled up the whole Northwest, turning the prairie into 
 a garden, and building up churches and schools, thus spreading 
 civilization and Christianity where before there was nothing but 
 savage barbarism. Under that principle we have become, from a 
 feeble nation, the most powerful on the face of the earth, and if 
 we only adhere to that principle, we can go forward increasing in 
 territory, in power, in strength, and in glory until the Republic 
 of America shall be the North Star that shall guide the friends of 
 freedom throughout the civilized world. 
 
 And why can we not adhere to the great principle of self- 
 government, upon which our institutions were originally based? 
 I believe that this new doctrine preached by Mr. Lincoln and his 
 party will dissolve the Union if it succeeds. They are trying to 
 array all the Northern States in one body against the South, to 
 excite a sectional war between the Free States and the Slave 
 States, in order that the one or the other may be driven to the 
 wall. 
 
 I am told that my time is out. Mr. Lincoln will now address 
 you for an hour and a half, and I will then occupy an half hour 
 in replying to him. 
 
HIS SPEECHES AND WRITINGS 441 
 
 mr. Lincoln's reply in the Ottawa debate 
 
 My Fellow-citizens: 
 
 When a man hears himself somewhat misrepresented, it pro- 
 vokes him — at least, I find it so with myself; but when misrepre- 
 sentation becomes very gross and palpable, it is more apt to 
 amuse him. The first thing I see fit to notice is the fact that Judge 
 Douglas alleges, after running through the history of the old 
 Democratic and the old Whig parties, that Judge Trumbull and 
 myself made an arrangement in 1854, by which I was to have the 
 place of General Shields in the United States Senate, and Judge 
 Trumbull was to have the place of Judge Douglas. Now all I have 
 to say upon that subject is that I think no man — not even Judge 
 Douglas — can prove it, because it is not true. I have no doubt he 
 is "conscientious" in saying it. 
 
 As to those resolutions that he took such a length of time to 
 read, as being the platform of the Republican party in 1854, I say 
 I never had anything to do with them, and I think Trumbull 
 never had. Judge Douglas cannot show that either of us ever did 
 have anything to do with them. I believe this is true about those 
 resolutions. There was a call for a Convention to form a Repub- 
 lican party at Springfield, and I think that my friend Mr. Lovejoy, 
 who is here upon this stand, had a hand in it. I think this is true, 
 and I think if he will remember accurately, he will be able to 
 recollect that he tried to get me into it, and I would not go in. 
 I believe it is also true that I went away from Springfield when 
 the convention was in session, to attend court in Tazewell County. 
 It is true they did place my name, though without authority, 
 upon the committee, and afterward wrote me to attend the meet- 
 ing of the committee; but I refused to do so, and I never had 
 anything to do with that organization. This is the plain truth 
 about all that matter of the resolutions. 
 
 Now, about this story that Judge Douglas tells of Trumbull 
 bargaining to sell out the old Democratic party, and Lincoln 
 agreeing to sell out the old Whig party, I have the means of 
 knowing about that: Judge Douglas cannot have; and I know 
 there is no substance to it whatever. Yet I have no doubt he is 
 
442 ABRAHAM LINCOLN: 
 
 "conscientious" about it. I know that after Mr. Lovejoy got into 
 the Legislature that winter, he complained of me that I had told 
 all the old Whigs of his district that the old Whig party was good 
 enough for them, and some of them voted against him because 
 I told them so. Now, I have no means of totally disproving such 
 charges as this which the judge makes. A man cannot prove a 
 negative, but he has a right to claim that when a man makes an 
 affirmative charge, he must offer some proof to show the truth of 
 what he says. I certainly cannot introduce testimony to show the 
 negative about things, but I have a right to claim that if a man 
 says he knows a thing, then he must show how he knows it. I 
 always have a right to claim this, and it is not satisfactory to me 
 that he may be "conscientious" on the subject. 
 
 Now, gentlemen, I hate to waste my time on such things, 
 but in regard to that general Abolition tilt that Judge Douglas 
 makes, when he says that I was engaged at that time in selling 
 out and Abolitionizing the Old Whig party, I hope you will per- 
 mit me to read a part of a printed speech that I made then at 
 Peoria, which will show altogether a different view of the position 
 I took in that contest of 1854. 
 
 A voice. — "Put on your specs." 
 
 Mr. Lincoln. — Yes, sir, I am obliged to do so. I am no longer 
 a young man. 
 
 "This is the repeal of the Missouri Compromise. The fore- 
 going history may not be precisely accurate in every particular, 
 but I am sure it is sufficiently so for all the uses I shall attempt 
 to make of it, and in it we have before us the chief materials 
 enabling us to correctly judge whether the repeal of the Missouri 
 Compromise is right or wrong. 
 
 "I think, and shall try to show, that it is wrong, — wrong in 
 its direct effect, letting slavery into Kansas and Nebraska, and 
 wrong in its prospective principle, allowing it to spread to every 
 other part of the wide world where men can be found inclined 
 to take it. 
 
 "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 
 
HIS SPEECHES AND WRITINGS 443 
 
 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 
 really good men amongst ourselves into an open war with the 
 very fundamental principles of civil liberty, — criticizing the 
 Declaration of Independence, and insisting that there is no right 
 principle of action but self-interest. 
 
 "Before proceeding, let me say I think I have no prejudice 
 against the Southern people. They are just what we would be in 
 their situation. If slavery did not now exist 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. We 
 know that some Southern men do free their slaves, go North, and 
 become tip-top Abolitionists; while some Northern ones go South, 
 and become most cruel slave-masters. 
 
 "When Southern people tell us they are no more responsible 
 for the origin of slavery than we, 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 understand 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 impossible. If they were all landed 
 there in a day, they would all perish in the next ten days; and 
 there are not surplus shipping and surplus money enough in the 
 world 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 to me 
 to denounce people upon. What next? Free them, and make them 
 
444 ABRAHAM LINCOLN: 
 
 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 white people will not. Whether this feeling accords 
 with justice and sound judgment 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 emanci- 
 pation might be adopted; but for their tardiness in this, I will not 
 undertake to judge our brethren of the South. 
 
 "When they remind us of their constitutional rights, I 
 acknowledge them, not grudgingly but fully and fairly; and I 
 would give them any legislation for the reclaiming of their fugi- 
 tives which should not, in its stringency, be more likely to carry 
 a free man into slavery, than our ordinary criminal laws are to 
 hang an innocent one. 
 
 "But all this, to my judgment, furnishes no more excuse for 
 permitting slavery to go into our own Free Territory, than it 
 would for reviving the African slave-trade by law. The law which 
 forbids the bringing of slaves from Africa, and that which has so 
 long forbidden the taking of them to Nebraska, can hardly be 
 distinguished on any moral principle; and the repeal of the former 
 could find quite as plausible excuses as that of the latter/' 
 
 I have reason to know that Judge Douglas knows that I said 
 this. I think he has the answer here to one of the questions he put 
 to me. I do not mean to allow him to catechize me unless he pays 
 back for it in kind. I will not answer questions one after another, 
 unless he reciprocates; but as he has made this inquiry, and I 
 have answered it before, he has got it without my getting any- 
 thing in return. He has got my answer on the fugitive-Slave law. 
 
 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 and the black race. This is the whole 
 of it, and anything that argues me into his idea of perfect social 
 and political equality with the negro is but a specious and fan- 
 tastic arrangement of words, by which a man can prove a horse- 
 chestnut to be a chestnut horse. 
 
 I will say here, while upon this subject, that I have no pur- 
 
HIS SPEECHES AND WRITINGS 445 
 
 pose, 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 pur- 
 pose 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 upon 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. I have never said anything to the contrary, 
 but I hold that, notwithstanding all this, there is no reason in the 
 world why the negro is not entitled to all the natural rights 
 enumerated in the Declaration of Independence — the right to 
 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 he is not my equal in many respects — certainly not in 
 color, perhaps not in moral or intellectual endowment. But in 
 the right to eat the bread, without the leave of anybody else, 
 which his own hand earns, he is my equal, and the equal of Judge 
 Douglas, and the equal of every living man. 
 
 Now I pass on to consider one or two more of these little 
 follies. The Judge is woefully at fault about his early friend Lin- 
 coln being a "grocery-keeper." I don't know that it would be a 
 great sin if I had been; but he is mistaken. Lincoln never kept a 
 grocery anywhere in the world. It is true that Lincoln did work 
 the latter part of one winter in a little still-house up at the head 
 of a hollow. 
 
 And so I think my friend, the Judge, is equally at fault when 
 he charges me at the time when I was in Congress of having 
 opposed our soldiers who were fighting in the Mexican war. The 
 Judge did not make his charge very distinctly, but I can tell 
 you what he can prove, by referring to the record. You remember 
 I was an old Whig, and whenever the Democratic party tried to 
 get me to vote that the war had been righteously begun by the 
 President, I would not do it. But whenever they asked for any 
 money, or land-warrants, or anything to pay the soldiers there, 
 during all that time, I gave the same vote that Judge Douglas did. 
 You can think as you please as to whether that was consistent. 
 
446 ABRAHAM LINCOLN: 
 
 Such is the truth; and the Judge has the right to make all he can 
 out of it. But when he, by a general charge, conveys the idea that 
 I withheld supplies from the soldiers who were fighting in the 
 Mexican war, or did anything else to hinder the soldiers, he is, 
 to say the least, grossly and altogether mistaken, as a consultation 
 of the records will prove to him. 
 
 As I have not used up so much of my time as I had supposed, 
 I will dwell a little longer upon one or two of these minor topics 
 upon which the Judge has spoken. He has read from my speech 
 in Springfield in which I say "that a house divided against itself 
 can not stand/' Does the Judge say it can stand? I don't know 
 whether he does or not. The Judge does not seem to be attending 
 to me just now, but I would like to know if it is his opinion that 
 a house divided against itself can stand. If he does, then there is 
 a question of veracity, not between him and me, but between 
 the Judge and an authority of a somewhat higher character. 
 
 Now, my friends, I ask your attention to this matter for the 
 purpose of saying something seriously. I know the Judge may 
 readily enough agree with me that the maxim which was put 
 forth by the Saviour is true, but he may allege that I misapply it; 
 and the Judge has a right to urge that, in my application, I do 
 misapply it and then I have a right to show that I do not misapply 
 it. When he undertakes to say that because I think this nation, 
 so far as the question of slavery is concerned, will all become one 
 thing or all the other, I am in favor of bringing about a dead 
 uniformity in the various States in all their institutions, he argues 
 erroneously. The great variety of the local institutions in the 
 States, springing from differences in the soil, differences in the 
 face of the country, and in the climate, are bonds of union. They 
 do not make "a house divided against itself," but they make a 
 house united. If they produce in one section of the country what 
 is called for by the wants of another section, and this other 
 section can supply the wants of the first, they are not matters of 
 discord, but bonds of union, true bonds of union. 
 
 But can this question of slavery be considered as among 
 these varieties in the institutions of the country? I leave it to you 
 to say whether, in the history of our Government, this institution 
 of slavery has not always failed to be a bond of union, and, on 
 

 /J 
 
 Meserve No. 82. A photograph made by Mathew B. Brady 
 on February 9, 1864. Victor D. Brenner used this photo- 
 graph in making his design for the Lincoln penny. The 
 original glass negative is in the Meserve Collection. 
 
HIS SPEECHES AND WRITINGS 447 
 
 the contrary, been an apple of discord and an element of division 
 in the house. I ask you to consider whether, so long as the moral 
 constitution of men's minds shall continue to be the same, after 
 this generation and assemblage shall sink into the grave, and 
 another race shall arise, with the same moral and intellectual 
 development we have, — whether, if that institution is standing 
 in the same irritating position in which it now is, it will not con- 
 tinue an element of division? If so, then I have a right to say that, 
 in regard to this question, the Union is a house divided against 
 itself; and when the Judge reminds me that I have often said to 
 him that the institution of slavery has existed for eighty years in 
 some States, and yet it does not exist in some others, I agree to 
 the fact, and I account for it by looking at the position in which 
 our fathers originally placed it, — restricting it from the new Terri- 
 tories where it had not gone, and legislating to cut off its source 
 by the abrogation of the slave-trade, thus putting the seal of legis- 
 lation against its spread. 
 
 The public mind did rest in the belief that it was in the 
 course of ultimate extinction. But lately, I think — and in this I 
 charge nothing on the Judge's motives — lately, I think, that he, 
 and those acting with him, have placed that institution on a new 
 basis, which looks to the perpetuity and nationalization of slavery. 
 And while it is placed upon this new basis, I say, and I have said, 
 that I believe we shall not have peace upon the question until the 
 opponents of slavery 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, on the other hand, that its 
 advocates will push it forward until it shall become alike lawful 
 in all the States, old as well as new, North as well as South. 
 Now I believe if we could arrest the spread, and place it where 
 Washington and Jefferson and Madison placed it, it would be in 
 the course of ultimate extinction, and the public mind would, as 
 for eighty years past, believe that it was in the course of ulti- 
 mate extinction. The crisis would be past, and the institution 
 might be let alone for a hundred years, if it should live so long, 
 in the States where it exists; yet it would be going out of existence 
 in the way best for both the black and the white races. 
 
 A voice. — "Then do you repudiate popular sovereignty?" 
 
448 ABRAHAM LINCOLN: 
 
 Mr. Lincoln. — Well, then, let us talk about popular sover- 
 eignty. What is popular sovereignty? Is it the right of the people 
 to have slavery or not have it, as they see fit, in the Territories? 
 I will state — and I have an able man to watch me — my under- 
 standing is that Popular Sovereignty, as now applied to the ques- 
 tion of slavery, does allow the people of a Territory to have 
 slavery if they want to, but does not allow them not to have it if 
 they do not want it. I do not mean that if this vast concourse of 
 people were in a Territory of the United States, any one of them 
 would be obliged to have a slave if he did not want one; but I 
 do say that, as I understand the Dred Scott decision, if any one 
 man wants slaves, all the rest have no way of keeping that one 
 man from holding them. 
 
 When I made my speech at Springfield, of which the Judge 
 complains, and from which he quotes, I really was not thinking of 
 the things which he ascribes to me at all. I had no thought in 
 the world that I was doing anything to bring about a war between 
 the Free and Slave States. I had no thought in the world that I 
 was doing anything to bring about a political and social equality 
 of the black and white races. It never occurred to me that I was 
 doing anything, or favoring anything to reduce to a dead uni- 
 formity all the local institutions of the various States. But I must 
 say, in all fairness to him, if he thinks I am doing something 
 which leads to these bad results, it is none the better that I did 
 not mean it. It is just as fatal to the country, if I have any in- 
 fluence in producing it, whether I intend it or not. But can it be 
 true, that placing this institution upon the original basis — the 
 basis upon which our fathers placed it — can have any tendency 
 to set the Northern and the Southern States at war with one 
 another, or that it can have any tendency to make the people of 
 Vermont raise sugar-cane because they raise it in Louisiana, or 
 that it can compel the people of Illinois to cut pine logs on the 
 Grand Prairie, where they will not grow, because they cut pine 
 logs in Maine, where they do grow? 
 
 The Judge says this is a new principle started in regard to 
 this question. Does the Judge claim that he is working on the 
 plan of the founders of the government? I think he says in some 
 of his speeches — indeed, I have one here now — that he saw evi- 
 
HIS SPEECHES AND WRITINGS 449 
 
 dence of a policy to allow slavery to be south of a certain line, 
 while north of it it should be excluded, and he saw an indisposi- 
 tion on the part of the country to stand upon that policy, and 
 therefore he set about studying the subject upon original prin- 
 ciples, and upon original principles he got up the Nebraska bill! 
 I am fighting it upon these "original principles," — fighting it in 
 the Jeffersonian, Washingtonian, and Madisonian fashion. 
 
 Now, my friends, I wish you to attend for a little while to one 
 or two other things in that Springfield speech. My main object 
 was to show, so far as my humble ability was capable of showing, 
 to the people of this country, what I believed was the truth — 
 that there was a tendency, if not a conspiracy, among those who 
 have engineered this slavery question for the last four or five 
 years, to make slavery perpetual and universal in this nation. 
 Having made that speech principally for that object, after arrang- 
 ing the evidences that I thought tended to prove my proposition, 
 I concluded with this bit of comment: 
 
 "We cannot absolutely know that these exact adaptations are 
 the result of pre-concert; but when we see a lot of framed timbers, 
 different portions of which we know have been gotten out at 
 different times and places, and by different workmen, — Stephen, 
 Franklin, Roger, and James, for instance, — and when we see these 
 timbers joined together, and see they exactly make the frame of 
 a house or a mill, all the tenons and mortices exactly fitting, and 
 all the lengths and proportions of the different pieces exactly 
 adapted to their respective places, and not a piece too many or 
 too few, — not omitting even the scaffolding, — or if a single piece 
 be lacking, we see the place in the frame exactly fitted and pre- 
 pared yet to bring such piece in — in such a case we feel it im- 
 possible 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 before the first 
 blow was struck." 
 
 When my friend, Judge Douglas came to Chicago on the 
 9th of July, this speech having been delivered on the 16th of 
 June, he made an harangue there, in which he took hold of this 
 speech of mine, showing that he had carefully read it; and while 
 
450 ABRAHAM LINCOLN: 
 
 he paid no attention to this matter at all, but complimented me 
 as being a "kind, amiable, and intelligent gentleman/' notwith- 
 standing I had said this, he goes on and deduces, or draws out, 
 from my speech this tendency of mine to set the States at war 
 with one another, to make all the institutions uniform, and set 
 the niggers* and white people to marrying together. Then, as the 
 Judge had complimented me with these pleasant tides (I must 
 confess to my weakness), I was a little "taken," for it came from 
 a great man. I was not very much accustomed to flattery, and it 
 came the sweeter to me. I was rather like the Hoosier with the 
 gingerbread, when he said he reckoned he loved it better than 
 any other man, and got less of it. As the Judge had so flattered 
 me, I could not make up my mind that he meant to deal unfairly 
 with me; so I went to work to show him that he misunderstood 
 the whole scope of my speech, and that I really never intended 
 to set the people at war with one another. 
 
 As an illustration, the next time I met him, which was at 
 Springfield, I used this expression, that I claimed no right under 
 the Constitution, nor had I any inclination, to enter into the 
 Slave States, and interfere with the institutions of slavery. He 
 says upon that: Lincoln will not enter into the Slave States, but 
 will go to the banks of the Ohio, on this side, and shoot over! He 
 runs on, step by step, in the horse-chestnut style of argument, 
 until in the Springfield speech he says: "Unless he shall be suc- 
 cessful in firing his batteries, until he shall have extinguished 
 slavery in all the States, the Union shall be dissolved." Now I 
 don't think that was exactly the way to treat "a kind, amiable, 
 intelligent gentleman." I know if I had asked the Judge to show 
 when or where it was I had said that if I didn't succeed in firing 
 into the Slave States until slavery should be extinguished, the 
 Union should be dissolved, he could not have shown it. I under- 
 stand what he would do. He would say, "I don't mean to quote 
 
 * There has been some difference of opinion as to whether Lincoln ever used the 
 word nigger, and the supposition has been made in other instances that the 
 reporter of a speech was responsible for the word (see Paul M. Angle's note, 
 New Letters and Papers of Lincoln, p. 188). It seems more likely that, although 
 the word never appears in Lincoln's manuscripts or in speeches printed from 
 manuscript, in extempore speaking Lincoln sometimes used it as the common 
 and quite natural colloquial term. — R.P.B. 
 
HIS SPEECHES AND WRITINGS 451 
 
 from you, but this was the result of what you say." But I have the 
 right to ask, and I do ask now, Did you not put it in such a form 
 that an ordinary reader or listener would take it as an expression 
 from me? 
 
 In a speech at Springfield, on the night of the 17th, I thought 
 I might as well attend to my own business a little, and I recalled 
 his attention as well as I could to this charge of conspiracy to 
 nationalize slavery. I called his attention to the fact that he had 
 acknowledged, in my hearing twice, that he had carefully read 
 the speech, and, in the language of the lawyers, as he had twice 
 read the speech, and still had put in no plea or answer, I took a 
 default on him. I insisted that I had a right then to renew that 
 charge of conspiracy. Ten days afterward I met the Judge at 
 Clinton, — that is to say, I was on the ground, but not in the dis- 
 cussion, — and heard him make a speech. Then he comes in with 
 his plea to this charge, for the first time; and his plea when put 
 in, as well as I can recollect it, amounted to this: that he never 
 had any talk with Judge Taney or the President of the United 
 States with regard to the Dred Scott decision before it was made. 
 I (Lincoln) ought to know that the man who makes a charge with- 
 out knowing it to be true, falsifies as much as he who knowingly 
 tells a falsehood; and lastly, that he would pronounce the whole 
 thing a falsehood; but he would make no personal application 
 of the charge of falsehood, not because of any regard for the 
 "kind, amiable, intelligent gentleman/' but because of his own 
 personal self-respect! 
 
 I have understood since then (but will not hold the Judge 
 to it if he is not willing) that he has broken through the "self- 
 respect," and has got to saying the thing out. The Judge nods to 
 me that it is so. It is fortunate for me that I can keep as good- 
 humored as I do, when the Judge acknowledges that he has been 
 trying to make a question of veracity with me. I know the Judge 
 is a great man, while I am only a small man, but I feel that I have 
 got him. I demur to that plea. I waive all objections that it was 
 not filed till after default was taken, and demur to it upon the 
 merits. What if Judge Douglas never did talk with Chief Justice 
 Taney and the President before the Dred Scott decision was 
 made; does it follow that he could not have had as perfect an 
 
452 ABRAHAM LINCOLN: 
 
 understanding without talking as withnt? I am not disposed to 
 stand upon my legal advantage. I am disposed to take his denial 
 as being like an answer in chancery, that he neither had any 
 knowledge, information, or belief in the existence, of such a con- 
 spiracy. I am disposed to take his answer as being as broad as 
 though he had put it in these words. And now, I ask, even if he 
 had done so, have not I a right to prove it on him, and to offer the 
 evidence of more than two witnesses, by whom to prove it; and 
 if the evidence proves the existence of the conspiracy, does his 
 broad answer, denying all knowledge, information, or belief, 
 disturb the fact? It can only show that he was used by con- 
 spirators, and was not a leader of them. 
 
 Now, in regard to his reminding me of the moral rule that 
 persons who tell what they do not know to be true, falsify as 
 much as those who knowingly tell falsehoods. I remember the 
 rule, and it must be borne in mind that in what I have read to 
 you, I do not say that I know such a conspiracy to exist. To that 
 I reply, I believe it. If the Judge says that I do not believe it, then 
 he says what he does not know, and falls within his own rule, that 
 he who asserts a thing which he does not know to be true, falsifies 
 as much as he who knowingly tells a falsehood. 
 
 I want to call your attention to a little discussion on that 
 branch of the case, and the evidence which brought my mind to 
 the conclusion which I expressed as my belief. If, in arraying that 
 evidence, I had stated anything which was false or erroneous, 
 it needed but that Judge Douglas should point it out, and I would 
 have taken it back, with all the kindness in the world. I do not 
 deal in that way. If I have brought forward anything not a fact, 
 if he will point it out, it will not even ruffle me to take it back. 
 But if he will not point out anything erroneous in the evidence, 
 is it not rather for him to show, by a comparison of the evidence, 
 that I have reasoned falsely, than to call the "kind, amiable, intel- 
 ligent gentleman" a liar? If I have reasoned to a false conclusion, 
 it is the vocation of an able debater to show by argument that I 
 have wandered to an erroneous conclusion. 
 
 I want to ask your attention to a portion of the Nebraska 
 bill, which Judge Douglas has quoted: "It being the true intent 
 and meaning of this Act, not to legislate slavery into any Terri- 
 
HIS SPEECHES AND WRITINGS 453 
 
 tory or State, nor to exclude it therefrom, but to leave the people 
 thereof perfectly free to form and regulate their domestic insti- 
 tutions in their own way, subject only to the Constitution of the 
 United States." Thereupon Judge Douglas and others began to 
 argue in favor of "Popular Sovereignty," — the right of the people 
 to have slaves if they wanted them, and to exclude slavery if 
 they did not want them. "But," said, in substance, a senator from 
 Ohio (Mr. Chase, I believe), "we more than suspect that you do 
 not mean to allow the people to exclude slavery if they wish to; 
 and if you do mean it, accept an amendment which I propose, 
 expressly authorizing the people to exclude slavery." 
 
 I believe I have the amendment here before me, which was 
 offered, and under which the people of the Territory, through 
 their proper representatives, might, if they saw fit, prohibit the 
 existence of slavery therein. And now I state it as a fact, to be 
 taken back if there is any mistake about it, that Judge Douglas 
 and those acting with him voted that amendment down. I now 
 think that those men who voted it down had a real reason for 
 doing so. They know what that reason was. It looks to us, since 
 we have seen the Dred Scott decision pronounced, holding that, 
 "under the Constitution," the people cannot exclude slavery, — I 
 say it looks to outsiders, poor, simple, "amiable, intelligent gentle- 
 men," as though the niche was left as a place to put that Dred 
 Scott decision in, — a niche which would have been spoiled by 
 adopting the amendment. And now, I say again, if this was not 
 the reason, it will avail the judge much more to calmly and good- 
 humoredly point out to these people what that other reason was 
 for voting the amendment down, than, swelling himself up, to 
 vociferate that he may be provoked to call somebody a liar. 
 
 Again: There is in that same quotation from the Nebraska 
 bill this clause: "It being the true intent and meaning of this 
 bill not to legislate slavery into any Territory or State." I have 
 always been puzzled to know what business the word "State" 
 had in that connection. Judge Douglas knows. He put it there. 
 He knows what he put it there for. We outsiders cannot say what 
 he put it there for. The law they were passing was not about 
 States, and was not making provision for States. What was it 
 placed there for? After seeing the Dred Scott decision, which 
 
454 ABRAHAM LINCOLN: 
 
 holds that the people cannot exclude slavery from a Territory, if 
 another Dred Scott decision shall come, holding that they cannot 
 exclude it from a State, we shall discover that when the word was 
 originally put there, it was in view of something which was to 
 come in due time, we shall see that it was the other half of some- 
 thing. I now say again, if there is any different reason for putting 
 it there, Judge Douglas, in a good-humored way, without calling 
 anybody a liar, can tell what the reason was. 
 
 When the Judge spoke at Clinton, he came very near making 
 a charge of falsehood against me. He used, as I found it printed 
 in a newspaper, which, I remember, was very nearly like the real 
 speech, the following language: — 
 
 "I did not answer the charge [of conspiracy] before, for the 
 reason that I did not suppose there was a man in America with a 
 heart so corrupt as to believe such a charge could be true. I have 
 too much respect for Mr. Lincoln to suppose he is serious in 
 making the charge." 
 
 I confess this is rather a curious view, that out of respect for 
 me he should consider I was making what I deemed rather a 
 grave charge, in fun. I confess it strikes me rather strangely. But 
 I let it pass. As the Judge did not for a moment believe that there 
 was a man in America whose heart was so "corrupt" as to make 
 such a charge, and as he places me among the "men in America," 
 who have hearts base enough to make such a charge, I hope he 
 will excuse me if I hunt out another charge very like this; and if 
 it should turn out that in hunting I should find that other, and it 
 should turn out to be Judge Douglas himself who made it, I 
 hope he will reconsider this question of the deep corruption of 
 heart he has thought fit to ascribe to me. In Judge Douglas's 
 speech of March 22, 1858, which I hold in my hand, he says: — 
 
 "In this connection there is another topic to which I desire 
 to allude. I seldom refer to the course of newspapers, or notice 
 the articles which they publish in regard to myself; but the 
 course of the Washington Union has been so extraordinary, for 
 the last two or three months, that I think it well enough to make 
 some allusion to it. It has read me out of the Democratic party 
 
HIS SPEECHES AND WRITINGS 455 
 
 every other day, at least for two or three months, and keeps 
 reading me out, and, as if it had not succeeded, still continues to 
 read me out, using such terms as 'traitor,' 'renegade/ 'deserter/ 
 and other kind and polite epithets of that nature. Sir, I have no 
 vindication to make of my Democracy against the Washington 
 Union, or any other newspaper. I am willing to allow my history 
 and action for the last twenty years to speak for themselves as to 
 my political principles and my fidelity to political obligations. 
 The Washington Union has a personal grievance. When the editor 
 was nominated for public printer, I declined to vote for him, and 
 stated that at some time I might give my reasons for doing so. 
 Since I declined to give that vote, this scurrilous abuse, these 
 vindictive and constant attacks have been repeated almost daily 
 on me. Will my friend from Michigan read the article to which 
 I allude?" 
 
 This is a part of the speech. You must excuse me from read- 
 ing the entire article of the Washington Union, as Mr. Stuart read 
 it for Mr. Douglas. The Judge goes on and sums up, as I think, 
 correctly: — 
 
 "Mr. President, you here find several distinct propositions 
 advanced boldly by the Washington Union editorially, and ap- 
 parently authoritatively; and any man who questions any of them 
 is denounced as an Abolitionist, a Free-soiler, a fanatic. The 
 propositions are, first, that the primary object of all government 
 at its original institution is the protection of person and property; 
 second, that the Constitution of the United States declares that 
 the citizens of each State shall be entitled to all the privileges and 
 immunities of citizens in the several States; and that, therefore, 
 thirdly, all State laws, whether organic or otherwise, which pro- 
 hibit the citizens of one State from settling in another with their 
 slave property, and especially declaring it forfeited, are direct 
 violations of the original intention of the government and Con- 
 stitution of the United States; and, fourth, that the emancipation 
 of the slaves of the Northern States was a gross outrage on the 
 rights of property, inasmuch as it was involuntarily done on the 
 part of the owner. 
 
 "Remember that this article was published in the Union on 
 
456 ABRAHAM LINCOLN: 
 
 the 17th of November, and on the 18th appeared the first article 
 giving the adhesion of the Union to the Lecompton Constitution. 
 It was in these words: — 
 
 " 'kansas and her constitution. — The vexed question is 
 settled. The problem is solved. The dead point of danger is passed. 
 All serious trouble to Kansas affairs is over and gone' — 
 
 "And a column nearly of the same sort. Then, when you 
 come to look into the Lecompton Constitution, you find the same 
 doctrine incorporated in it which was put forth editorially in the 
 Union. What is it? 
 
 "'Article 7, Section 1. The right of property is before and 
 higher than any constitutional sanction; and the right of the 
 owner of a slave to such slave and its increase is the same and 
 as inviolable as the right of the owner of any property whatever.' 
 
 "Then in the schedule is a provision that the Constitution 
 may be amended after 1864 by a two-thirds vote. 
 
 "'But no alteration shall be made to affect the right of 
 property in the ownership of slaves/ 
 
 "It will be seen by these clauses in the Lecompton Constitu- 
 tion that they are identical in spirit with the authoritative article 
 in the Washington Union of the day previous to its indorsement 
 of this constitution." 
 
 I pass over some portions of the speech, and I hope that any 
 one who feels interested in this matter will read the entire section 
 of the speech, and see whether I do the Judge injustice. He pro- 
 ceeds: — 
 
 "When I saw that article in the Union of the 17th of Novem- 
 ber, followed by the glorification of the Lecompton Constitution 
 on the 18th of November, and this clause in the Constitution 
 asserting the doctrine that a State has no right to prohibit slavery 
 within its limits, I saw that there was a fatal blow being struck 
 at the sovereignty of the States of this Union." 
 
 I stop the quotation there, again requesting that it may all 
 be read. I have read all of the portion I desire to comment upon. 
 What is this charge that the Judge thinks I must have a very 
 corrupt heart to make? It was a purpose on the part of certain 
 
HIS SPEECHES AND WRITINGS 457 
 
 high functionaries to make it impossible for the people of one 
 State to prohibit the people of any other State from entering it 
 with their "property," so called, and making it a slave State. In 
 other words it was a charge implying a design to make the insti- 
 tution of slavery national. And now I ask your attention to what 
 Judge Douglas has himself done here. I know he made that part 
 of the speech as a reason why he had refused to vote for a certain 
 man for public printer; but when we get at it, the charge itself 
 is the very one I made against him, that he thinks I am so corrupt 
 for uttering. Now, whom does he make that charge against? Does 
 he make it against that newspaper editor merely? No; he says 
 it is identical in spirit with the Lecompton Constitution, and so 
 the framers of that Constitution are brought in with the editor of 
 the newspaper in that "fatal blow being struck." He did not call 
 it a "conspiracy." In his language, it is a "fatal blow being struck." 
 And if the words carry the meaning better when changed from 
 a "conspiracy" into a "fatal blow being struck," I will change my 
 expression and call it "fatal blow being struck." We see the charge 
 made not merely against the editor of the Union, but all the 
 framers of the Lecompton Constitution; and not only so, but the 
 article was an authoritative article. By whose authority? Is there 
 any question but that he means it was by the authority of the 
 President and his Cabinet, — the Administration? 
 
 Is there any sort of question but that he means to make that 
 charge? Then there are the editors of the Union, the framers of 
 the Lecompton Constitution, the President of the United States 
 and his Cabinet, and all the supporters of the Lecompton Consti- 
 tution, in Congress and out of Congress, who are all involved in 
 this "fatal blow being struck." I commend to Judge Douglas's 
 consideration the question of how corrupt a man's heart must be 
 to make such a charge! 
 
 Now, my friends, I have but one branch of the subject, in 
 the little time I have left, to which to call your attention; and as 
 I shall come to a close at the end of that branch, it is probable 
 that I shall not occupy quite all the time allotted to me. Although 
 on these questions I would like to talk twice as long as I have, 
 I could not enter upon another head and discuss it properly 
 without running over my time. I ask the attention of the people 
 
458 ABRAHAM LINCOLN: 
 
 here assembled and elsewhere, to the course that Judge Douglas is 
 pursuing every day as bearing upon this question of making 
 slavery national. Not going back to the records, but taking the 
 speeches he makes, the speeches he made yesterday and day be- 
 fore, and makes constantly all over the country, — I ask your atten- 
 tion to them. In the first place, what is necessary to make the 
 institution national? Not war. There is no danger that the people 
 of Kentucky will shoulder their muskets, and, with a young nigger 
 stuck on every bayonet, march into Illinois and force them upon 
 us. There is no danger of our going over there and making war 
 upon them. Then what is necessary for the nationalization of 
 slavery? It is simply the next Dred Scott decision. It is merely for 
 the Supreme Court to decide that no State under the Constitution 
 can exclude it, just as they have already decided that under the 
 Constitution neither Congress nor the Territorial Legislature can 
 do it. When that is decided and acquiesced in, the whole thing is 
 done. 
 
 This being true, and this being the way, as I think, that 
 slavery is to be made national, let us consider what Judge Douglas 
 is doing every day to that end. In the first place, let us see what 
 influence he is exerting on public sentiment. In this and like 
 communities, public sentiment is everything. With public senti- 
 ment, nothing can fail; without it, nothing can succeed. Conse- 
 quently he who moulds public sentiment goes deeper than he 
 who enacts statutes or pronounces decisions. He makes statutes 
 and decisions possible or impossible to be executed. This must be 
 borne in mind, as also the additional fact that Judge Douglas is 
 a man of vast influence, so great that it is enough for many men to 
 profess to believe anything, when they once find out that Judge 
 Douglas professes to believe it. Consider also the attitude he 
 occupies at the head of a large party, — a party which he claims 
 has a majority of all the voters in the country. This man sticks to 
 a decision which forbids the people of a Territory from excluding 
 slavery, and he does so, not because he says it is right in itself, — 
 he does not give any opinion on that, — but because it has been 
 decided by the court; and being decided by the court, he is, and 
 you are, bound to take it in your political action as law, not that 
 he judges at all of its merits, but because a decision of the court 
 
HIS SPEECHES AND WRITINGS 459 
 
 is to him a "Thus saith the Lord/' He places it on that ground 
 alone; and you will bear in mind that thus committing himself 
 unreservedly to this decision commits him to the next one just 
 as firmly as to this. He did not commit himself on account of the 
 merit or demerit of the decision, but it is a "Thus saith the Lord/' 
 The next decision, as much as this, will be a "Thus saith the 
 Lord." 
 
 There is nothing that can divert or turn him away from this 
 decision. It is nothing that I point out to him that his great pro- 
 totype, General Jackson, did not believe in the binding force of 
 decisions. It is nothing to him that Jefferson did not so believe. 
 I have said that I have often heard him approve of Jackson's 
 course in disregarding the decision of the Supreme Court pro- 
 nouncing a National Bank constitutional. He says, I did not hear 
 him say so. He denies the accuracy of my recollection. I say he 
 ought to know better than I, but I will make no question about 
 this thing, though it still seems to me that I heard him say it 
 twenty times. I will tell him, though, that he now claims to stand 
 on the Cincinnati platform, which affirms that Congress cannot 
 charter a National Bank, in the teeth of that old standing decision 
 that Congress can charter a bank. 
 
 And I remind him of another piece of history on the question 
 of respect for judicial decisions: and it is a piece of Illinois his- 
 tory, belonging to a time when the large party to which Judge 
 Douglas belonged were displeased with a decision of the Supreme 
 Court of Illinois; because they had decided that a governor could 
 not remove a Secretary of State. You will find the whole story 
 in Ford's History of Illinois, and I know that Judge Douglas will 
 not deny that he was then in favor of overslaughing that decision 
 by the mode of adding five new judges, so as to vote down the 
 four old ones. Not only so, but it ended in the Judges sitting 
 down on the very bench as one of the five new judges to break 
 down the four old ones. It was in this way precisely that he got 
 his title of Judge. Now, when the Judge tells me that men ap- 
 pointed conditionally to sit as members of a court will have to 
 be catechised beforehand upon some subject, I say, "You know, 
 Judge; you have tried it." When he says a court of this kind will 
 lose the confidence of all men, will be prostituted and disgraced 
 
460 ABRAHAM LINCOLN: 
 
 by such a proceeding, I say, "You know best, Judge; you have 
 been through the mill." 
 
 But I cannot shake Judge Douglas's teeth loose from the 
 Dred Scott decision. Like some obstinate animal (I mean no dis- 
 respect) that will hang on when he has once got his teeth fixed, 
 you may cut off a leg, or you may tear away an arm, still he will 
 not relax his hold. And so I may point out to the Judge, and 
 say, that he is bespattered all over, from the beginning of his 
 political life to the present time, with attacks upon judicial de- 
 cisions; I may cut off limb after limb of his public record, and 
 strive to wrench him from a single dictum of the court, — yet I 
 cannot divert him from it. He hangs; to the last, to the Dred Scott 
 decision. These things show there is a purpose strong as death 
 and eternity for which he adheres to this decision, and for which 
 he will adhere to all other decisions of the same court. 
 
 A Hibernian. — "Give us something besides Dred Scott." 
 
 Mr. Lincoln. — Yes; no doubt you want to hear something 
 that don't hurt. Now, having spoken of the Dred Scott decision, 
 one more word, and I am done. Henry Clay, my beau ideal of a 
 statesman, the man for whom I fought all my humble life, — 
 Henry Clay once said of a class of men who would repress all 
 tendencies to liberty and ultimate emancipation, that they must, 
 if they would do this, go back to the era of our Independence, and 
 muzzle the cannon which thunders its annual joyous return; they 
 must blow out the moral lights around us; they must penetrate 
 the human soul, and eradicate there the love of liberty; and then, 
 and not till then, could they perpetuate slavery in this country! 
 To my thinking, Judge Douglas is, by his example and vast in- 
 fluence, doing that very thing in this community, when he says 
 that the negro has nothing in the Declaration of Independence. 
 Henry Clay plainly understood the contrary. 
 
 Judge Douglas is going back to the era of our Revolution, and 
 to the extent of his ability, muzzling the cannon which thunders its 
 annual joyous return. When he invites any people, willing to have 
 slavery, to establish it, he is blowing out the moral lights around us. 
 When he says he "cares not whether slavery is voted down or 
 voted up," — that it is a sacred right of self-government, — he is, 
 in my judgment, penetrating the human soul and eradicating the 
 
HIS SPEECHES AND WRITINGS 461 
 
 light of reason and the love of liberty in this American people. And 
 now I will only say that when, by all these means and appliances, 
 Judge Douglas shall succeed in bringing public sentiment to an 
 exact accordance with his own views; when these vast assem- 
 blages shall echo back all these sentiments; when they shall come 
 to repeat his views and to avow his principles, and to say all 
 that he says on these mighty questions, — then it needs only the 
 formality of the second Dred Scott decision, which he indorses 
 in advance, to make slavery alike lawful in all the States, old as 
 well as new, North as well as South. 
 
 My friends, that ends the chapter. The Judge can take his half 
 hour. 
 
 MR. DOUGLAS S REJOINDER 
 
 Fellow-Citizens : 
 
 I will now occupy the half hour allotted to me in replying to 
 Mr. Lincoln. The first point to which I will call your attention is 
 as to what I said about the organization of the Republican party 
 in 1854, and the platform that was formed on the 5th of October 
 of that year, and I will then put the question to Mr. Lincoln, 
 whether or not he approves of each article in that platform, 
 and ask for a specific answer. I did not charge him with being a 
 member of the committee which reported that platform. I charged 
 that that platform was the platform of the Republican party 
 adopted by them. The fact that it was the platform of the Repub- 
 lican party is not denied; but Mr. Lincoln now says that although 
 his name was on the committee which reported it, he does not 
 think he was there, but thinks he was in Tazewell, holding court. 
 Now, I want to remind Mr. Lincoln that he was at Springfield 
 when that Convention was held and those resolutions were 
 adopted. 
 
 The point I am going to remind Mr. Lincoln of is this: that 
 after I had made my speech in 1854, during the Fair, he gave me 
 notice that he was going to reply to me the next day. I was sick 
 at the time, but I stayed over in Springfield to hear his reply, and 
 to reply to him. On that day this very Convention, the resolu- 
 
462 . ABRAHAM LINCOLN: 
 
 tions adopted by which I have read, was to meet in the Senate 
 chamber. He spoke in the hall of the House; and when he got 
 through his speech, — my recollection is distinct, and I shall never 
 forget it, — Mr. Codding walked in as I took the stand to reply, and 
 gave notice that the Republican State Convention would meet 
 instantly in the Senate chamber, and called upon the Republicans 
 to retire there and go into this very Convention, instead of remain- 
 ing and listening to me. 
 
 Mr. Lincoln. — Judge, add that I went along with them. 
 
 Mr. Douglas. — Gentlemen, Mr. Lincoln tells me to add that 
 he went along with them to the senate chamber. I will not add 
 that, because I do not know whether he did or not. 
 
 Mr. Lincoln. — I know he did not. 
 
 Mr. Douglas. — I do not know whether he knows it or not, 
 that is not the point and I will yet bring him to the question. 
 
 In the first place, Mr. Lincoln was selected by the very men 
 who made the Republican organization on that day, to reply to 
 me. He spoke for them and for that party, and he was the leader 
 of the party; and on the very day he made his speech in reply to 
 me, preaching up this same doctrine of negro equality under the 
 Declaration of Independence, this Republican party met in Con- 
 vention. Another evidence that he was acting in concert with 
 them is to be found in the fact that that Convention waited an 
 hour after its time of meeting to hear Lincoln's speech, and 
 Codding, one of their leading men, marched in the moment 
 Lincoln got through, and gave notice that they did not want to 
 hear me, and would proceed with the business of the Convention. 
 Still another fact. I have here a newspaper printed at Springfield, 
 Mr. Lincoln's own town, in October, 1854, a few days afterward, 
 publishing these resolutions, charging Mr. Lincoln with entertain- 
 ing these sentiments, and trying to prove that they were also the 
 sentiments of Mr. Yates, then candidate for Congress. This has 
 been published on Mr. Lincoln over and over again, and never 
 before has he denied it. 
 
 But, my friends, this denial of his that he did not act on the 
 committee, is a miserable quibble to avoid this main issue, which 
 is, that this Republican platform declares in favor of the uncondi- 
 tional repeal of the Fugitive-Slave law. Has Lincoln answered 
 
HIS SPEECHES AND WRITINGS 463 
 
 whether he indorsed that or not? I called his attention to it when I 
 first addressed you, and asked him for an answer, and I then 
 predicted that he would not answer. How does he answer? Why, 
 that he was not on the committee that wrote the resolutions. I 
 then repeated the next proposition contained in the resolutions, 
 which was to restrict slavery in those States in which it exists, and 
 asked him whether he indorsed it. Does he answer yes, or no? He 
 says in reply, "I was not on the committee at the time; I was up in 
 Tazewell." The next question I put to him was, whether he was in 
 favor of prohibiting the admission of any more Slave States into 
 the Union. I put the question to him distinctly, whether, if the 
 people of the Territory, when they had sufficient population to 
 make a State, should form their Constitution recognizing slavery, 
 he would vote for or against its admission. He is a candidate for 
 the United States Senate, and it is possible, if he should be elected, 
 that he would have to vote directly on that question. I asked him 
 to answer me and you, whether he would vote to admit a State 
 into the Union, with slavery or without it, as its own people might 
 choose. He did not answer that question. He dodges that question 
 also, under the cover that he was not on the committee at the time, 
 that he was not present when the platform was made. I want to 
 know, if he should happen to be in the Senate when a State 
 applied for admission, with a Constitution acceptable to her own 
 people, [whether?] he would vote to admit that State, if slavery 
 was one of its institutions. He avoids the answer. 
 
 Mr. Lincoln — No, Judge. 
 
 It is true he gives the Abolitionists to understand by a hint 
 that he would not vote to admit such a State. And why? He goes 
 on to say that the man who would talk about giving each State 
 the right to have slavery or not, as it pleased, was akin to the man 
 who would muzzle the guns which thundered forth the annual 
 joyous return of the day of our Independence. He says that that 
 kind of talk is casting a blight on the glory of this country. What is 
 the meaning of that? That he is not in favor of each State to have 
 the right of doing as it pleases on the slavery question? I will put 
 the question to him again and again, and I intend to force it out 
 of him. 
 
 Then, again, this platform which was made at Springfield 
 
464 ABRAHAM LINCOLN: 
 
 by his own party when he was its acknowledged head, provides 
 that Republicans will insist on the abolition of slavery in the Dis- 
 trict of Columbia, and I asked Lincoln specifically whether he 
 agreed with them in that? ["Did you get an answer?"] He is afraid 
 to answer it. He knows I will trot him down to Egypt. I intend to 
 make him answer there, or I will show the people of Illinois that 
 he does not intend to answer these questions. The Convention to 
 which I have been alluding goes a little further, and pledges itself 
 to exclude slavery from all the Territories over which the General 
 Government has exclusive jurisdiction north of 36 deg. 30 min., 
 as well as south. Now I want to know whether he approves that 
 provision. I want him to answer, and when he does, I want to 
 know his opinion on another point, which is, whether he will 
 redeem the pledge of this platform, and resist the acquirement 
 of any more territory unless slavery therein shall be forever pro- 
 hibited. I want him to answer this last question. 
 
 Each of the questions I have put to him are practical ques- 
 tions, — questions based upon the fundamental principles of the 
 Black Republican party; and I want to know whether he is the 
 first, last, and only choice of a party with whom he does not 
 agree in principle. He does not deny but that that principle 
 was unanimously adopted by the Republican party; he does not 
 deny that the whole Republican party is pledged to it; he does not 
 deny that a man who is not faithful to it is faithless to the Re- 
 publican party; and now I want to know whether that party is 
 unanimously in favor of a man who does not adopt that creed 
 and agree with them in their principles; I want to know whether 
 the man who does not agree with them, and who is afraid to 
 avow his differences, and who dodges the issue, is the first, last, 
 and only choice of the Republican party. 
 
 A voice. — "How about the conspiracy?" 
 
 Never mind, I will come to that soon enough. But the plat- 
 form which I have read to you not only lays down these principles, 
 but it adds: — 
 
 "Resolved, That, in furtherance of these principles, we will 
 use such constitutional and lawful means as shall seem best 
 adapted to their accomplishment, and that we will support no 
 
HIS SPEECHES AND WRITINGS 465 
 
 man for office, under the General or State Government, who is not 
 positively and fully committed to the support of these principles, 
 and whose personal character and conduct are not a guarantee 
 that he is reliable, and who shall not have abjured old party 
 allegiance and ties." 
 
 The Black Republican party stands pledged that they will 
 never support Lincoln until he has pledged himself to that plat- 
 form; but he cannot devise his answer. He has not made up his 
 mind whether he will or not. He talked about everything else he 
 could think of to occupy his hour and a half, and when he could 
 not think of anything more to say, without an excuse for refusing 
 to answer these questions, he sat down long before his time 
 was out. 
 
 In relation to Mr. Lincoln's charge of conspiracy against me, 
 I have a word to say. In his speech to-day he quotes a playful part 
 of his speech at Springfield, about Stephen, and James, and Frank- 
 lin, and Roger, and says that I did not take exception to it. I did 
 not answer it, and he repeats it again. I did not take exception to 
 this figure of his. He has a right to be as playful as he pleases 
 in throwing his arguments together, and I will not object; but 
 I did take objection to his second Springfield speech, in which 
 he stated that he intended his first speech as a charge of corrup- 
 tion or conspiracy against the Supreme Court of the United 
 States, President Pierce, President Buchanan, and myself. That 
 gave the offensive character to the charge. He then said that 
 when he made it he did not know whether it was true or not; 
 but inasmuch as Judge Douglas had not denied it, although he 
 had replied to the other parts of his speech three times, he re- 
 peated it as a charge of conspiracy against me, thus charging me 
 with moral turpitude. When he put it in that form, I did say, that 
 inasmuch as he repeated the charge simply because I had not 
 denied it, I would deprive him of the opportunity of ever repeat- 
 ing it again, by declaring that it was, in all its bearings, an in- 
 famous lie. He says he will repeat it until I answer his folly and 
 nonsense about Stephen, and Franklin, and Roger, and Bob, and 
 James. 
 
 He studied that out, prepared that one sentence with the 
 
466 ABRAHAM LINCOLN: 
 
 greatest care, committed it to memory, and put it in his first Spring- 
 field speech; and now he carries that speech around, and reads 
 that sentence to show how pretty it is. His vanity is wounded 
 because I will not go into that beautiful figure of his about the 
 building of a house. All I have to say is, that I am not green 
 enough to let him make a charge which he acknowledges he does 
 not know to be true, and then take up my time in answering it, 
 when I know it to be false, and nobody else knows it to be true. 
 
 I have not brought a charge of moral turpitude against him. 
 When he, or any other man, brings one against me, instead of dis- 
 proving it, I will say that it is a lie, and let him prove it if he can. 
 
 I have lived twenty-five years in Illinois. I have served you 
 with all the fidelity and ability which I possess, and Mr. Lincoln 
 is at liberty to attack my public action, my votes, and my conduct; 
 but when he dares to attack my moral integrity by a charge of 
 conspiracy between myself, Chief Justice Taney and the Supreme 
 Court, and two Presidents of the United States, I will repel it. 
 
 Mr. Lincoln has not character enough for integrity and truth, 
 merely on his own ipse dixit, to arraign President Buchanan, Presi- 
 dent Pierce, and nine Judges of the Supreme Court, not one of 
 whom would be complimented by being put on an equality 
 with him. There is an unpardonable presumption in a man putting 
 himself up before thousands of people, and pretending that his 
 ipse dixit, without proof, without fact, and without truth, is 
 enough to bring down and destroy the purest and best of living 
 men. 
 
 Fellow-citizens, my time is fast expiring; I must pass on. Mr. 
 Lincoln wants to know why I voted against Mr. Chase's amend- 
 ment to the Nebraska bill. I will tell him. In the first place, the bill 
 already conferred all the power which Congress had, by giving 
 the people the whole power over the subject. Chase offered a 
 proviso that they might abolish slavery, which by implication 
 would convey the idea that they could prohibit by not introducing 
 that institution. General Cass asked him to modify his amendment 
 so as to provide that the people might either prohibit or intro- 
 duce slavery, and thus make it fair and equal. Chase refused to 
 so modify his proviso, and then General Cass and all the rest of 
 us voted it down. Those facts appear on the journals and debates 
 
HIS SPEECHES AND WRITINGS 467 
 
 of Congress, where Mr. Lincoln found the charge; and if he had 
 told the whole truth, there would have been no necessity for me 
 to occupy your time in explaining the matter. 
 
 Mr. Lincoln wants to know why the word "State," as well as 
 "Territory ," was put into the Nebraska bill? I will tell him. It was 
 put there to meet just such false arguments as he has been adduc- 
 ing. That first, not only the people of the Territories should do 
 as they pleased, but that when they come to be admitted as States, 
 they should come into the Union with or without slavery, as the 
 people determined. I meant to knock in the head this Abolition 
 doctrine of Mr. Lincoln's, that there shall be no more Slave States, 
 even if the people want them. And it does not do for him to say, 
 or for any other Black Republican to say, that there is nobody in 
 favor of the doctrine of no more Slave States, and that nobody 
 wants to interfere with the right of the people to do as they please. 
 What was the origin of the Missouri difficulty and the Missouri 
 Compromise? The people of Missouri formed a Constitution as a 
 Slave State, and asked admission into the Union, but the Free-soil 
 party of the North, being in a majority, refused to admit her be- 
 cause she had slavery as one of her institutions. Hence this first 
 slavery agitation arose upon a State, and not upon a Territory; and 
 yet Mr. Lincoln does not know why the word "State" was placed in 
 the Kansas-Nebraska bill. The whole Abolition agitation arose on 
 that doctrine of prohibiting a State from coming in with slavery 
 or not, as it pleased, and that same doctrine is here in this Repub- 
 lican platform of 1854; it has never been repealed; and every Black 
 Republican stands pledged by that platform never to vote for any 
 man who is not in favor of it. Yet Mr. Lincoln does not know that 
 there is a man in the world who is in favor of preventing a State 
 from coming in as it pleases, notwithstanding. The Springfield plat- 
 form says that they, the Republican party, will not allow a State 
 to come in under such circumstances. He is an ignorant man. 
 
 Now you see that upon these very points I am as far from 
 bringing Mr. Lincoln up to the line as I ever was before. He does 
 not want to avow his principles. I do want to avow mine, as clear 
 as sunlight in midday. Democracy is founded upon the eternal 
 principle of right. The plainer these principles are avowed before 
 the people, the stronger will be the support which they will re- 
 
468 ABRAHAM LINCOLN: 
 
 ceive. I only wish I had the power to make them so clear that 
 they would shine in the heavens for every man, woman, and child 
 to read. The first of those principles that I would proclaim would 
 be in opposition to Mr. Lincoln's doctrine of uniformity between 
 the different States, and I would declare instead the sovereign 
 right of each State to decide the slavery question as well as all 
 other domestic questions for themselves, without interference 
 from any other State or power whatsoever. 
 
 When that principle is recognized, you will have peace and 
 harmony and fraternal feeling between all the States of this Union; 
 until you do recognize that doctrine, there will be sectional war- 
 fare agitating and distracting the country. What does Mr. Lincoln 
 propose? He says that the Union cannot exist divided into Free 
 and Slave States. If it cannot endure thus divided, then he must 
 strive to make them all Free or all Slave, which will inevitably 
 bring about a dissolution of the Union. 
 
 Gentlemen, I am told that my time is out, and I am obliged 
 to stop. 
 
 The propriety of including Douglas's portion of this 
 debate in a volume of Lincoln's writings has precedent in 
 the Complete Works of Abraham Lincoln, hut in addi- 
 tion, in the editor's opinion, the inclusion is justified on 
 the ground that Douglas's speech and rebuttal afford an 
 excellent opportunity for gauging the two men. One 
 thing in particular is worth noting — the extent to which 
 Douglas dealt in Lincoln's personal and public history, 
 and the manner of Lincoln's replies to the charges and 
 insinuations, with his ironical, even sarcastic, reference 
 to Douglas's <e conscientiousness." This is typical of 
 Lincoln's sarcastic humor as revealed in his political 
 speeches up to this time. It is interesting to observe that 
 Lincoln took no notice of Douglas's charge that Lincoln 
 was a habitual participant in the cruder pastimes of the 
 frontier and could "ruin more liquor than all the boys 
 of the town together," especially in view of the notorious 
 fact that Douglas was a hard drinker and Lincoln a 
 
HIS SPEECHES AND WRITINGS 469 
 
 truly temperate man. That Lincoln neglected an oppor- 
 tunity for scathing sarcasm of a very personal nature is 
 significant. Sarcasm was his forte, but there were ap- 
 parently restrictions upon it, of expediency as well as 
 inclination. Lincoln was shooting for bigger game, in 
 the realm of political philosophy rather than of petty 
 personalities. The reason for Lincoln's notice of the term 
 "grocery-keeper" may not be obvious today when eat- 
 ables are chiefly inferred from its use. In Lincoln s day 
 it was a euphemism for barroom. The value of Douglas's 
 biographical sketch of Lincoln lies in its revelation of 
 Douglas's personality more than in its characterization 
 of Lincoln. 
 
 All queries from the audience and explanatory ma- 
 terial inclosed in brackets in the text of the debate are 
 the reporter's, not the editor's. 
 
 FRAGMENT: SPEECH AT EDWARDS VILLE, ILLINOIS 
 SEPTEMBER 11, 1858 
 
 I have been requested to give a concise statement, as I under- 
 stand it, of the difference between the Democratic and the Re- 
 publican parties on the leading issues of this campaign. The ques- 
 tion has just been put to me by a gentleman whom I do not know. 
 I do not even know whether he is a friend of mine or a supporter 
 of Judge Douglas in this contest; nor does that make any differ- 
 ence. His question is a pertinent one and, though it has not been 
 asked me anywhere in the State before, I am very glad that my 
 attention has been called to it to-day. Lest I should forget it, I will 
 give you my answer before proceeding with the line of argument 
 I had marked out for this discussion. 
 
 The difference between the Republican and the Democratic 
 parties on the leading issue of this contest, as I understand it, is, 
 
470 ABRAHAM LINCOLN: 
 
 that the former consider slavery a moral, social and political wrong, 
 while the latter do not consider it either a moral, social or political 
 wrong; and the action of each, as respects the growth of the 
 country and the expansion of our population, is squared to meet 
 these views. I will not allege that the Democratic party consider 
 slavery morally, socially and politically right, though their tend- 
 ency to that view has, in my opinion, been constant and unmis- 
 takable for the past five years. I prefer to take, as the accepted 
 maxim of the party, the idea put forth by Judge Douglas, that he 
 "don't care whether slavery is voted down or voted up." I am 
 quite willing to believe that many Democrats would prefer that 
 slavery be always voted down, and I am sure that some prefer that 
 it be always "voted up;" but I have a right to insist that their action, 
 especially if it be their constant and unvarying action, shall deter- 
 mine their ideas and preferences on the subject. Every measure of 
 the Democratic party of late years, bearing directly or indirectly 
 on the slavery question, has corresponded with this notion of utter 
 indifference whether slavery or freedom shall outrun in the race of 
 empire across the Pacific — every measure, I say, up to the Dred 
 Scott decision, where, it seems to me, the idea is boldly suggested 
 that slavery is better than freedom. The Republican party, on the 
 contrary, hold that this government was instituted to secure the 
 blessings of freedom, and that slavery is an unqualified evil to the 
 negro, to the white man, to the soil, and to the State. Regarding 
 it an evil, they will not molest it in the States where it exists; they 
 will not overlook the constitutional guards which our forefathers 
 have placed around it; they will do nothing that can give proper 
 offence to those who hold slaves by legal sanction; but they will 
 use every constitutional method to prevent the evil from becoming 
 larger and involving more negroes, more white men, more soil, 
 and more States in its deplorable consequences. They will, if pos- 
 sible, place it where the public mind shall rest in the belief that 
 it is in course of ultimate peaceable extinction, in God's own good 
 time. And to this end they will, if possible, restore the govern- 
 ment to the policy of the fathers — the policy of preserving the 
 new territories from the baneful influence of human bondage, as 
 the Northwestern territories were sought [thought?] to be pre- 
 served by the ordinance of 1787 and the compromise act of 1820. 
 
HIS SPEECHES AND WRITINGS 471 
 
 They will oppose, in all its length and breadth, the modern Demo- 
 cratic idea that slavery is as good as freedom, and ought to have 
 room for expansion all over the continent, if people can be found to 
 carry it. All, or very nearly all, of Judge Douglas' arguments about 
 "Popular Sovereignty" as he calls it, are logical if you admit that 
 slavery is as good and as right as freedom; and not one of them is 
 worth a rush if you deny it. This is the difference, as I understand 
 it, between the Republican and the Democratic parties; and I ask 
 the gentleman, and all of you, whether his question is not satis- 
 factorily answered. 
 
 In this connection let me read to you the opinions of our old 
 leader Henry Clay, on the question of whether slavery is as good 
 as freedom. The extract which I propose to read is contained [in?] 
 a letter written by Mr. Clay in his old age, as late as 1849. The 
 circumstances which called it forth were these. A convention had 
 been called to form a new constitution for the State of Kentucky. 
 The old Constitution had been adopted in the year 1799 — half a 
 century before, when Mr. Clay was a young man just rising into 
 public notice. As long ago as the adoption of the old Constitu- 
 tion, Mr. Clay had been the earnest advocate of a system of 
 gradual emancipation and colonization of the [slaves] of Ken- 
 tucky. And again in his old age, in the maturity of his great mind, 
 we find the same wise project still uppermost in his thoughts. Let 
 me read a few passages from his letter of 1849: "I know there are 
 those who draw an argument in favor of slavery from the alleged 
 intellectual inferiority of the black race. Whether this argument is 
 founded in fact or not, I will not now stop to inquire, but merely 
 say that if it proves anything at all, it proves too much. It proves 
 that among the white races of the world any one might properly 
 be enslaved by any other which had made greater advances in 
 civilization. And, if this rule applies to nations there is no reason 
 why it should not apply to individuals; and it might easily be 
 proved that the wisest man in the world could rightfully reduce 
 all other men and women to bondage," &c., &c. 
 
 Let us inquire, what Douglas really invented, when he intro- 
 duced, and drove through Congress, the Nebraska bill. He called 
 
472 ABRAHAM LINCOLN: 
 
 it "Popular Sovereignty." What does Popular Sovereignty mean? 
 Strictly and literally it means the sovereignty of the people over 
 their own affairs — in other words, the right of the people of every 
 nation and community to govern themselves. Did Mr. Douglas 
 invent this? Not quite. The idea of Popular Sovereignty was float- 
 ing about the world several ages before the author of the Nebraska 
 bill saw daylight — indeed before Columbus set foot on the Amer- 
 ican continent. In the year 1776 it took tangible form in the noble 
 words which you are all familiar with: "We hold these truths to 
 be self-evident: That all men are created equal; That they are 
 endowed by their Creator with certain inalienable rights; That 
 among these are life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness; That to 
 secure these rights governments are instituted among men, deriv- 
 ing their just powers from the consent of the governed." Was not 
 this the origin of Popular Sovereignty as applied to the American 
 people? Here we are told that Governments are instituted among 
 men to secure certain rights, and that they derive their just 
 powers from the consent of the governed. If that is not Popular 
 Sovereignty, then I have no conception of the meaning of words. 
 Then, if Mr. Douglas did not invent this kind of sovereignty, 
 let us pursue the inquiry and find out what the invention really 
 was. Was it the right of emigrants in Kansas and Nebraska to 
 govern themselves and a gang of niggers too, if they wanted 
 them? Clearly this was no invention of his, because Gen. Cass 
 put forth the same doctrine in 1848, in his so-called Nicholson 
 letter — six whole years before Douglas thought of such a thing. 
 Gen. Cass could have taken out a patent for the idea, if he had 
 chosen to do so, and have prevented his Illinois rival from reaping 
 a particle of benefit from it. Then what was it, I ask again, that 
 this "Little Giant" invented? It never occurred to Gen. Cass to call 
 his discovery by the odd name of "Popular Sovereignty." He had 
 not the impudence to say that the right of people to govern nig- 
 gers was the right of people to govern themselves. His notions of 
 the fitness of things were not moulded to the brazen degree of 
 calling the right to put a hundred niggers through under the lash 
 in Nebraska, a "sacred right of self-government." And here, I sub- 
 mit to this intelligent audience and the whole world, was Judge 
 
HIS SPEECHES AND WRITINGS 473 
 
 Douglas' discovery, and the whole of it. He invented a name for 
 Gen. Cass' old Nicholson letter dogma. He discovered that the 
 right of the white man to breed and flog niggers in Nebraska was 
 
 POPULAR SOVEREIGNTY! 
 
 My friends, I have endeavored to show you the logical conse- 
 quences of the Dred Scott decision, which holds that the people 
 of a Territory cannot prevent the establishment of Slavery in their 
 midst. I have stated what cannot be gainsayed — that the grounds 
 upon which this decision is made are equally applicable to the 
 Free States as to the Free Territories, and that the peculiar reasons 
 put forth by Judge Douglas for endorsing this decision, commit 
 him in advance to the next decision, and to all other decisions 
 emanating from the same source. Now, when by all these means, 
 you have succeeded in dehumanizing the negro; when you have 
 put him down and made it forever impossible for him to be but 
 as the beasts of the field; when you have extinguished his soul, 
 and placed him where the ray of hope is blown out in darkness 
 like that which broods over the spirits of the damned; are you 
 quite sure the demon which you have roused will not turn and 
 rend you? What constitutes the bulwark of our own liberty and 
 independence? It is not our frowning battlements, our bristling 
 sea coasts, the guns of our war steamers, or the strength of our 
 gallant and disciplined army. These are not our reliance against a 
 resumption of tyranny in our fair land. All of them may be turned 
 against our liberties, without making us stronger or weaker for 
 the struggle. Our reliance is in the love of liberty which God has 
 planted in our bosoms. Our defense is in the preservation of the 
 spirit which prizes liberty as the heritage of all men, in all lands, 
 everywhere. Destroy this spirit, and you have planted the seeds of 
 despotism around your own doors. Familiarize yourselves with 
 the chains of bondage, and you are preparing your own limbs to 
 wear them. Accustomed to trample on the rights of those around 
 you, you have lost the genius of your own independence, and 
 become the fit subjects of the first cunning tyrant who rises. And 
 let me tell you, all these things are prepared for you with the 
 
474 ABRAHAM LINCOLN: 
 
 logic of history, if the elections shall promise that the next Dred 
 Scott decision and all future decisions will be quietly acquiesced 
 in by the people. 
 
 The text of this speech is here more inclusive than 
 in the Complete Works of Abraham Lincoln, hut is 
 evidently a slight part of the whole, as indicated by the 
 accompanying comment in the Alton Courier, Septem- 
 ber 16, 1858: 
 
 "An enthusiastic audience greeted Mr. Lincoln at 
 Edwardsville on Saturday, and we learn from all sources 
 that his speech gave more than satisfaction to his listen- 
 ers — that it was warmly applauded throughout. We can 
 do nothing better than give a few extracts from his 
 speech (which was something over two hours in length,) 
 for the benefit of those of our readers who were unable 
 to hear the convincing arguments and eloquent appeals 
 pronounced by Mr. Lincoln himself . . /* 
 
 Lincoln's definition of the difference between the 
 Republican and the Democratic parties on the issues in- 
 volved in the senatorial contest, in particular the last 
 paragraph of the text, contains his fundamental philos- 
 ophy of equality and freedom for all men, as it is 
 grounded in the same theory that is central to Jeffer- 
 son's philosophy — that the individual's love of liberty 
 is the source of political liberty and that no man can 
 deny liberty to another without endangering his own. 
 
HIS SPEECHES AND WRITINGS 475 
 
 LETTER TO M. P. SWEET 
 SEPTEMBER 16, 1858 
 
 Centralia, Sept. 16 1858 
 Hon: M. P. Sweet 
 My dear Sir 
 
 Yesterday Douglas and I met at Jonesboro. A very trifling 
 thing occurred which gives me a little uneasiness. I was, at the 
 suggestion of friends, putting in, some resolutions and the like 
 of abolition caste, passed by Douglas friends, some time ago, as a 
 Set-off to his attempts of a like character against me. Among others 
 I put the questions to T. Campbell and his answers to them, in 
 1850 when you and he ran for Congress. As my attention was 
 divided, half lingering upon that case, and half advancing to the 
 next one, I mentioned your name, as Campbell's opponent, in a 
 confused sentence, which, when I heard it myself, struck me as 
 having something disparaging to you in it. I instantly corrected 
 it, and asked the reporters to suppress it; but my fear now is that 
 those villainous reporters Douglas has with him will try to make 
 something out of it. I do not myself exactly remember what it 
 was, so little connection had it with any distinct thought in my 
 my [sic] mind, and I really hope no more may be heard of it; 
 but if there should, I write this to assure you that nothing can be 
 farther from me than to feel, much less, intentionally say anything 
 disrespectful to you. 
 
 I sincerely hope you may hear nothing of it except what I have 
 written. 
 
 Yours very truly, 
 
 A. Lincoln 
 
 Sweet was an old-line Whig who had been associated 
 with Lincoln in politics jot many years. In 1850 Thomas 
 Campbell had defeated Sweet in the race for Congress 
 in the Galena District. 
 
476 ABRAHAM LINCOLN 
 
 VERSES: TO ROSA 
 SEPTEMBER 28, 1858 
 
 TO ROSA— 
 You are young, and I am older; 
 
 You are hopeful, I am not. 
 Enjoy life, ere it grow colder. 
 
 Pluck the roses ere they rot. 
 
 Teach your beau to heed the lay — 
 
 That sunshine soon is lost in shade — 
 That now's as good as any day — , 
 To take thee, Rosa, ere she fade. 
 
 A. Lincoln- 
 Winchester, Sep. 28, 1858. 
 
 These verses to Rosa Haggard and those written two 
 days later, "To Linnie" were penned hy Lincoln in the 
 autograph hooks of the daughters of the proprietor of 
 the hotel where Lincoln stopped in Winchester, Illinois, 
 while filling a campaign speaking engagement. 
 
HIS SPEECHES AND WRITINGS 477 
 
 VERSES: TO LINNIE 
 SEPTEMBER 30, 1858 
 
 TO LINNIE— 
 A sweet plaintive song did I hear, 
 
 And I fancied that she was the singer. 
 May emotions as pure as that song set a-stir 
 
 Be the worst that the future shall bring her. 
 
 A. Lincoln — 
 Winchester Sep. 30—1858— 
 
 FRAGMENT: ON SLAVERY 
 [OCTOBER 1, 1858?] 
 
 Suppose it is true, that the negro is inferior to the white, 
 in the gifts of nature; is it not the exact reverse justice that the 
 white should, for that reason, take from the negro, any part of the 
 little which has been given him? "Give to him that is needy" is 
 the Christian rule of charity; but "Take from him that is needy" 
 is the rule of slavery. 
 
 PRO-SLAVERY THEOLOGY 
 
 The sum of pro-slavery theology seems to be this: "Slavery is 
 not universally right, nor yet universally wrong; it is better for 
 some people to be slaves; and, in such cases, it is the Will of God 
 that they be such." 
 
 Certainly there is no contending against the Will of God; but 
 still there is some difficulty in ascertaining, and applying it, to 
 
478 ABRAHAM LINCOLN: 
 
 particular cases. For instance we will suppose the Rev. Dr. Ross 
 has a slave named Sambo, and the question is "Is it the Will of 
 God that Sambo shall remain a slave, or be set free?" The Almighty 
 gives no audable [sic] answer to the question, and his revelation 
 — the Bible — gives none — or, at most, none but such as admits of 
 a squabble, as to it's meaning. No one thinks of asking Sambo's 
 opinion on it. So, at last, it comes to this, that Dr. Ross is to decide 
 the question. And while he consider [sic] it, he sits in the shade, 
 with gloves on his hands, and subsists on the bread that Sambo 
 is earning in the burning sun. If he decides that God Wills Sambo 
 to continue a slave, he thereby retains his own comfortable posi- 
 tion; but if he decides that God wills Sambo to be free, he thereby 
 has to walk out of the shade, throw off his gloves, and delve for 
 his own bread. Will Dr. Ross be actuated by that perfect impar- 
 tiality, which has ever been considered most favorable to correct 
 decisions? 
 
 But, slavery is good for some people!! I As a good thing, slavery 
 is strikingly perculiar [sic], in this, that it is the only good thing 
 which no man ever seeks the good of, for himself. 
 
 Nonsense! Wolves devouring lambs, not because it is good 
 for their own greedy maws, but because it is good for the lambs!! I 
 
 LETTER TO J. N. BROWN 
 OCTOBER 18, 1858 
 
 Springfield, Oct. 18. 1858 
 Hon. J. N. Brown 
 My dear Sir 
 
 I do not perceive how I can express myself, more plainly, 
 than I have done in the foregoing extracts. In four of them I have 
 expressly disclaimed all intention to bring about social and politi- 
 cal equality between the white and black races, and, in all the 
 rest, I have done the same thing by clear implication 
 
HIS SPEECHES AND WRITINGS 479 
 
 I have made it equally plain that I think the negro is included 
 in the word "men" used in the Declaration of Independence. 
 
 I believe the declara-[sic] that "all men are created equal" 
 is the great fundamental principle upon which our free institutions 
 rest; that negro slavery is violative of that principle; but that, by 
 our frame of government, that principle has not been made one 
 of legal obligation; that by our frame of government, the states 
 which have slavery are to retain it, or surrender it at their 
 own pleasure; and that all others — individuals, free-states and 
 national government — are constitutionally bound to leave them 
 alone about it. 
 
 I believe our government was thus framed because of the 
 necessity springing from the actual presence of slavery, when it 
 was framed. 
 
 That such necessity does not exist in the teritories [sic], when 
 slavery is not present. 
 
 In his Mendenhall speech Mr. Clay says 
 
 "Now, as an abstract principle, there is no doubt of the 
 truth of that declaration ( all men created equal ) and it is desire- 
 able [sic], in the original construction of society, and in organized 
 societies, to keep it in view, as a great fundamental principle" 
 
 Again, in the same speech Mr. Clay says: 
 
 "If a state of nature existed, and we were about to lay the 
 foundations of society, no man would be more strongly opposed 
 than I should to incorporate the institution of slavery among it's 
 elements" 
 
 Exactiy so. In our new free teritories [sic], a state of nature 
 does exist. In them Congress lays the foundations of society; and, 
 in laying those foundations, I say, with Mr. Clay, it is desireable 
 [sic] that the declaration of the equality of all men shall be kept 
 in view, as a great fundamental principle; and that Congress, which 
 lays the foundations of society, should, like Mr. Clay, be strongly 
 opposed to the incorporation of slavery among it's elements. 
 
 But it does not follow that social and political equality be- 
 tween whites and blacks, must be incorporated, because slavery 
 must not. The declaration does not so require. 
 
 Yours as ever 
 
 A. Lincoln 
 
480 ABRAHAM LINCOLN: 
 
 The extracts referred to in this letter were news- 
 paper clippings of the passages on slavery from Lincoln's 
 speeches at Peoria (1854), at Springfield (1857), at Chi- 
 cago (1858), at Ottawa (1858), and at Charleston (1858). 
 The clippings were put together and sent to Brown in a 
 little notebook, on the first pages of which Lincoln 
 penned the letter. Brown, an old Whig, had served in the 
 Illinois Legislature several terms and was associated 
 with Lincoln in Whig politics. From the tone of Lin- 
 coln's letter and his sending extracts from his speeches 
 dealing with his position on slavery in particular, one 
 gathers that Brown like many old Whigs was having a 
 hard time swallowing the more radical Republicanism. 
 Lincoln's emphasis on the fact that he is a disciple of 
 Henry Clay is significant. 
 
 LAST SPEECH IN SPRINGFIELD, ILLINOIS, IN THE 
 CAMPAIGN OF 1858. [OCTOBER 30, 1858] 
 
 My friends, to-day closes trie discussions of this canvass. 
 The planting and the culture are over; and there remains but 
 the preparation, and the harvest. 
 
 I stand here surrounded by friends — some political, all per- 
 sonal friends, I trust. May I be indulged, in this closing scene, to 
 say a few words of myself. I have borne a laborious, and, in some 
 respects to myself, a painful part in the contest. Through all, I 
 have neither assailed, nor wrestled with any part of the Constitu- 
 tion. The legal right of the Southern people to reclaim their fugi- 
 tives I have constantly admitted. The legal right of Congress to 
 interfere with their institution in the states, I have constantly 
 denied. In resisting the spread of slavery to new teritory [sic] y 
 and with that, what appears to me to be a tendency to subvert 
 
HIS SPEECHES AND WRITINGS 481 
 
 the first principle of free government itself my whole effort has 
 consisted. To the best of my judgment I have labored for, and not 
 against the Union. As I have not felt, so I have not expressed any 
 harsh sentiment towards our Southern bretheren [sic]. I have 
 constantly declared, as I really believed, the only difference be- 
 tween them and us, is the difference of circumstances. 
 
 I have meant to assail the motives of no party, or individual; 
 and if I have, in any instance (of which I am not conscious) 
 departed from my purpose, I regret it. 
 
 I have said that in some respects the contest has been painful 
 to me. Myself, and those with whom I act have been constantly 
 accused of a purpose to destroy the Union; and bespattered with 
 every immaginable [sic] odious epithet; and some who were 
 friends, as it were but yesterday have made themselves most 
 active in this. I have cultivated patience, and made no attempt at 
 a retort. 
 
 Ambition has been ascribed to me. God knows how sincerely 
 I prayed from the first that this field of ambition might not be 
 opened. I claim no insensibility to political honors; but today 
 could the Missouri restriction be restored, and the whole slavery 
 question replaced on the old ground of "toleration" by necessity 
 where it exists, with unyielding hostility to the spread of it, on 
 principle, I would, in consideration, gladly agree, that Judge 
 Douglas should never be out, and I never in, an office, so long as 
 we both or either, live. 
 
 There is evidence in the account of the day's events 
 published in the Illinois State Journal that Lincoln made 
 a long speech, and a particular reference to the conclu- 
 sion as "one of the most eloquent appeals ever addressed 
 to the American people" seems appropriate to this selec- 
 tion. However, the rhetorical structure of this composi- 
 tion suggests that it might have served equally well as a 
 formal opening to be followed by further extempore re- 
 marks, or as a short speech complete in itself. 
 
482 ABRAHAM LINCOLN 
 
 LETTER TO HENRY ASBURY 
 NOVEMBER 19, 1858 
 
 Springfield, Novr. 19 1858 
 Henry Asbury, Esq 
 My dear Sir 
 
 Yours of the 13th. was received some days ago. The fight must 
 go on. The cause of civil liberty must not be surrendered at the 
 end of one or even, one hundred defeats. Douglas had the inge- 
 nuity to be supported in the late contest both as the best means 
 to break down, and to uphold the Slave interest. No ingenuity can 
 keep those antagonistic elements in harmony long. Another ex- 
 plosion will soon come. 
 
 Yours truly 
 A. Lincoln — 
 
 LETTER TO DOCTOR C. H. RAY 
 NOVEMBER 20, 1858 
 
 Springfield, Nov. 20, 1858 
 Dr. C. H. Ray 
 My dear Sir 
 
 I wish to preserve a Set of the late debates ( if they may be 
 called so) between Douglas and myself. To enable me to do so, 
 please get two copies of each number of your paper containing 
 the whole, and send them to me by Express; and I will pay you 
 for the papers & for your trouble. I wish the two sets, in order to 
 lay one away in the room, and to put the other in a Scrap-book. 
 Remember, if part of any debate is on both sides of one sheet, it 
 
HIS SPEECHES AND WRITINGS 483 
 
 will take two sets to make one scrap-book. I believe, according to 
 a letter of yours to Hatch you are "feeling like h-11 yet". Quit that. 
 You will soon feel better. Another "blow-up" is coming; and 
 we shall have fun again. Douglas managed to be supported both 
 as the best instrument to put down and to uphold the slave power; 
 but no ingenuity can long keep these antagonisms in harmony. 
 
 Yours as ever 
 
 A. Lincoln 
 
 Ray was editor of the Chicago Daily Press and 
 Tribune. The "scrap book" was duly prepared and the 
 text emended in some passages by Lincoln himself. It was 
 used as the basis for the official Follett, Foster Debates. 
 Ray had at an earlier date practiced medicine in Musca- 
 tine, Iowa, and Tazewell County, Illinois. His journalism 
 began with writing for a temperance paper in Spring- 
 field. In 1847 he removed to Galena and soon after be- 
 came editor of the Galena Jeffersonian. With Joseph 
 Medill and John C. Vaughn he became associated in pur- 
 chasing the Chicago Tribune, of which he was editor-in- 
 chief, 1855-63. 
 
 NOTES OF AN ARGUMENT 
 [DECEMBER ?], 1858 
 
 Legislation and adjudication must follow, and conform to, the 
 progress of society. 
 
 The progress of society now begins to produce cases of the transfer, 
 for debts, of the entire property of Railroad corporations; and to 
 enable transferees to use, and enjoy, the transferred property, 
 legislation, and adjudication, begins to be necessary. 
 
484 ABRAHAM LINCOLN: 
 
 Shall this class of legislation, just now beginning with us, be 
 general or special? 
 
 Section Ten, of our Constitution, requires that it should be general, 
 if possible. (Read the section) 
 
 Special legislation always trenches upon the judicial department; 
 and in so far violates Section Two of the Constitution. (Read it.) 
 
 Just reasoning — policy — is in favor of general legislation — else 
 the legislature will be loaded down with the investigation of 
 special cases — a work which the courts ought to perform, and can 
 perform much more perfectly. How can the Legislature rightly 
 decide the facts between P. & B. & S. C. & Co. 
 
 It is said that, under a general law, whenever a R. R. Co. gets 
 tired of its debts, it may transfer fraudulently, to get rid of them. 
 
 So they may — -so may individuals; and which — the legislature 
 or the courts is best suited to try the question of fraud in either 
 case? 
 
 It is said, if a purchaser have acquired legal rights, let him not 
 be robbed of them; but if he needs legislation, let him submit 
 to just terms to obtain it. 
 
 Let him, say we, have general law in advance (guarded in 
 every possible way against fraud) so that when he acquires a 
 legal right, he will have no occasion to wait for additional legisla- 
 tion — and if he has practiced fraud, let the courts so decide. 
 
HIS SPEECHES AND WRITINGS 485 
 
 LETTER TO JAMES T. THORNTON 
 DECEMBER 2, 1858 
 
 Springfield, Deer. 2. 1858 
 James T. Thornton, Esq 
 Dear Sir 
 
 Yours of the 29th. written in behalf of Mr. John H. Widmer, 
 is received. I am absent altogether too much to be a suitable 
 instructer [sic] for a law student. When a man has reached the 
 age that Mr. Widner [sic] has, and has already been doing for him- 
 self, my judgment is, that he reads the books for himself without 
 an instructer [sic]. That is precisely the way I came to the law. 
 Let Mr. Widner [sic] read Rlackstone's Commentaries, Chitty's 
 Pleadings — Greenleafs 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 [sic] to make a lawyer of himself. 
 
 Yours truly 
 
 A. Lincoln. 
 
 The editor has been able to find little identifying 
 Thornton or the prospective lawyer Widmer (Widner) 
 beyond the comment which appeared with the facsimile 
 of the letter in the Oregon Historical Society Quarterly, 
 Vol. 23, 1922: "Following autograph letter was brought 
 to Oregon from Urbana, Champaign Co., 111., by J. W. 
 Thornton, in Feb., 1906 — given him by his father, the 
 gentleman to whom it was written. Widmer began the 
 study of law . . . enlisted in first call for volunteers in 
 Civil War . . . became a Colonel. . . . After the war 
 he resumed his law studies and in a few years became 
 eminent in his profession and now lives in Urbana, III." 
 
 On the other hand, the only Widmer of record as 
 
486 ABRAHAM LINCOLN: 
 
 admitted to the Illinois Bar was John H. Widmer, ad- 
 mitted from LaSalle in 1860. He became a Major rather 
 than a Colonel, and was until the time of his death in 
 1923 a resident of Ottawa, rather than Urbana. That he 
 is the person about whom Lincoln wrote this letter seems 
 probable. 
 
 The name which Lincoln spells both Widmer and 
 Widner is likewise confusing, appearing in Paul M. 
 Angle, Lincoln: 1854-1861, as Widner and Widener, 
 and in Carl Sandburg, Abraham Lincoln: The Prairie 
 Years as Widener. Michael C. O'Byrne, History of La- 
 Salle County, Illinois, lists the man as John H. Widmer. 
 
 James T. Thornton was a native of Kentucky who 
 moved to Sangamon County, Illinois, in 1838, and later 
 became a farmer in Putnam County. He is listed in David 
 Lyman Phillips, Biographies of the State Officers, as "a 
 Republican, as old as the party itself, and no less 
 vigorous" 
 
 LETTER TO LYMAN TRUMBULL 
 DECEMBER 11, 1858 
 
 Springfield, Deer. 11. 1858 
 Hon. L. Trumbull: 
 My dear Sir 
 
 Your letter of the 7th. enclosing one from Mr. Underwood, 
 is received. I have not the slightest thought of being a candidate 
 for Congress in this District. I am not spoken of in that connec- 
 tion; and I can scarcely conceive what has misled Mr. Underwood 
 in regard to the matter. 
 
 As to what we shall do, the Republicans are a little divided. 
 The Danites say if we will stand out of the way, they will run a 
 man, and divide the democratic forces with the Douglasites; and 
 
HIS SPEECHES AND WRITINGS 487 
 
 some of our friends are in favor of this course. Others think such 
 a course would demoralize us, and hurt us in the future; and they, 
 of course, are in favor of running a man of our own at all events. 
 This latter view will probably prevail. 
 
 Since you left, Douglas has gone South, making character- 
 istic speeches, and seeking to re-instate himself in that section. 
 The majority of the democratic politicians of the nation mean to 
 kill him; but I doubt whether they will adopt the aptest way to 
 do it. Their true way is to present him with no new test, let him 
 into the Charleston convention, and then outvote him, and nomi- 
 nate another. In that case, he will have no pretext for bolting the 
 nomination, and will be as powerless as they can wish. On the 
 other hand, if they push a Slave Code upon him, as a test, he 
 will bolt at once, turn upon us, as in the case of Lecompton, and 
 claim that all Northern men shall make common cause in elect- 
 ing him President as the best means of breaking down this Slave 
 power. In that case, the democratic party go into a minority in- 
 evitably; and the struggle in the whole North will be, as it was in 
 Illinois last summer and fall, whether the Republican party can 
 maintain it's identity, or be broken up to form the tail of Dougla's 
 [sic] new kite. Some of our great Republican doctors will then have 
 a splendid chance to swallow the pills they so eagerly prescribed 
 for us last Spring. Still I hope they will not swallow them; and 
 although I do not feel that I owe the said doctors much, I will 
 help them, to the best of my ability, to reject the said pills. The 
 truth is, the Republican principle can, in no wise live with 
 Douglas; and it is arrant folly now, as it was last Spring, to waste 
 time, and scatter labor already performed, in dallying with him. 
 
 Your friend as ever 
 
 A. Lincoln — 
 
 The "Danites" alluded to were anti-Douglas Demo- 
 crats who resented Douglas's split with the Buchanan 
 forces over the Lecompton Constitution, so called from 
 the town in Kansas where the Constitutional Conven- 
 tion met. 
 
488 ABRAHAM LINCOLN 
 
 LETTER TO H. L. PIERCE AND OTHERS 
 APRIL 6, 1859 
 
 Springfield, Ills, April 6, 1859 
 Messrs. Henry L. Pierce, & others. 
 Gentlemen 
 
 Your kind note inviting me to attend a Festival in Boston, on 
 the 13th. Inst, in honor of the birth-day of Thomas Jefferson, was 
 duly received. My engagements are such that I can not attend. 
 
 Bearing in mind that about seventy years ago, two great politi- 
 cal parties were first formed in this country, that Thomas Jeffer- 
 son was the head of one of them, and Boston the head-quarters 
 of the other, it is both curious and interesting that those supposed 
 to descend politically from the party opposed to Jefferson should 
 now be celebrating his birthday in their own original seat of 
 empire, while those claiming political descent from him have 
 nearly ceased to breathe his name everywhere. 
 
 Remembering too, that the Jefferson party were formed upon 
 its supposed superior devotion to the personal rights of men, hold- 
 ing the rights of property to be secondary only, and greatly infe- 
 rior, and then assuming that the so-called democracy of to-day, are 
 the Jefferson, and their opponents, the anti-Jefferson parties, it 
 will be equally interesting to note how completely the two have 
 changed hands as to the principle upon which they were originally 
 supposed to be divided. 
 
 The democracy of to-day hold the liberty of one man to be 
 absolutely nothing, when in conflict with another man's right of 
 property. Republicans, on the contrary, are for both the man and 
 the dollar; but in cases of conflict, the man before the dollar. 
 
 I remember once being much amused at seeing two partially 
 intoxicated men engage in a fight with their great-coats on, 
 which fight, after a long, and rather harmless contest, ended in 
 each having fought himself out of his own coat, and into that of 
 the other. If the two leading parties of this day are really identical 
 
HIS SPEECHES AND WRITINGS 489 
 
 with the two in the days of Jefferson and Adams, they have per- 
 formed the same feat as the two drunken men. 
 
 But soberly, it is now no child's play to save the principles of 
 Jefferson from total overthrow in this nation. 
 
 One would start with great confidence that he could convince 
 any sane child that the simpler propositions of Euclid are true; 
 but, nevertheless, he would fail, utterly, with one who should 
 deny the definitions and axioms. The principles of Jefferson are 
 the definitions and axioms of free society. 
 
 And yet they are denied and evaded, with no small show of 
 success. 
 
 One dashingly calls them "glittering generalities"; another 
 bluntly calls them "self evident lies"; and still others insidiously 
 argue that they apply only to "superior races." 
 
 These expressions, differing in form, are identical in object 
 and effect—the supplanting the principles of free government, and 
 restoring those of classification, caste, and legitimacy. They would 
 delight a convocation of crowned heads, plotting against the 
 people. They are the van-guard — the miners, and sappers — of re- 
 turning despotism. 
 
 We must repulse them, or they will subjugate us. 
 
 This is a world of compensations; and he who would be no 
 slave, must consent to have no slave. Those who deny freedom 
 to others, deserve it not for themselves; and, under a just God, 
 can not long retain it. 
 
 All honor to Jefferson — to the man who, in the concrete pres- 
 sure of a struggle for national independence by a single people, 
 had the coolness, forecast, and capacity to introduce into a merely 
 revolutionary document, an abstract truth, applicable to all men 
 and all times, and so to embalm it there, that to-day, and in all 
 coming days, it shall be a rebuke and a stumbling-block to the 
 very harbingers of re-appearing tyranny and oppression. 
 
 Your obedient Servant 
 
 A. Lincoln — 
 
 As a result of his growing reputation, Lincoln was 
 receiving numerous invitations to speak, and although he 
 
490 ABRAHAM LINCOLN: 
 
 accepted a number he had to refuse a good many. In this 
 instance, however, he did the next best thing by writing 
 a letter which, apparently, he intended to be read to the 
 meeting. That he relished the possibilities of speaking 
 in honor of Jefferson is obvious, and what he has to say 
 about the Republican party being the true heir of Jeffer- 
 sonian principles is in keeping with numerous similar 
 references in his speeches of 1858. 
 
 The second half of the letter, beginning with the 
 reference to Euclid, is of particular interest as an early 
 use of the analogy linking Euclid's propositions and the 
 Jeffersonian proposition in the Declaration of Inde- 
 pendence, which Lincoln turned into the memorable 
 phrase in the "Gettysburg Address." 
 
 LETTER TO T. J. PICKETT 
 APRIL 16, 1859 
 
 Springfield, April 16. 1859. 
 T. J. Pickett, Esq 
 My dear Sir: 
 
 Yours of the 13th. is just received. My engagements are such 
 that I can not, 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 con- 
 certed effort, such as you suggest, should be made. 
 Let this be considered confidential. 
 
 Yours very truly 
 
 A. Lincoln 
 
HIS SPEECHES AND WRITINGS 491 
 
 Pickett was a newspaper editor of Rock Island, 
 Illinois. The lecture referred to was the one on "Dis- 
 coveries, Inventions and Improvements" which Lincoln 
 had delivered a number of times, but which he thought 
 little of. (See "Letter to F. C. Herburger," April 7, 1860.) 
 Lincoln's categorical statement concerning his unfitness 
 for the Presidency was made, in the editors opinion, not 
 because he thought lightly of the possibility that he might 
 be a candidate, but because he was acutely aware of it. 
 He knew that his name was being discussed widely, and 
 was beginning to feel qualms at the possibility. 
 
 LETTER TO SALMON PORTLAND CHASE 
 JUNE 9, 1859 
 
 Springfield, Ills. June 9. 1859 
 Hon: S. P. Chase: 
 Dear Sir 
 
 Please pardon the liberty I take in addressing you, as I now 
 do. It appears by the papers that the late Republican State Con- 
 vention of Ohio adopted a Platform, of which the following is one 
 plank, "A repeal of the atrocious Fugitive Slave Law." 
 
 This is already damaging us here. I have no doubt that if 
 that plank be even introduced into the next Republican National 
 Convention, it will explode it. Once introduced, its supporters 
 and it's opponents will quarrel irreconcilably. The latter believe 
 the U. S. constitution declares a fugitive slave "shall be delivered 
 up 9 '; and they look upon the above plank as dictated by the spirit 
 which declares a fugitive slave "shall not be delivered up." 
 
 I enter upon no argument one way or the other; but I assure 
 you the cause of Republicanism is hopeless in Illinois, if it be in 
 
492 ABRAHAM LINCOLN: 
 
 any way made responsible for that plank. I hope you can, and will, 
 contribute something to relieve us from it. 
 
 Your Obt. Servt. 
 
 A. Lincoln 
 
 LETTER TO SALMON PORTLAND CHASE 
 JUNE 20, 1859 
 
 Springfield, Ills. June 20. 1859 
 Hon. S. P. Chase 
 My dear Sir 
 
 Yours of the 13th. Inst, is received. You say you would be 
 glad to have my views. Although I think Congress has Constitu- 
 tional authority to enact a Fugitive Slave law, I have never elab- 
 orated an opinion upon the subject. My view has been, and is, 
 simply this: The U. S. Constitution says the fugitive slave "shall 
 he delivered up" but it does not expressly say who shall deliver 
 him up. Whatever the Constitution says "shall be done 7 and has 
 omitted saying who shall do it, the government established by 
 that Constitution, ex vi termini, is vested with the power of doing; 
 and Congress is, by the Constitution, expressly empowered to 
 make all laws which shall be necessary and proper for carrying 
 into execution all powers vested by the constitution in the govern- 
 ment of the United States. This would be my view, on a simple 
 reading of the Constitution; and it is greatly strengthened by the 
 historical fact that the constitution was adopted, in great part, in 
 order to get a government which could execute it's own behests, 
 in contradistinction to that under the Articles of Confederation, 
 which depended, in many respects, upon the States, for it's execu- 
 tion; and the other fact that one of the earliest congresses, under 
 the constitution, did enact a Fugitive Slave law. 
 
 But I did not write you on this subject, with any view of dis- 
 cussing the constitutional question. My only object was to impress 
 
HIS SPEECHES AND WRITINGS 493 
 
 you with what I believe is true, that the introduction of a proposi- 
 tion for repeal of the Fugitive Slave law, into the next Republican 
 National convention, will explode the Convention and the party. 
 Having turned your attention to the point, I wish to do no more. 
 
 Yours very truly 
 
 A. Lincoln. 
 
 AGRICULTURE: ANNUAL ADDRESS BEFORE THE 
 
 WISCONSIN STATE AGRICULTURAL SOCIETY, 
 
 AT MILWAUKEE, WISCONSIN. SEPTEMBER 30, 1859 
 
 Members of the Agricultural Society and Citizens of Wisconsin: 
 Agricultural fairs are becoming an institution of the country. 
 They are useful in more ways than one. They bring us together, 
 and thereby make us better acquainted, and better friends than 
 we otherwise should be. From the first appearance of man upon 
 the earth, down to very recent times, the words "stranger" and 
 "enemy" were quite or almost synonymous. Long after civilized 
 nations had defined robbery and murder as high crimes, and had 
 affixed severe punishments to them, when practiced among and 
 upon their own people respectively, it was deemed no offence, 
 but even meritorious, to rob, and murder, and enslave strangers, 
 whether as nations or as individuals. Even yet, this has not totally 
 disappeared. The man of the highest moral cultivation, in spite of 
 all that abstract principle can do, likes him whom he does know, 
 much better than him whom he does not know. To correct the 
 evils, great and small, which spring from want of sympathy and 
 from positive enmity, among strangers, as nations or as indi- 
 viduals, is one of the highest functions of civilization. To this 
 end, our agricultural fairs contribute in no small degree. They 
 make more pleasant, and more strong, and more durable, the 
 bond of social and political union among us. 
 
494 ABRAHAM LINCOLN: 
 
 Again, if, as Pope declares, "happiness is our being's end and 
 aim," our fairs contribute much to that end and aim, as occasions 
 of recreation — as holidays. Constituted as man is, he has positive 
 need of occasional recreation, and whatever can give him this, as- 
 sociated with virtue and advantage, and free from vice and dis- 
 advantage, is a positive good. Such recreation our fairs afford. 
 They are a present pleasure, to be followed by no pain as a 
 consequence. They are a present pleasure, making the future 
 more pleasant. 
 
 But the chief use of agricultural Fairs is to aid in improving 
 the great calling of Agriculture, in all its departments and minute 
 divisions; to make mutual exchange of agricultural discovery, in- 
 formation and knowledge, so that, at the end, all may know every- 
 thing which may have been known to but one or to but few, at 
 the beginning — to bring together especially all which is supposed 
 to not be generally known, because of recent discovery or in- 
 vention. 
 
 And not only to bring together, and to impart, all that has 
 been accidentally discovered or invented upon ordinary motive; 
 but by exciting emulation, for premiums, and for the pride and 
 honor of success — of triumph, in some sort — to stimulate dis- 
 covery and invention into extraordinary activity. In this, these 
 fairs are kindred to the patent clause in the Constitution of the 
 United States; and to the department and practical system based 
 upon that clause. 
 
 One feature I believe of every fair, is a regular address. The 
 Agricultural Society of the young, prosperous, and soon to be great 
 State of Wisconsin, has done me the high honor of selecting me 
 to make that address on this occasion — an honor for which I 
 make my profound and grateful acknowledgment. 
 
 I presume I am not expected to employ the time assigned 
 me in the mere flattery of farmers, as a class. My opinion of them 
 is that, in proportion to numbers, they are neither better nor 
 worse than other people. In the nature of things they are more 
 numerous than any other class; and I believe there really are more 
 attempts at flattering them than any other; the reason of which I 
 cannot perceive, unless it be that they can cast more votes than 
 any other. On reflection, I am not quite sure there is not cause of 
 
HIS SPEECHES AND WRITINGS 495 
 
 suspicion against you in selecting me, in some sort a politician 
 and in no sort a farmer, to address you. 
 
 But farmers being the most numerous class, it follows that 
 their interest is the largest interest. It also follows that that interest 
 is most worthy of all to be cherished and cultivated— that if there 
 be inevitable conflict between that interest and any other, that 
 other should yield. 
 
 Again, I suppose it is not expected of me to impart to you 
 much specific information on Agriculture. You have no reason 
 to believe, and do not believe, that I possess it. If that were what 
 you seek in this address, any one of your own number, or class, 
 would be more able to furnish it. 
 
 You, perhaps, do expect me to give some general interest to 
 the occasion; and to make some general suggestions, on practical 
 matters. I shall attempt nothing more. And in such suggestions 
 by me, quite likely very little will be new to you, and a large part 
 of the rest possibly already known to be erroneous. 
 
 My first suggestion is an inquiry as to the effect of greater 
 thoroughness in all the departments of agriculture than now 
 prevails in the Northwest — perhaps I might say, in America. To 
 speak entirely within bounds, it is known that fifty bushels of 
 wheat, or one hundred bushels of Indian corn, can be produced 
 from an acre. Less than a year ago I saw it stated that a man, by 
 extraordinary care and labor, had produced of wheat, what was 
 equal to two hundred bushels from an acre. But take fifty of wheat, 
 and one hundred of corn, to be the probability, and compare it 
 with the actual crops of the country. Many years ago I saw it 
 stated in a Patent Office Report that eighteen bushels to the acre 
 was the average crop throughout the wheat growing region of the 
 United States; and this year, an intelligent farmer of Illinois 
 assured me that he did not believe the land harvested in that 
 State this season, had yielded more than an average of eight 
 bushels to the acre. The brag crop I heard of in our vicinity was 
 two thousand bushels from ninety acres; many crops were 
 threshed, producing no more than three bushels to the acre; much 
 was cut, and then abandoned as not worth threshing; and much 
 was abandoned without cutting. As to Indian corn, and indeed, 
 most other crops, the case has not been much better. For the last 
 
496 ABRAHAM LINCOLN: 
 
 four years I do not believe the ground planted with corn in 
 Illinois has produced an average of twenty bushels to the acre. 
 It is true that heretofore we have had better crops with no better 
 cultivation; but I believe it is also true that the soil has never been 
 pushed up to one-half of its capacity. * 
 
 What would be the effect upon the farming interest to push 
 the soil up to something near its full capacity? Unquestionably it 
 will take more labor to produce fifty bushels from an acre, than it 
 will to produce ten bushels from the same acre. But will it take 
 more labor to produce fifty bushels from one acre than from five? 
 Unquestionably, thorough cultivation will require more labor to 
 the acre; but will it require more to the bushel? If it should require 
 just as much to the bushel, there are some probable, and several 
 certain advantages in favor of the thorough practice. It is probable 
 it would develope those unknown causes, or develope unknown 
 cures for those causes, which of late years have cut down our crops 
 below their former average. It is almost certain, I think, that in 
 the deeper plowing, analysis of soils, experiments with manures 
 and varieties of seeds, observance of seasons, and the like, these 
 cures would be found. 
 
 It is certain that thorough cultivation would spare half, or 
 more than half, the cost of land, simply because the same product 
 would be got from half, or from less than half, the quantity of 
 land. This proposition is self-evident; and can be made no plainer 
 by repetitions or illustrations. The cost of land is a great item, 
 even in new countries, and constantly grows greater and greater, 
 in comparison with other items, as the country grows older. 
 
 It also would spare a large proportion of the making and 
 maintaining of inclosures — the same, whether these inclosures 
 should be hedges, ditches or fences. This, again, is a heavy item — 
 heavy at first, and heavy in its continual demand for repairs. I 
 remember once being greatly astonished by an apparently 
 authentic exhibition of the proportion the cost of inclosures bears 
 to all the other expenses of the farmer, though I cannot remember, 
 exactly, what that proportion was. Any farmer, if he will, can 
 ascertain, it in his own case, for himself. 
 
 Again, a great amount of "locomotion" is spared by thorough 
 cultivation. Take fifty bushels of wheat, ready for harvest, stand- 
 
HIS SPEECHES AND WRITINGS 497 
 
 ing upon a single acre; and it can be harvested, in any of the 
 known ways, with less than half the labor which would be 
 required if it were spread over five acres. This would be true, if 
 cut by the old hand sickle; true, to a greater extent, if by the 
 scythe and cradle; and to a still greater extent, if by the machinery 
 now in use. These machines are chiefly valuable, as a means of 
 substituting animal power for the power of men in this branch of 
 farm-work. In the highest degree of perfection yet reached, in 
 applying the horse power to harvesting, fully nine-tenths of the 
 power is expended by the animal in carrying himself and drag- 
 ging the machine over the field; leaving certainly not more than 
 one-tenth to be applied directly to the only end of the whole 
 operation — the gathering in the grain, and clipping of the straw. 
 When grain is very thin on the ground, it is always more or less 
 intermingled with weeds, chess and the like; and a large part of 
 the power is expended in cutting these. It is plain that when the 
 crop is very thick upon the ground, a larger proportion of the 
 power is directly applied to gathering in and cutting it, and the 
 smaller to that which is totally useless as an end. And what I have 
 said of harvesting is true, in a greater or less degree, of mowing, 
 plowing, gathering in of crops generally; and, indeed, of almost 
 all farm work. 
 
 The effect of thorough cultivation upon the farmer's own 
 mind, and, in reaction through his mind, back upon his business, 
 is perhaps quite equal to any other of its effects. Every man is 
 proud of what he does well, and no man is proud of what he does 
 not do well. With the former, his heart is in his work; and he will 
 do twice as much of it with less fatigue. The latter he performs 
 a little imperfectly, looks at it in disgust, turns from it, and 
 imagines himself exceedingly tired. The little he does comes to 
 nothing, for want of finishing. 
 
 The man who produces a good full crop will scarcely ever let 
 any part of it go to waste. He will keep up the inclosures about 
 it, and allow neither man nor beast to trespass upon it. He will 
 gather it in due season, and store it in perfect security. Thus he 
 labors with satisfaction, and saves to himself the whole fruit of 
 his labor. 
 
 The other, starting with no purpose for a full crop, labors 
 
498 ABRAHAM LINCOLN: 
 
 less, and with less satisfaction; allows his fences to fall, and cattle 
 to trespass; gathers not in due season, or not at all; and stores 
 insecurely, or not at all. Thus the labor he has performed is 
 wasted away, little by little, till, in the end, he derives scarcely 
 anything from it. 
 
 The ambition for broad acres leads to poor farming, even 
 with men of energy. I scarcely ever knew a mammoth farm to 
 sustain itself, much less, to return a profit upon the outlay. I have 
 more than once known a man to spend a respectable fortune upon 
 one, fail, and leave it, and then some man of more moderate 
 aims, get a small fraction of the ground and make a good living 
 upon it. Mammoth farms are like tools, or weapons, which are 
 too heavy to be handled. Erelong they are thrown aside at a 
 great loss. 
 
 The successful application of steam power to farm work is a 
 desideratum — especially a steam-plow. It is not enough that a 
 machine operated by steam will really plow. To be successful, it 
 must, all things considered, plow better than can be done with 
 animal power. It must do all the work as well, and cheaper or 
 more rapidly, so as to get through more perfectly in season; or 
 in some way afford an advantage over plowing with animals, else 
 it is no success. I have never seen a machine intended for a 
 steam-plow. Much praise and admiration are bestowed upon 
 some of them; and they may be, for aught I know, already suc- 
 cessful; but I have not perceived the demonstration of it. I have 
 thought a good deal, in an abstract way, about a steam-plow. 
 That one which shall be so contrived as to apply the larger pro- 
 portion of its power to the cutting and turning of the soil, and 
 the smallest to the moving itself over the field, will be the best 
 one. A very small stationary engine would draw a large gang of 
 plows through the ground from a short distance to itself; but 
 when it is not stationary, but has to move along like a horse, 
 dragging the plows after it, it must have additional power to 
 carry itself; and the difficulty grows by what is intended to over- 
 come it; for what adds power, also adds size and weight to the 
 machine, thus increasing again the demand for power. Suppose 
 you should construct the machine so as to cut a succession of 
 short furrows, say a rod in length, transversely to the course the 
 
HIS SPEECHES AND WRITINGS 499 
 
 machine is locomoting, something like the shuttle in weaving. In 
 such case the whole machine would move north only the width 
 of a furrow, while in length the furrow would be a rod from east 
 to west. In such case a very large proportion of the power would 
 be applied to the actual plowing. But in this, too, there would 
 be a difficulty, which would be, the getting of the plow into and 
 out of the ground at the ends of all these short furrows. 
 
 I believe, however, ingenious men will, if they have not 
 already, overcome the difficulties I have suggested. But there is 
 still another, about which I am less sanguine. It is the supply of 
 fuel, and especially of water, to make steam. Such supply is clearly 
 practicable, but can the expense of it be borne? Steamboats live 
 upon the water, and find their fuel at stated places. Steam-mills 
 and other stationary steam-machinery, have their stationary sup- 
 plies of fuel and water. Railroad-locomotives have their regular 
 wood and water stations. But the steam-plow is less fortunate. 
 It does not live upon the water; even if it be once at a water station, 
 it will work away from it, and when it gets dry cannot return 
 without leaving its work, at a great expense of its time and 
 strength. It will occur that a wagon and horse team might be 
 employed to supply it with fuel and water; but this, too, is expen- 
 sive; and the question recurs, "Can the expense be borne?" When 
 this is added to all other expenses, will not the plowing cost more 
 than in the old way? 
 
 It is to be hoped that the steam plow will finally be success- 
 ful; and if it shall be, "thorough cultivation' — putting the soil to 
 the top of its capacity — producing the largest crop possible from 
 a given quantity of ground will be most favorable to it. Doing a 
 large amount of work upon a small quantity of ground, it will be, 
 as nearly as possible, stationary while working, and as free as 
 possible from locomotion; thus expending its strength, as much 
 as possible, upon its work, and as little as possible in traveling. 
 Our thanks, and something more substantial than thanks, are due 
 to every man engaged in the effort to produce a successful steam 
 plow. Even the unsuccessful, will bring something to light, which 
 in the hands of others will contribute to the final success. I have 
 not pointed out difficulties in order to discourage, but in order 
 that being seen, they may be the more readily overcome. 
 
500 ABRAHAM LINCOLN: 
 
 The world is agreed that labor is the source from which 
 human wants are mainly supplied. There is no dispute upon this 
 point. From this point, however, men immediately diverge. Much 
 disputation is maintained as to the best way of applying and con- 
 trolling the labor element. By some it is assumed that labor is 
 available only in connection with capital — that nobody labors, 
 unless somebody else, owning capital, somehow, by the use of that 
 capital, induces him to do it. Having assumed this, they proceed 
 to consider whether it is best that capital shall hire laborers, and 
 thus induce them to work by their own consent; or buy them, and 
 drive them to it without their consent. Having proceeded so far, 
 they naturally conclude that all laborers are necessarily either 
 hired laborers or slaves. They further assume that whoever is once 
 a hired laborer, is fatally fixed in that condition for life; and 
 thence, again, that his condition is as bad as, or worse than, that 
 of a slave. This is the "mud-sill" theory. 
 
 But another class of reasoners hold the opinion that there is 
 no such relation between capital and labor as assumed; and that 
 there is no such thing as a freeman being fatally fixed for life in 
 the condition of a hired laborer; that both these assumptions are 
 false, and all inferences from them groundless. They hold that 
 labor is prior to, and independent of, capital; that, in fact, capital 
 is the fruit of labor, and could never have existed if labor had not 
 first existed; that labor can exist without capital, but that capital 
 could never have existence without labor. Hence, they hold that 
 labor is the superior — greatly the superior — of capital. 
 
 They do not deny that there is, and probably always will be, 
 a relation between labor and capital. The error, as they hold, is in 
 assuming that the whole labor of the world exists within that re- 
 lation. A few men own capital; and that few avoid labor them- 
 selves, and with their capital, hire or buy another few to labor 
 for them. A large majority belong to neither class — neither work 
 for others, nor have others work for them. Even in all our Slave 
 States, except South Carolina, a majority of the whole people, of 
 all colors, are neither slaves nor masters. In these free States, a 
 large majority are neither hirers nor hired. Men, with their families 
 — wives, sons, and daughters — work for themselves, on their 
 
HIS SPEECHES AND WRITINGS 501 
 
 farms, in their houses and in their shops, taking the whole product 
 to themselves, and asking no favor of capital on the one hand, nor 
 of hirelings or slaves on the other. It is not forgotten that a con- 
 siderable number of persons mingle their own labor with capital 
 — that is, labor with their own hands, and also buy slaves or hire 
 freemen to labor for them; but this is only a mixed, and not a 
 distinct, class. No principle stated is disturbed by the existence 
 of this mixed class. 
 
 Again, as has already been said, the opponents of the "mud- 
 sill" theory insist that there is not, of necessity, any such thing as 
 the free hired laborer being fixed to that condition for life. There 
 is demonstration for saying this. Many independent men, in this 
 assembly, doubtless, a few years ago were hired laborers. And 
 their case is almost, if not quite, the general rule. The prudent, 
 penniless beginner in the world labors for wages awhile, saves a 
 surplus with which to buy tools or land for himself; then labors 
 on his own account another while, and at length hires another 
 new beginner to help him. This, say its advocates, is free labor — 
 the just and generous and prosperous system which opens the 
 way for all, gives hope to all, and energy and progress and im- 
 provement of condition to all. If any continue through life in the 
 condition of the hired laborer, it is not the fault of the system, but 
 because of either a dependent nature which prefers it, or of im- 
 providence, folly, or singular misfortune. I have said this much 
 about the elements of labor generally, as introductory to the 
 consideration of a new phase which that element is in process of 
 assuming. The old general rule was that educated people did not 
 perform manual labor. They managed to eat their bread, leaving 
 the toil of producing it to the uneducated. This was not an in- 
 supportable evil to the working bees, so long as the class of drones 
 remained very small. But now, especially in these free States, 
 nearly all are educated — quite too nearly all to leave the labor 
 of the uneducated in any way adequate to the support of the 
 whole. It follows from this that henceforth educated people too 
 must labor. Otherwise education itself would become a positive 
 and intolerable evil. No community can sustain, in idleness, more 
 than a small per centage of its numbers. The great majority must 
 
502 ABRAHAM LINCOLN: 
 
 labor at something useful — something productive. From these 
 premises the problem springs, "How can labor and education be 
 the most satisfactorily combined?" 
 
 By the "mud-sill" theory it is assumed that labor and edu- 
 cation are incompatible, and any practical combination of them 
 impossible. According to that theory, a blind horse upon a tread- 
 mill is a perfect illustration of what a laborer should be — all the 
 better for being blind, that he can not tread out of place, or kick 
 understandingly. According to that theory, the educating of 
 laborers is not only useless, but pernicious and dangerous. In fact, 
 it is, in some sort, deemed a misfortune that laborers should have 
 heads at all. Those same heads are regarded as explosive mate- 
 rials, only to be safely kept in damp places, as far as possible 
 from that peculiar sort of fire which ignites them. A Yankee who 
 could invent a strong-handed man, without a head, would secure 
 the everlasting gratitude of the "mud-sill" advocates. 
 
 But free labor says, "No." Free labor argues that, as the 
 Author of man makes every individual with one head, and one 
 pair of hands, it was probably intended that heads and hands 
 should co-operate as friends, and that that particular head should 
 direct and control that particular pair of hands. As each man 
 has one mouth to be fed, and one pair of hands to furnish food, 
 it was probably intended that that particular pair of hands should 
 feed that particular mouth — that each head is the natural 
 guardian, director and protector of the hands and mouth insepa- 
 rably connected with it; and that being so, every head should be 
 cultivated and improved, by whatever will add to its capacity 
 for performing its charge. In one word, free labor insists on 
 universal education. 
 
 I have so far stated the opposite theories of "mudsill" and 
 "free labor," without declaring any preference of my own 
 between them. On an occasion like this, I ought not to declare 
 any; I suppose, however, I shall not be mistaken, in assuming as 
 a fact, that the people of Wisconsin prefer free labor, with its 
 natural companion, education. 
 
 This leads to the further reflection that no other human 
 occupation opens so wide a field for the profitable and agreeable 
 combination of labor with cultivated thought as agriculture. 
 
HIS SPEECHES AND WRITINGS 503 
 
 I know nothing so pleasant to the mind, as the discovery of any- 
 thing which is at once new and valuable — nothing which so 
 lightens and sweetens toil as the hopeful pursuit of such dis- 
 covery. And how vast and how varied a field is agriculture for 
 such discovery. The mind, already trained to thought in the 
 country school, or higher school, cannot fail to find it an exhaust- 
 less source of profitable enjoyment. Every blade of grass is a 
 study; and to produce two where there was but one, is both a 
 profit and a pleasure. And not grass alone, but soils, seeds and 
 seasons; hedges, ditches and fences; draining, droughts, and irri- 
 gation; plowing, hoeing and harrowing; reaping, mowing and 
 threshing; — saving crops; pests of crops; diseases of crops, and 
 what will prevent or cure them; implements, utensils and ma- 
 chines, their relative merits, and how to improve them; hogs, 
 horses and cattle; sheep, goats and poultry; trees, shrubs, fruits 
 and flowers; the thousand things of which these are specimens, 
 each a world of study within itself. 
 
 In all this, book-learning is available. A capacity and taste 
 for reading, gives access to whatever has already been discovered 
 by others. It is the key, or one of the keys, to the already solved 
 problems. And not only so, it gives a relish and facility for suc- 
 cessfully pursuing the yet unsolved ones. The rudiments of 
 science are available and highly valuable. Some knowledge of 
 botany assists in dealing with the vegetable world — with all 
 growing crops; chemistry assists in the analysis of soils, selection 
 and application of manures, and in numerous other ways. The 
 mechanical branches of natural philosophy are ready helps in 
 almost everything, but especially in reference to implements and 
 machinery. 
 
 The thought occurs that education — cultivated thought — 
 can best be combined with agricultural labor, or any labor, on the 
 principle of thorough work — that careless, half performed, slov- 
 enly work, makes no place for such combination. And thorough 
 work, again, renders sufficient the smallest quantity of ground 
 to each man. And this, again, conforms to what must occur in a 
 world less inclined to wars, and more devoted to the arts of 
 peace, than heretofore. Population must increase rapidly, more 
 rapidly than in former times — and ere long the most valuable of 
 
504 ABRAHAM LINCOLN: 
 
 all arts will be the art of deriving a comfortable subsistence from 
 the smallest area of soil. No community whose every member 
 possesses this art, can ever be the victim of oppression in any of 
 its forms. Such community will be alike independent of crowned 
 kings, money kings, and land kings. 
 
 But, according to your programme the awarding of premiums 
 awaits the closing of this address. Considering the deep interest 
 necessarily pertaining to that performance, it would be no wonder 
 if I am already heard with some impatience. I will detain you 
 but a moment longer. Some of you will be successful, and such 
 will need but little philosophy to take them home in cheerful 
 spirits; others will be dissatisfied, and will be in a less happy 
 mood. To such let me say, "Lay it not too much to heart." Let 
 them adopt the maxim, "Better luck next time/' and then, by 
 renewed exertion, make that better luck for themselves. 
 
 And, by the successful and the unsuccessful, let it be remem- 
 bered, that while occasions like the present bring their sober and 
 durable benefits; the exultations and mortifications of them are 
 but temporary; that the victor will soon be the vanquished, if he 
 relax in his exertion; and that the vanquished this year may be 
 the victor the next, in spite of all competition. 
 
 It is said an Eastern monarch once charged his wise men to 
 invent him a sentiment to be ever in view, and which should be 
 true and appropriate in all times and situations. They presented 
 him the words, "And this, too, shall pass away." How much it 
 expresses! How chastening in the hour of pride; how consoling in 
 the depths of affliction! "And this, too, shall pass away." And yet, 
 let us hope, it is not quite true. Let us hope, rather, that by the 
 best cultivation of the physical world, beneath and around us, 
 and the intellectual and moral worlds within us, we shall secure 
 an individual, social, and political prosperity and happiness, 
 whose course shall be onward and upward, and which, while the 
 earth endures, shall not pass away. 
 
 The basic text of this address is from the Chicago 
 Daily Press and Tribune, October 1, 1859, collated with 
 the brochure reprinted from the volume of official pro- 
 
HIS SPEECHES AND WRITINGS 505 
 
 ceedings of the Wisconsin State Agricultural Society for 
 1859-60. (See Lincoln on Agriculture, Lincoln Fellowship 
 of Wisconsin, 1943, Historical Bulletin No. 1.) That the 
 text preserved in the volume of "official proceedings" is 
 less accurate than that in the Daily Press and Tribune 
 is indicated by comparison with an extant page of the 
 original manuscript owned by The Wisconsin State 
 Historical Society. The story of the disposition of the 
 manuscript is that Lincoln gave it to some unknown in- 
 dividual who handed it out a page at a time to the 
 farmer listeners and others who heard the speech. 
 
 Although this address has been discussed in "Lin- 
 coln's Development as a Writer," a note may not be amiss 
 on one portion of it that may seem strange in the twen- 
 tieth century — Lincoln s puzzlement over the problem of 
 mechanics presented by the steam plow. Although the 
 problem was effectively solved within a few years and 
 steam plows became widely used in the flat open prairie 
 country long before the day of gasoline tractors, the 
 first popular reception of the idea was much like that of 
 the steamboat. Theorists opined that it would not work. 
 Lincoln, although not overly sanguine, at least recog- 
 nized its possibilities. 
 
 WRITTEN BY LINCOLN IN THE AUTOGRAPH ALBUM 
 OF MARY DELAHAY. DECEMBER 7, 1859 
 
 Dear Mary 
 
 With pleasure I write my name in your Album. Ere long 
 some younger man will be more happy to confer his name upon 
 you. Don't allow it, Mary, until fully assured that he is worthy of 
 the happiness. Dec. 7 — 1859 
 
 Your friend 
 
 A. Lincoln 
 
506 ABRAHAM LINCOLN: 
 
 This expression of sentiment penned for the daugh- 
 ter of Mark W. Delahay, an old Illinois crony, lawyer, 
 and editor, who had migrated to Kansas and was carry- 
 ing on Republican activity in the state, was written 
 during a speaking tour which took Lincoln to Kansas in 
 the first week of December, 1859. 
 
 LETTER TO WILLIAM KELLOGG 
 DECEMBER 11, 1859 
 
 Springfield, Ills. Dec. 11, 1859 
 Hon. William Kellogg. 
 My dear Sir: 
 
 I have been a good deal relieved this morning by a sight of 
 Greeley's letter to you, published in the Tribune. Before seeing it, 
 I much feared you had, in changing interviews between Douglas 
 & Greeley, stated what you believed, but did not certainly know 
 to be true; and that it might be untrue, and our enemies would 
 get an advantage of you. However, as G. admits the interviews, 
 I think it will not hurt you that he denies conversing with D. 
 about his re-election to the Senate. G. I think, will not tell a false- 
 hood; and I think he will scarcely deny that he had the interviews 
 with D. in order to assure himself from D's own lips, better than 
 he could from his public acts & declarations, whether to try to 
 bring the Republican party to his support generally, including 
 his re-election to the Senate. What else could the interviews be 
 for? Why immediately followed in the Tribune the advice that all 
 anti-Lecompton democrats should be re-elected? The world will 
 not consider it anything that D's reelection to the Senate was not 
 specifically talked of by him and G. 
 
 Now, mark, I do not charge that G. was corrupt in this. I do 
 not think he was, or is. It was his judgment that the course he 
 took was the best way of serving the Republican cause. For this 
 
HIS SPEECHES AND WRITINGS 507 
 
 reason, and for the further reason, that he is now pulling straight 
 with us, I think, if I were you, I would not pursue him further 
 than necessary to my own justification. If I were you I would 
 however be greatly tempted [to?] ask him if he really thinks D.'s 
 advice to his friends to vote for a Lecompton & Slave code man, 
 is very "plucky" 
 
 Please excuse what I have said in the way of unsolicited 
 avice [sic], I believe you will not doubt the sincerity of my friend- 
 ship for you. 
 
 Yours very truly 
 
 A. Lincoln 
 
 Kellogg was a Republican politician from Canton, 
 Illinois, who was elected to Congress. Something over 
 a year later he was to cause Lincoln considerable politi- 
 cal embarrassment. (See "Letter to William Kellogg? 
 December 11, 1860, and note.) Horace Greeley's anti- 
 slavery sentiment was often stronger than his Repub- 
 licanism and practical results probably dictated his 
 support of Douglas against Lincoln in the preceding 
 campaign. Lincoln's attitude here is typical of his lack 
 of personal animosity and his wish to place the general 
 party welfare above other considerations. Of course, he 
 recognized the power that Greeley wielded as editor of 
 the New York Tribune. 
 
 LETTER TO G. W. DOLE, G. S. HUBBARD, AND 
 W. H. BROWN. DECEMBER 14, 1859 
 
 Springfield, Dec. 14, 1859 
 Messrs. Dole, Hubbard & Brown — 
 Gent. 
 
 Your favor of the 12th. is at hand, and it gives me pleasure 
 to be able to answer it. It is not my intention to take part in any 
 
508 ABRAHAM LINCOLN: 
 
 of the rivalries for the Gubernatorial nomination; but the fear of 
 being misunderstood upon that subject, ought not to deter me 
 from doing justice to Mr. Judd, and preventing a wrong being 
 done to him by the use of my name in connection with alledged 
 wrongs to me. 
 
 In answer to your first question as to whether Mr. Judd was 
 guilty of any unfairness to me at the time of Senator Trumbull's 
 election, I answer unhesitatingly in the negative. Mr. Judd owed 
 no political allegiance to any party whose candidate I was. He 
 was in the Senate, holding over, having been elected by a demo- 
 cratic constituency. He never was in any caucus of the friends 
 who sought to make me U. S. Senator — never gave me any 
 promises or pledges to support me — and subsequent events have 
 greatly tended to prove the wisdom, politically, of Mr. Judd's 
 course. The election of Judge Trumbull strongly tended to sustain 
 and preserve the position of that portion of the Democrats who 
 condemned the repeal of the Missouri Compromise, and left them 
 in a position of joining with us in forming the Republican party, 
 as was done at the Bloomington Convention in 1856 
 
 During the canvass of 1858 for the Senatorship my belief 
 was, and still is, that I had no more sincere and faithful friend 
 than Mr. Judd — certainly none whom I trusted more. His position 
 as Chairman of the State Central Committee, led to my greater 
 intercourse with him, and to my giving him a larger share of my 
 confidence, than with, or, to almost any other friend; and I have 
 never suspected that that confidence was, to any degree, mis- 
 placed. 
 
 My relations with Mr. Judd, since the organization of the 
 Republican party, in our State, in 1856, and especially since the 
 adjournment of the Legislature in Feb. 1857, have been so very 
 intimate, that I deem it an impossibility that he could have been 
 dealing treacherously with me. He has also, at all times, appeared 
 equally true and faithful to the party. In his position as Chairman 
 of the Committee, I believe he did all that any man could have 
 done. The best of us are liable to commit errors, which become 
 apparent by subsequent developement; but I do not know of 
 a single error, even, committed by Mr. Judd, since he and I have 
 acted together politically. 
 
HIS SPEECHES AND WRITINGS 509 
 
 I had occasionally heard these insinuations against Mr. Judd, 
 before the receipt of your letter; and in no instance have I hesi- 
 tated to pronounce them wholly unjust, to the full extent of my 
 knowledge and belief. I have been, and still am, very anxious to 
 take no part between the many friends, all good and true, who are 
 mentioned as candidates for a Republican Gubernatorial nomina- 
 tion; but I can not feel that my own honor is quite clear, if I 
 remain silent, when I hear any one of them assailed about matters 
 of which I believe I know more than his assailants. 
 
 I take pleasure in adding that of all the avowed friends I had 
 in the canvass of last year, I do not suspect any of having acted 
 treacherously to me, or to our cause; and that there is not one of 
 them in whose honesty, honor, and integrity I, to-day, have 
 greater confidence than I have in those of Mr. Judd. 
 
 I dislike to appear before the public, in this matter; but you 
 are at liberty to make such use of this letter as you may think 
 justice requires. 
 
 Yours very truly 
 
 A. Lincoln 
 
 As Lincoln indicated his willingness that it should 
 he, this letter was made public in the Chicago Daily Press 
 and Tribune, January 30, 1860. The persons addressed 
 were prominent Chicago business men and Republicans. 
 George W. Dole is often confused by Lincoln students 
 with William P. Dole, who became Commissioner of 
 Indian Affairs under Lincoln — a position which George 
 W. Dole could hardly have held considering the fact 
 that he died in 1860. George W. Dole had been a director 
 of the State Bank as early as 1835, postmaster in 1851, a 
 trustee of the Illinois Savings Institution in 1855, and 
 one of the governors of the city hospital in 1859. Gurdon 
 S. Hubbard was a native of Vermont who went to Chi- 
 cago as an employee of the American Fur Company in 
 1818 and later became Chicago's first lumber dealer, 
 first underwriter, and one of the first meat packers. As a 
 member of the Illinois Legislature, he introduced a bill 
 
510 ABRAHAM LINCOLN: 
 
 for the construction of the Illinois and Michigan Canal 
 and various bills promoting construction of railroads in 
 different parts of the state. William H. Brown moved to 
 Kaskaskia, Illinois, from Connecticut in 1817, edited the 
 Illinois Intelligencer at Vandalia (1820), and later went 
 to Chicago as cashier of the State Bank (1835). He is 
 listed in later Chicago directories as hanker and lawyer. 
 His interest in Chicago history led to his election as the 
 first president of the Chicago Historical Society. 
 
 LETTER TO J. W. FELL 
 
 INCLOSING AUTOBIOGRAPHY. DECEMBER 20, 1859 
 
 Springfield, Dec. 20. 1859 
 J. W. Fell, Esq 
 My dear Sir: 
 
 Herewith is a little sketch, as you requested. There is not 
 much of it, for the reason, I suppose, that there is not much of me. 
 If anything be made out of it, I wish it to be modest, and not to 
 go beyond the materials. If it were thought necessary to incor- 
 porate any thing from any of my speeches, I suppose there would 
 be no objection. Of course it must not appear to have been written 
 by myself. 
 
 Yours very truly 
 
 A. Lincoln 
 
 I was born Feb. 12, 1809, 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 Counties, 
 Illinois. My paternal grandfather, Abraham Lincoln, emigrated 
 
HIS SPEECHES AND WRITINGS 511 
 
 from Rockingham County, Virginia, to Kentucky, about 1781 or 
 2, where, a year or two later, he was killed by indians, not in 
 battle, but by stealth, when he was laboring to open a farm in 
 the forest. 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 fami- 
 lies, 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, litterally [sic] 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 re- 
 quired of a teacher beyond "readin, writin, and cipherin" to the 
 Rule of Three. If a straggler supposed to understand latin hap- 
 pened to sojourn in the neighborhood, he was looked upon as a 
 wizzard [sic]. 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, and passed the first 
 year in Macon County. Then I got to New-Salem (at that time in 
 Sangamon, 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 afterwards. During this 
 Legislative period I had studied law, and removed to Springfield 
 to practise it. In 1846 I was once elected to the lower House of 
 
512 ABRAHAM LINCOLN: 
 
 Congress. Was not a candidate for re-election. 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 grey eyes — no other 
 marks or brands recollected. 
 
 Yours very truly 
 
 A. Lincoln. 
 Hon J W. Fell. 
 
 Fell was a Bloomington, Illinois, Republican who 
 had been associated with Lincoln in Whig politics from 
 the thirties. A native son of Pennsylvania, while on a 
 visit back home in 1858, he observed Lincoln's prestige 
 among Pennsylvania Republicans and began thinking of 
 Lincoln s presidential possibilities. At his .suggestion, Lin- 
 coln prepared the autobiography to be sent to Joseph 
 J. Lewis of Westchester, who used it in preparing an 
 extended article on Lincoln for the Chester County 
 Times, February 11, 1860. The article, reprinted in 
 various newspapers in following months, became the first 
 widely read biographical sketch of Lincoln. 
 
HIS SPEECHES AND WRITINGS 513 
 
 FRAGMENT: 
 
 THE CONSTITUTION AND THE UNION [I860?] 
 
 All this is not the result of accident. It has a philosophical 
 cause. Without the Constitution and the Union, we could not 
 have attained the result; but even these, are not the primary 
 cause of our great prosperity. There is something back of these, 
 entwining itself more closely about the human heart. That some- 
 thing, is the principle of "Liberty to all" — the principle that clears 
 the path for all — gives hope to all — and, by consequence, enter- 
 prize, and industry to all. 
 
 The expression of that principle, in our Declaration of Inde- 
 pendence, was most happy, and fortunate. Without this, as well as 
 with it, we could have declared our independence of Great 
 Brittain [sic]; but without it, we could not, I think, have secured 
 our free government, and consequent prosperity. No oppressed 
 people will fight, and endure, as our fathers did, without the 
 promise of something better, than a mere change of masters. 
 
 The assertion of that principle, at that time, was the word, 
 "fitly spoken which has proved an "apple of gold" to us. The 
 Union, and the Constitution, are the picture of silver, subse- 
 quently framed around it. The picture was made, not to conceal, 
 or destroy the apple; but to adorn, and preserve it. The picture 
 was made for the apple — not the apple for the picture. 
 
 So let us act, that neither picture, or apple, shall ever be 
 blurred, or broken. 
 
 That we may so act, we must study, and understand the 
 points of danger. 
 
 This fragment contains one of Lincoln's most famous 
 literary analogies, figuring the apple of gold in the pic- 
 ture of silver (Proverbs, 25:11) as the principle of the 
 Declaration of Independence framed by the Union and 
 
514 ABRAHAM LINCOLN: 
 
 the Constitution. This figurative expression is, of course, 
 simply what Lincoln had always insisted, in all kinds 
 of expressions, to be the raison d'etre of the United 
 States. (Compare the central theme of "The Perpetuation 
 of Our Political Institutions," 1838, and the "Gettysburg 
 Address. 9 ') 
 
 According to Paul M. Angle's note in New Letters 
 and Papers of Lincoln, the fragment was possibly used 
 in Lincoln's New England speeches, on the tour which 
 followed the "Address at Cooper Institute"; or possibly 
 written later, after December SO, 1860, when Lincoln 
 received from Alexander H. Stephens of Georgia a letter 
 urging that "a word 'fitly spoken by you now would 
 indeed be like 'apples of gold in pictures of silver! " The 
 first possibility seems more likely, as Stephens may have 
 read in the newspapers a quotation from one of the 
 speeches in which Lincoln had used the figure, and in 
 writing to his old friend may have made the allusion 
 for its ironical emphasis. 
 
 LETTER TO M. W. PACKARD 
 FEBRUARY 10, 1860 
 
 Springfield, Feb 10—1860 
 M. W. Packard, Esq 
 Dear Sir: 
 
 William Florville, a colored barber here, owns four lots in 
 Bloomington, on which I have been paying the taxes for him 
 several years, but which I forgot [to?] do, though under promise, 
 when I was at Bloomington last. Will you please collect the ten 
 dollars fee we spoke of, add enough of your own money, pay all 
 taxes due, and send me the receipt, or receipts? If you will I shall 
 
HIS SPEECHES AND WRITINGS 515 
 
 be greatly obliged; and besides, will return you the money you 
 advanced by the first mail. 
 
 William Thomas, Larrimore, and others there know about 
 these lots. 
 
 Yours truly 
 
 A. Lincoln 
 
 LETTER TO O. P. HALL, J. R. FULLINWIDER, AND 
 U. F. CORRELL. FEBRUARY 14, 1860 
 
 Springfield, Feb. 14. 1860 
 Messrs. O. P. Hall 
 J. R. Fullinwider & U. F. Correll. 
 Gentlemen. 
 
 Your letter, in which among other things, you ask "what I 
 meant when I said this Union could not stand half slave and half 
 free — and also what I meant when I said a house divided against 
 itself could not stand" is received, and I very cheerfully answer 
 it as plainly as I may be able. You misquote, to some material 
 extent, what I did say; which induces me to think you have not, 
 very carefully read the speech in which the expressions occur 
 which [seem?] to puzzle you to understand. For this reason and 
 because the language I used is as plain as I can make it, I now 
 quote at length the whole paragraph in which the expressions 
 which puzzle you occur. It is as follows: "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 constantly augmented. I believe it will not cease until 
 a crisis shall have been reached, and passed. A house divided 
 against itself can not stand. I believe this government can not 
 endure permanently, half slave, and half free. I do not expect the 
 
516 ABRAHAM LINCOLN: 
 
 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 opponents 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 course of ultimate extinction; or it's 
 advocates will push it forward till it will become alike lawful in 
 all the states, old as well as new, North, as well as South/' 
 
 That is the whole paragraph; and it puzzles me to make my 
 meaning plainer. Look over it carefully, and conclude I meant all 
 I said and did not mean anything I did not say, and you will have 
 my meaning. Douglas attacked me upon this, saying it was a 
 declaration of war between the slave and the free states. You will 
 perceive I said no such thing, and I assure you I thought of no 
 such thing. 
 
 If I had said "I believe this government can not last always, 
 half slave and half free" would you understand it any better than 
 you do? "Endure permanently" and "last always" have exactly the 
 same meaning. 
 
 If you, or any of you, will state to me some meaning which 
 you suppose I had, I can, and will instantly tell you whether that 
 was my meaning. 
 
 Yours very truly 
 
 A. Lincoln 
 
 The three men addressed in this letter were all 
 farmers who lived in the eastern fart of Sangamon 
 County near Mechanicsburg, Illinois. Correll was a 
 Democrat, Fullinwider a Republican, and Hall of un- 
 identified political allegiance. Apparently they were 
 neighbors and friends who, arguing politics early in the 
 year of the presidential election and specifically discuss- 
 ing Lincoln s possibility as a candidate, could come to 
 no agreement on Lincoln's famous pronouncement in the 
 "House Divided Speech." Lincoln's painstaking answer to 
 their question indicates his concern that the electorate 
 should not misunderstand him to mean — as Dougjias had 
 charged, and as one suspects the Democrat Correll prob- 
 
HIS SPEECHES AND WRITINGS 517 
 
 ably maintained — that he favored a permanent separa- 
 tion of the slave from the free states. 
 
 ADDRESS AT COOPER INSTITUTE, 
 NEW YORK. FEBRUARY 27, 1860 
 
 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 inferences and observations 
 following that presentation. 
 
 In his speech last autumn, at Columbus, Ohio, as reported in 
 "The New- York Times," Senator Douglas said: 
 
 "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 discourse. 
 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 sup- 
 pose the "thirty-nine" who signed the original instrument may be 
 fairly called our fathers who framed that part of the present 
 
518 ABRAHAM LINCOLN: 
 
 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 well, 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 Repub- 
 licans 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 they 
 acted upon it — how they expressed that better understanding? 
 
 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 Constitution, were in that Congress, 
 and voted on that question. Of these, Roger Sherman, Thomas 
 Mifflin, and Hugh Williamson voted for the prohibition, thus 
 showing that, in their understanding, no line 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 M' Henry — voted against the prohibition, 
 showing that, for some cause, he thought it improper to vote for it. 
 
 In 1787, still before the Constitution, but while the Conven- 
 tion was in session framing it, and while the Northwestern Terri- 
 tory 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 Confederation; and two more of the 
 "thirty-nine" who afterward signed the Constitution, were in 
 
HIS SPEECHES AND WRITINGS 519 
 
 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 authority, nor anything else, properly forbids 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 recorded that 
 the "thirty-nine," or any of them, while engaged on that instru- 
 ment, expressed any opinion on that precise question. 
 
 In 1789, by the first Congress which sat under the Consti- 
 tution, an act was passed to enforce the Ordinance of '87, includ- 
 ing 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 yeas and 
 nays, which is equivalent to an unanimous passage. In this Con- 
 gress there were sixteen of the thirty-nine fathers who framed the 
 original Constitution. They were John Langdon, Nicholas Gilman, 
 Wm. S. Johnson, Roger Sherman, Robert Morris, Thos. Fitzsim- 
 mons, William Few, Abraham Baldwin, Rufus King, William 
 Paterson, George Clymer, Richard Bassett, George Read, Pierce 
 Butler, Daniel Carroll, 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 ter- 
 ritory; else both their fidelity to correct principle, and their oath 
 to support the Constitution, would have constrained 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 
 federal authority, nor anything in the Constitution, forbade the 
 Federal Government, to control as to slavery in federal territory. 
 
520 ABRAHAM LINCOLN: 
 
 No great while after the adoption of the original Consti- 
 tution, 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. Under these cir- 
 cumstances, Congress, on taking charge of these countries, did 
 not absolutely prohibit slavery within them. But they did inter- 
 fere with it — take control of it — even there, to a certain extent. 
 In 1798, Congress organized the Territory of Mississippi. In the 
 act of organization, they prohibited the bringing of slaves into the 
 Territory, from any place without the United States, by fine, and 
 giving freedom to slaves so brought. This act passed both branches 
 of Congress without yeas and nays. In that Congress were three 
 of the "thirty-nine" who framed the original Constitution. They 
 were John Langdon, George Read and Abraham Baldwin. They 
 all, probably, voted for it. Certainly 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 Consti- 
 tution, 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 constitutes the State of Louisiana. 
 New Orleans, lying within that part, was an old and compara- 
 tively large city. There were other considerable towns and settle- 
 ments, and slavery was extensively and thoroughly intermingled 
 with the people. Congress did not, in the Territorial Act, pro- 
 hibit 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: 
 
 First. That no slave should be imported into the territory 
 from foreign parts. 
 
 
HIS SPEECHES AND WRITINGS 521 
 
 Second. That no slave should be carried into it who had 
 been imported into the United States since the first day of May, 
 1798. 
 
 Third. 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 yeas and 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 pro- 
 vision of the Constitution. 
 
 In 1819-20, 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 compromises, 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 Constitution, was 
 violated by Congress prohibiting slavery in federal territory; 
 while Mr. Pinckney, by his votes, showed that, in his understand- 
 ing, there was some sufficient reason for opposing such prohibi- 
 tion 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 1819-20 — 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 upon the question, which, by the 
 
522 ABRAHAM LINCOLN: 
 
 text, they understood better than we, is twenty-three, leaving six- 
 teen 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 live," who 
 have, upon their official responsibility and their corporal oaths, 
 acted upon the very question which the text affirms they "under- 
 stood 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 wilful perjury, if, in their understanding, any proper division 
 between local and federal authority, or anything in the Consti- 
 tution 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 pro- 
 hibition of slavery in the federal territories, in the instances 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 conscientiously 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 consti- 
 tutional, if, at the same time, he deems it inexpedient. It, there- 
 fore, would be unsafe to set down even the two who voted against 
 the prohibition, as having done so because, in their understand- 
 ing, any proper division of local from federal authority, or 
 anything in the Constitution, forbade 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 terri- 
 tories. But there is much reason to believe that their understand- 
 
HIS SPEECHES AND WRITINGS 523 
 
 ing 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 pur- 
 posely omitted whatever understanding may have been mani- 
 fested by any person, however distinguished, other than the 
 thirty-nine fathers who framed the original Constitution; 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 gen- 
 erally, 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 anti- 
 slavery 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 terri- 
 tories; while all the rest probably had the same understanding. 
 Such, unquestionably, was the understanding of our fathers who 
 framed the original Constitution; and the text affirms that they 
 understood the question "better than we." 
 
 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 
 suppose it thus violates; and, as I understand, that all fix upon 
 provisions in these amendatory articles, and not in the original 
 
524 ABRAHAM LINCOLN: 
 
 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 
 powers 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 consideration, and in progress 
 toward maturity, these Constitutional amendments, and this act 
 prohibiting slavery in all the territory the nation then owned. 
 The Constitutional amendments 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 
 Constitutional amendments were also pending. 
 
 The seventy-six members of that Congress, including sixteen 
 of the framers of the original Constitution, as before stated, were 
 pre-eminently our fathers who framed that part of "the Govern- 
 ment under which we live," which is now claimed as forbidding 
 the Federal Government to control slavery in the federal terri- 
 tories. 
 
 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 absolutely inconsistent 
 with each other? And does not such affirmation become im- 
 pudently 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 incon- 
 sistent? 
 
 It is surely safe to assume that the thirty-nine framers of the 
 original Constitution, and the seventy-six members of the Con- 
 gress which framed the amendments thereto, taken together, do 
 
HIS SPEECHES AND WRITINGS 525 
 
 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, for- 
 bade 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 begin- 
 ning 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 century 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 misunder- 
 stood. 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 improve- 
 ment. 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 divi- 
 sion of local from federal authority, or any part of the Constitu- 
 tion, 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 substituting falsehood and deception 
 for truthful evidence and fair argument. If any man at this day 
 
526 ABRAHAM LINCOLN: 
 
 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 Constitution, 
 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 declaring 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," speak as they spoke, 
 and act as they acted upon it. This is all Republicans ask — all Re- 
 publicans 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 protected only because of and so far as its 
 actual presence among us makes that toleration and protection 
 a necessity. Let all the guaranties those fathers gave it, be, not 
 grudgingly, but fully and fairly, maintained. For this Republicans 
 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 reasonable 
 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 like 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 
 condemnation 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 your- 
 
HIS SPEECHES AND WRITINGS 527 
 
 selves? Bring forward your charges and specifications, 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 sec- 
 tion — 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 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 primarily yours, and remains 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 prin- 
 ciple, 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 it 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 Farewell 
 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 mo- 
 
528 ABRAHAM LINCOLN: 
 
 ment he penned that warning; and about one year after he 
 penned it, he wrote LaFayette that he considered that prohibi- 
 tion a wise measure, expressing 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 Washington, and we commend it to you, 
 together with his example pointing to the right application of it. 
 
 But you say you are conservative — eminently conservative- 
 while we are revolutionary, destructive, or something of the sort. 
 What is conservatism? Is it not adherence to the old and tried, 
 against the new and untried? We stick to, contend for, the identical 
 old policy on the point in controversy which was adopted by 
 "our fathers who framed the Government 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 Con- 
 gress 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," fan- 
 tastically called "Popular Sovereignty;" but never a man among 
 you is in favor of federal prohibition of slavery in federal terri- 
 tories, 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 
 claim of conservatism for yourselves, and your charge of de- 
 structiveness against us, are based on the most clear and stable 
 foundations. 
 
 Again, you say we have made the slavery question more 
 
HIS SPEECHES AND WRITINGS 529 
 
 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 re- 
 duced to its former proportions? 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? Harper's Ferry! John Brown!! 
 John Brown was no Republican; and you have failed to implicate 
 a single Republican in his Harper's Ferry enterprise. If any mem- 
 ber 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 designat- 
 ing 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 Harper's Ferry affair, but still insist that our doc- 
 trines and declarations necessarily lead to such results. We do 
 not believe it. We know we hold to 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 charging the blame upon 
 us, you could get an advantage of us in those elections. The 
 elections came, and your expectations 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 accompanied 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 
 
530 ABRAHAM LINCOLN: 
 
 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 misrepre- 
 sentations 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 Harper's 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 gen- 
 eral, 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 
 everywhere in parcels; but there neither are, nor can be supplied, 
 the indispensable connecting trains. 
 
 Much is said by Southern people about the affection of 
 slaves for their masters and mistresses; and a part of it, at 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 Hayti 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, only 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 conse- 
 quence, 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 continue 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 
 
HIS SPEECHES AND WRITINGS 531 
 
 much fears, or much hopes for such an event, will be alike dis- 
 appointed. 
 
 In the language of Mr. Jefferson, uttered many years ago, 
 "It is still in our power to direct the process of emancipation, 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 contrary, 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 Vir- 
 ginia; and, as to the power of emancipation, I speak of the slave- 
 holding States only. The Federal Government, however, as we 
 insist, has the power of restraining the extension of the institu- 
 tion — 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 insurrec- 
 tion. It was an attempt by white men to get up a revolt among 
 slaves, in which the slaves refused to participate. In fact, it was 
 so absurd that the slaves, with all their ignorance, saw plainly 
 enough it could not succeed. That affair, in its philosophy, cor- 
 responds with the many attempts, related in history, at the assas- 
 sination of kings and emperors. An enthusiast broods over the 
 oppression 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. Orsinfs attempt on Louis 
 Napoleon, and John Brown's attempt at Harper's 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, Helpers Book, and the like, break up the Repub- 
 lican organization? Human action can be modified to some ex- 
 tent, 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 or- 
 ganization which rallies around it. You can scarcely scatter and 
 disperse an army which has been formed into order in the face 
 
532 ABRAHAM LINCOLN: 
 
 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. 
 
 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 specifically written in the 
 Constitution. That instrument is literally silent about any such 
 right. We, on the contrary, deny that such a right has any ex- 
 istence in the Constitution, even by implication. 
 
 Your purpose, then, plainly stated, is that you will destroy 
 the Government, unless you be allowed to construe and enforce 
 the Constitution as you please, on all points in dispute 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 Constitutional ques- 
 tion in your favor. Not quite so. But waiving the lawyer s dis- 
 tinction between dictum and decision, the Court have decided 
 the question for you in a sort of way. The Court have substan- 
 tially 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 majority 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 
 
HIS SPEECHES AND WRITINGS 533 
 
 of property in a slave is not "distinctly and expressly affirmed" in 
 it. Bear in mind, the Judges do not pledge their judicial opinion 
 tiiat such right is impliedly affirmed in the Constitution; but 
 they pledge their veracity that it is "distinctly and expressly" 
 affirmed there — "distinctly," that is, not mingled with anything 
 else — "expressly," that is, in 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 with- 
 draw the mistaken statement, and reconsider the conclusion 
 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 Constitutional question 
 in our favor, long ago — decided it without division among them- 
 selves, when making the decision; without division among them- 
 selves about the meaning of it after it was made, and, so far as 
 any evidence is left, without basing it upon any mistaken state- 
 ment of facts. 
 
 Under all these circumstances, do you really feel yourselves 
 justified to break up this Government unless such a court deci- 
 sion as yours is, shall be at once submitted to as a conclusive and 
 final rule of political action? But you will not abide the election 
 of a Republican president! In that supposed event, you say, you 
 
534 ABRAHAM LINCOLN: 
 
 will destroy the Union; and then, you say, the great crime of 
 having destroyed it will be upon us! That is cool. A highway- 
 man 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 Republicans 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 na- 
 ture 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 insur- 
 rections? 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 abstaining does not exempt us from the charge and 
 the denunciation. 
 
 The question recurs, what will satisfy them? Simply this: 
 We must not only let them alone, but we must somehow, con- 
 vince them that we do let them alone. This, we know by experi- 
 ence, is no easy task. We have been so trying to convince them 
 from the very beginning of our organization, but with no suc- 
 cess. In all our platforms and speeches we have constantly pro- 
 tested our purpose to let them alone; but this has had no tendency 
 to convince them. Alike unavailing to convince them, is the fact 
 
HIS SPEECHES AND WRITINGS 535 
 
 that they have never detected a man of us in any attempt to dis- 
 turb 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 ourselves avowedly with them. Senator 
 Douglas's new sedition law must be enacted and enforced, sup- 
 pressing all declarations 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 
 be 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 disturbed 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 Constitutions 
 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 voluntarily stop nowhere short of this consumma- 
 tion. Holding, as they do, that slavery is morally right, and 
 socially elevating, 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 themselves wrong, and 
 should be silenced, and swept away. If it is right, we cannot justly 
 object to its nationality — its universality; if it is wrong, they can- 
 not justly insist upon its extension — its enlargement. All they 
 
536 ABRAHAM LINCOLN: 
 
 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 Terri- 
 tories, 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 con- 
 trivances 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 
 Disunionists, reversing the divine rule, and calling, not the sin- 
 ners, but the righteous to repentance — such as invocations to 
 Washington, imploring men to unsay what Washington said, and 
 undo what Washington did. 
 
 , Neither let us be slandered from our duty by false accusations 
 against us, nor frightened from it by menaces of destruction 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. 
 
 The text of this address is from the revised and an- 
 notated edition published by the Young Mens Repub- 
 lican Union under the editorship of Charles C. Nott and 
 Cephas Brainerd in September, 1860. Lincoln authorized 
 the text and checked the editorial emendations. 
 
HIS SPEECHES AND WRITINGS 537 
 
 The following "Preface" prepared by Nott and 
 Brainerd requires no further explanation: 
 
 "This edition of Mr. Lincoln's address has been pre- 
 pared and published by the Young Mens Republican 
 Union of New York, to exemplify its wisdom, truthful- 
 ness, and learning. No one who has not actually at- 
 tempted to verify its details can understand the patient 
 research and historical labor which it embodies. The 
 history of our earlier politics is scattered through numer- 
 ous journals, statutes, pamphlets, 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 travelled over this precise ground ap- 
 preciate 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 ques- 
 tion of slavery, to present the single question which he 
 discusses. From the first line to the last — from his prem- 
 ises to his conclusion, he travels with swift, unerring di- 
 rectness which no logician ever excelled — an argument 
 complete and full, without the affectation of learning, 
 and without the stiffness 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. And, though the public should justly estimate 
 the labor bestowed on the facts which are stated, they 
 cannot estimate the greater labor involved on those 
 which are omitted — how many pages have been read — 
 how many works examined — what numerous statutes, 
 resolutions, speeches, letters, and biographies have been 
 looked through. Commencing with this address as a 
 political pamphlet, the reader will leave it as an historical 
 work — brief, complete, profound, impartial, truthful — 
 which will survive the time and the occasion that called 
 
538 ABRAHAM LINCOLN: 
 
 it forth, and he esteemed hereafter, no less for its intrinsic 
 worth than its unpretending modesty. 
 "New York, September, I860" 
 
 In preparing the revised edition for publication, Nott 
 and Brainerd made numerous minor changes and sub- 
 mitted them for Lincoln's approval. Lincoln's "Letter 
 to Charles C. Nott," May 81, 1860, containing Lincoln's 
 reply to the suggested emendations, corroborates Hern- 
 don's testimony that Lincoln was "inflexible" if anyone 
 "volunteered to recommend or even suggest a change of 
 language which involved a change of sentiment." 
 Nott's letter explaining his editorial labors and compli- 
 menting Lincoln's address is as follows: 
 
 "69 Wall St., New York 
 "May 23, 1860 
 "Dear Sir: 
 
 "I enclose a copy of your address in New York. 
 
 "We (the Young Men's Rep. Union) design to pub- 
 lish a new edition in larger type and better form, with 
 such notes and references as will best attract readers 
 seeking information. Have you any memoranda of your 
 investigations which you would approve of inserting? 
 
 "You and your Western friends, I think, underrate 
 this speech. It has produced a greater effect here than 
 any other single speech. It is the real platform in the 
 Eastern States, and must carry the conservative element 
 in New York, New Jersey, and Pennsylvania. 
 
 "Therefore I desire that it should be as nearly perfect 
 as may be. Most of the emendations are trivial and do 
 not affect the substance — all are merely suggested for 
 your judgment. 
 
 "I cannot help adding that this speech is an ex- 
 traordinary example of condensed English. After some 
 experience in criticizing for Reviews, I find hardly any- 
 thing to touch and nothing to omit. It is the only one 
 I know of which I cannot shorten, and — like a good 
 
HIS SPEECHES AND WRITINGS 539 
 
 arch — moving one word tumbles a whole sentence down. 
 "Finally — it being a bad and foolish thing for a 
 candidate to write letters, and you having doubtless more 
 to do of that than is pleasant or profitable, we will not 
 add to your burden in that regard, but if you will let any 
 friend who has nothing to do, advise us as to your wishes, 
 in this or any other matter, we will try to carry them out. 
 
 "Respectfully, 
 "Charles C. Nott 
 "To Hon. Abraham Lincoln" 
 
 LETTER TO MARK W. DELAHAY 
 MARCH 16, 1860 
 
 Springfield, Ills— Mar— 16, 1860 
 Dear Delahay. 
 
 I have just returned from the East. Before leaving, I received 
 your letter of Feb. 6; and on my return I find those of the 17th. & 
 19th. with Genl. Lane's note inclosed in one of them. 
 
 I sincerely wish you could be elected one of the first Senators 
 for Kansas; but how to help you I do not know. If it were per- 
 missable [sic] for me to interfere, I am not personally acquainted 
 with a single member of your Legislature. If my known friend- 
 ship for you could be of any advantage, that friendship was 
 abundantly manifested by me last December while in Kansas. 
 If any member had written me, as you say some have Trumbull, 
 I would very readily answer him. I shall write Trumbull on the 
 subject at this sitting. 
 
 I understood, while in Kansas, that the State Legislature will 
 not meet until the State is admitted. Was that the right under- 
 standing? 
 
 As to your kind wishes for myself, allow me to say I can not 
 enter the ring on the money basis — first, because, in the main, it 
 
540 ABRAHAM LINCOLN: 
 
 is wrong; and secondly, I have not, and can not get, the money. 
 I say, in the main, the use of money is wrong; but for certain 
 objects, in a political contest, the use of some, is both right, and 
 indispensable. With me, as with yourself, this long struggle has 
 been one of great pecuniary loss. I now distinctly say this. If you 
 shall be appointed a delegate to Chicago, I will furnish one hun- 
 dred dollars to bear the expences [sic] of the trip. 
 
 Present my respects to Genl. Lane; and say to him, I shall 
 be pleased to hear from him at any time. 
 
 Your friend, as ever 
 
 A. Lincoln — 
 
 P. S. I have not yet taken the newspaper slip to the Journal. I 
 shall do that to-morrow; and then send you the paper as re- 
 quested. 
 
 A. L 
 
 Delahay's distant relationship to Lincoln (Delahay's 
 mother was a Hanks) and his early association with Lin- 
 coln in Illinois provided a friendship and political alli- 
 ance that some of Lincoln's biographers have deprecated 
 because of Delahay's personal shortcomings. The fact 
 that Lincoln trusted his friend's political principles, in 
 spite of shady personal traits, is obvious, although one 
 may read in this letter some misgivings on Lincoln's part 
 as to the propriety of financing Delahay's trip to Chicago. 
 In his allusion to Delahay's "pecuniary loss" in the 
 struggle, Lincoln probably had in mind the fact that 
 Delahay's newspaper office had been destroyed by a pro- 
 slavery mob. 
 
HIS SPEECHES AND WRITINGS 541 
 
 LETTER TO F. C. HERBURGER 
 APRIL 7, 1860 
 
 Springfield, Ills. April 7, 1860 
 F. C. Herburger Secy &c 
 Dear Sir 
 
 Yours of March 14th addressed to me at Chicago, and seek- 
 ing to arrange with me to Lecture for the Harrison Literary In- 
 stitute, has been received. I regret to say I can not make such 
 arrangement. I am not a professional lecturer — have never got 
 up but one lecture; and that, I think, rather a poor one. Besides, 
 what- time I can spare from my own business this season, I shall 
 be compelled to give to politics. 
 
 Respectfully yours, 
 
 A. Lincoln 
 
 Lincoln wrote almost identical letters to Herburger 
 and John M. Carson, Secretary and Chairman, respect- 
 tively, of the Committee on Lectures of the Harrison 
 Literary Institute, which was presumably in Chicago 
 but about which the editor has been able to learn noth- 
 ing. Another invitation to lecture had to be declined in 
 the interest of politics. 
 
542 ABRAHAM LINCOLN 
 
 LETTER TO LYMAN TRUMBULL 
 APRIL 29, 1860 
 
 Springfield, April 29. 1860 
 Hon: L. Trumbull: 
 My dear Sir: 
 
 Yours of the 24th. was duly received; and I have postponed 
 answering it, hoping by the result at Charleston, to know who 
 is to lead our adversaries, before writing. But Charleston hangs 
 fire, and I wait no longer. 
 
 As you request, I will be entirely frank. The taste is in my 
 mouth a little; and this, no doubt, disqualifies me, to some extent, 
 to form correct opinions. You may confidently rely, however, that 
 by no advice or consent of mine, shall my pretentions [sic] be 
 pressed to the point of endangering our common cause. 
 
 Now, as to my opinions about the chances of others in Illi- 
 nois. I think neither Seward nor Bates can carry Illinois if Doug- 
 las shall be on the track; and that either of them can, if he shall 
 not be. I rather think McLean could carry it with D. on or off — 
 in other words, I think McLean is stronger in Illinois, taking all 
 sections of it, than either S. or B; and I think S. the weakest of the 
 three. I hear no objection to McLean, except his age; but that 
 objection seems to occur to every one; and it is possible it might 
 leave him no stronger than the others. By the way, if we should 
 nominate him, how would we save to ourselves the chance of 
 filling his vacancy in the Court? Have him hold on up to the mo- 
 ment of his inaugeration [sic]? Would that course be no draw- 
 back upon us in the canvass? 
 
 Recurring to Illinois, we want something here quite as much 
 as, and which is harder to get than, the electoral vote — the Legis- 
 lature. And it is exactly in this point that Seward's nomination 
 would be hard upon us. Suppose he should gain us a thousand 
 votes in Winnebago, it would not compensate for the loss of fifty 
 in Edgar. 
 
HIS SPEECHES AND WRITINGS 543 
 
 A word now for your own special benefit. You better write 
 no letters which can possibly be distorted into opposition, or 
 quasi opposition to me. There are men on the constant watch for 
 such things out of which to prejudice my peculiar friends against 
 you. While I have no more suspicion of you than I have of my 
 best friend living, I am kept in a constant struggle against sug- 
 gestions of this sort. I have hesitated some to write this para- 
 graph, lest you should suspect I do it for my own benefit, and 
 not for yours; but on reflection I conclude you will not suspect me. 
 
 Let no eye but your own see this — not that there is anything 
 wrong, or even ungenerous, in it; but it would be misconstrued. 
 
 Your friend as ever 
 
 A. Lincoln 
 
 LETTER TO GEORGE ASHMUN 
 MAY 23, 1860 
 
 Springfield. Ills. May 23. 1860 
 Hon: George Ashmun: 
 
 President of the Republican National Convention. 
 Sir: 
 
 I accept the nomination tendered me by the convention over 
 which you presided, and of which I am formally apprised in the 
 letter of yourself and others, acting as a committee of the con- 
 vention, for that purpose. 
 
 The declaration of principles and sentiments, which accom- 
 panies your letter, meets my approval; and it shall be my care not 
 to violate or disregard it, in any part. 
 
 Imploring the assistance of Divine Providence, and with 
 due regard to the views and feelings of all who were represented 
 in the Convention; to the rights of all the states, and territories, 
 and people of the nation; to the inviolability of the Constitution, 
 and the perpetual union, harmony, and prosperity of all, I am most 
 
544 ABRAHAM LINCOLN: 
 
 happy to co-operate for the practical success of the principles 
 declared by the Convention. 
 
 Your obliged friend, and fellow citizen 
 
 A. Lincoln 
 
 LETTER TO SAMUEL HAYCRAFT 
 AND AUTOBIOGRAPHY. MAY 28, 1860 
 
 Springfield, Ills. May 28. 1860 
 Hon. Sam. Haycraft 
 Dear Sir: 
 
 Your recent letter, without date, is received. Also the copy 
 of your speech on the contemplated Daniel Boone Monument, 
 which I have not yet had time to read. In the main you are right 
 about my history. My father was Thomas Lincoln, and Mrs. 
 Sally Johnston, was his second wife. You are mistaken about my 
 mother — her maiden name was Nancy Hanks. I was not born at 
 Elizabethtown; but my mother's first child, a daughter, two years 
 older than myself, and now long since deceased, was. I was born 
 Feb. 12. 1809, near where Hogginsville [Hodgenville?] now is, 
 then in Hardin County. I do not think I ever saw you, though 
 I very well know who you are— so well that I recognized your 
 hand-writing, on opening your letter, before I saw the signature. 
 My recollection is that Ben. Helm was first Clerk, that you suc- 
 ceeded him, that Jack Thomas and William Farleigh graduated 
 in the same office, and that your handwritings were all very sim- 
 ilar. Am I right? 
 
 My father has been dead near ten years; but my step-mother 
 ( Mrs. Johnson [sic] ) is still living. 
 
 I am really very glad of your letter, and shall be pleased to 
 receive another at any time. 
 
 Yours very truly 
 
 A. Lincoln 
 
HIS SPEECHES AND WRITINGS 545 
 
 LETTER TO CHARLES C. NOTT 
 MAY 31, 1860 
 
 Springfield, Ills., May 31, 1860 
 Charles C. Nott, Esq. 
 My dear Sir: 
 
 Yours of the 23rd, accompanied by a copy of the speech de- 
 livered by me at the Cooper Institute, and upon which you have 
 made some notes for emendations, was received some days ago. 
 Of course I would not object to, but would be pleased rather, 
 with a more perfect edition of that speech. 
 
 I did not preserve memoranda of my investigations; and 
 I could not now re-examine, and make notes, without an expendi- 
 ture of time which I can not bestow upon it. Some of your notes I 
 do not understand. 
 
 So far as it is intended merely to improve in grammar, and 
 elegance of composition, I am quite agreed; but I do not wish the 
 sense changed, or modified, to a hair's breadth. And you, not hav- 
 ing studied the particular points so closely as I have, can not be 
 quite sure that you do not change the sense when you do not in- 
 tend it. For instance, in a note at bottom of first page, you propose 
 to substitute "Democrats" for "Douglas." But what I am saying 
 there is true of Douglas, and is not true of "Democrats" generally; 
 so that the proposed substitution would be a very considerable 
 blunder. Your proposed insertion of "residences" though it would 
 do little or no harm, is not at all necessary to the sense I was try- 
 ing to convey. On page 5 your proposed grammatical change 
 would certainly do no harm. The "impudently absurd" I stick to. 
 The striking out "he" and inserting "we" turns the sense exactly 
 wrong. The striking out "upon it" leaves the sense too general 
 and incomplete. The sense is "act as they acted upon that ques- 
 tion" — not as they acted generally. 
 
 After considering your proposed changes on page 7, I do 
 
546 ABRAHAM LINCOLN: 
 
 not think them material, but I am willing to defer to you in rela- 
 tion to them. 
 
 On page 9, striking out "to us" is probably right. The word 
 "lawyer's" I wish retained. The word "Courts" struck out twice, 
 I wish reduced to "Court" and retained. "Court" as a collection 
 more properly governs the plural "have" as I understand. "The" 
 preceding "Court," in the latter case, must also be retained. The 
 words "quite," "as," and "or" on the same page, I wish retained. 
 The italicising, and quotation marking, I have no objection to. 
 
 As to the note at bottom, I do not think any too much is ad- 
 mitted. What you propose on page 11 is right. I return your copy 
 of the speech, together with one printed here, under my own 
 hasty supervising. That at New York was printed without any 
 supervision by me. If you conclude to publish a new edition, 
 allow me to see the proof-sheets. 
 
 And now thanking you for your very complimentary letter, 
 and your interest for me generally, I subscribe myself. 
 
 Your friend and servant, 
 
 A. Lincoln 
 
 For the student interested in Lincoln's writings this 
 letter is of particular note. Herndons statement that 
 Lincoln would take no corrections which involved a 
 change in meaning or sentiment is fully borne out, 
 though he is ready to acquiesce in so far as corrections 
 of grammar are concerned. In the matter of grammar, 
 however, Lincoln was able to set his editors straight on 
 a point or two! 
 
HIS SPEECHES AND WRITINGS 547 
 
 SHORT AUTOBIOGRAPHY WRITTEN FOR 
 THE CAMPAIGN OF 1860. JUNE [1?], 1860 
 
 Abraham Lincoln was born February 12, 1809, then in Har- 
 din, now in the more recently formed county of La Rue, Ken- 
 tucky. 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 descend- 
 ants 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, remained 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 in- 
 formation of him or his family has been obtained. The eldest 
 sister, Mary, married Ralph Crume, and some of her descendants 
 are now known to be in Breckenridge County, Kentucky. The 
 second sister, Nancy, married William Brumfield, and her family 
 are not known to have left Kentucky, but there is no recent in- 
 formation from them. Thomas, the youngest son, and father of the 
 present subject, by the early death of his father, and very narrow 
 circumstances 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 
 
548 ABRAHAM LINCOLN: 
 
 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 
 ABC 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 1818, Abraham 
 then being in his eighth year. This removal was partly on account 
 of slavery, but chiefly on account of the difficulty 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 hunter, which 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 1818 his 
 mother died; and a year afterward his father married Mrs. Sally 
 Johnston, at Elizabethtown, Kentucky, a widow with three chil- 
 dren 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 con- 
 
HIS SPEECHES AND WRITINGS 549 
 
 tinued at the same place in Indiana till 1830. While here Abraham 
 went to A B C schools by littles, kept successively by Andrew 
 Crawford, — Sweeney, and Azel W. Dorsey. He does not remem- 
 ber 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 education he has picked up. After he was 
 twenty-three and had separated from his father, he studied Eng- 
 lish 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 appar- 
 ently 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 melee, but succeeded in driving the 
 negroes from the boat, and then "cut cable," "weighed anchor," 
 and left. 
 
 March 1, 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 home- 
 stead 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 west- 
 erly 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 
 
550 ABRAHAM LINCOLN: 
 
 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 stepmothers 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 off. 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 is the time and the manner of Abraham's first 
 entrance into Sangamon County. They found Offutt at Spring- 
 field, 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 Sanga- 
 mon 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 Abra- 
 ham, 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. Abraham's 
 father, with his own family and others mentioned, had, in pursu- 
 ance of their intention, removed from Macon to Coles County. 
 John D. Johnston, the stepmother's son, went to them, and Abra- 
 
HIS SPEECHES AND WRITINGS 551 
 
 ham 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. He 
 says he has not since had any success in life 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 im- 
 mediate 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 Abra- 
 ham 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 learning 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 sur- 
 veyor 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 to- 
 gether. The election of 1834 came, and he was then elected to the 
 legislature 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 
 
552 ABRAHAM LINCOLN: 
 
 Abraham [to] study law. After the election he borrowed books 
 of Stuart, took them home with him, and went at it in good earn- 
 est. 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 reelected 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 Sanga- 
 mon, briefly defined his position 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 Aboli- 
 tion 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 no 
 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." 
 
 Iri 1838 and 1840, Mr. Lincoln's party voted for him as 
 Speaker, but being in the minority he was not elected. After 1840 
 
HIS SPEECHES AND WRITINGS 553 
 
 he declined a reelection to the legislature. He was on the Harri- 
 son electoral ticket in 1840, and on that of Clay in 1844, and spent 
 much time and labor in both those canvasses. In November, 1842, 
 he was married to Mary, daughter of Robert S. Todd, of Lexing- 
 ton, 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 end- 
 ing with the inauguration of General Taylor, in March 1849. All 
 the battles of the Mexican war had been fought before Mr. Lin- 
 coln took his seat in Congress, but the American army was still 
 in Mexico, and the treaty of peace was not fully and formally 
 ratified till the June afterward. Much has been said of his course 
 in Congress in regard to this war. A careful examination of the 
 "Journal" and "Congressional 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 in- 
 habited by native Mexicans, born there under the Mexican gov- 
 ernment, and had never submitted to, nor been conquered by, 
 Texas or the United States, 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 
 
554 ABRAHAM LINCOLN: 
 
 the country where hostilities commenced, having once belonged 
 to Mexico, must remain so until it was somehow legally trans- 
 ferred, 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 boundary question. 
 
 Mr. Lincoln was not a candidate for reelection. This was 
 determined upon and declared before he went to Washington, 
 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 Washington, several 
 times in Massachusetts, and canvassing quite fully his own dis- 
 trict 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 of 
 politics in his mind, when the repeal of the Missouri Compromise 
 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 attention by turns to that and politics. The State agricul- 
 
HIS SPEECHES AND WRITINGS 555 
 
 tural 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 
 any part 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 news- 
 papers may have reported him as saying what is now ascribed to 
 him, but he thinks he could not have expressed himself as repre- 
 sented. 
 
 Campaign biographies were beginning to be an- 
 nounced by publishers as "authorized" by Lincoln. (See 
 "Letter to Samuel Galloway, 9 ' June 19, 1860.) Lincoln 
 prepared this sketch in third person with the understand- 
 ing that it would be followed explicitly in a biography 
 to be written by John L. Scripps. The original manu- 
 script is in the Robert Lincoln Collection in the Library 
 of Congress, which is unavailable to students until 1947 
 by reason of the stipulation in the bequest. 
 
 LETTER TO SAMUEL GALLOWAY 
 JUNE 19, 1860 
 
 Especially Confidential 
 
 Springfield, Ills. June 19. 1860 
 Hon: Saml. Galloway: 
 My dear Sir 
 
 Your very kind letter of the 15th. is received. Messrs. Follett, 
 Foster & Co's Life of me is not by my authority; and I have 
 scarcely been so much astounded by any thing, as by their public 
 announcement that it is authorized by me. They have fallen into 
 
556 ABRAHAM LINCOLN: 
 
 some strange misunderstanding. I certainly knew they contem- 
 plated publishing a biography; and I certainly did not object to 
 their doing so, upon their own responsibility. I even took pains to 
 facilitate them. But, at the same time, I made myself tiresome, if 
 not hoarse, with repeating to Mr. Howard, their only agent seen 
 by me, my protest that I authorized nothing — would be respon- 
 sible for nothing. How, they could so misunderstand me, passes 
 comprehension. As a matter, wholly my own, I would authorize 
 no biography, without time, and opertunity [sic] to carefully ex- 
 amine and consider every word of it; and, in this case, in the 
 nature of things, I can have no such time and opertunity [sic]. 
 But, in my present position, when, by the lessons of the past, 
 and the united voice of all discreet friends I can neither write or 
 speak a word for the public, how dare I to send forth, by my 
 authority, a volume of hundreds of pages, for adversaries to make 
 points upon without end. Were I to do so, the Convention would 
 have a right to re-assemble, and substitute another name for 
 mine. ■ 
 
 For these reasons, I would not look at the proof sheets. I am 
 determined to maintain the position of of [sic] truly saying I 
 never saw the proof sheets, or any part of their work, before it's 
 publication. 
 
 Now, do not mistake me. I feel great Kindness for Messrs F. F. 
 & Co — do not think they have intentionally done wrong. There 
 may be nothing wrong in their proposed book. I sincerely hope 
 there will not. I barely suggest that you, or any of the friends 
 there, on the party account, look it over, & exclude what you may 
 think would embarrass the party — bearing in mind, at all times, 
 that I authorize nothing — will be responsible for nothing. 
 
 Your friend, as ever 
 
 A. Lincoln 
 
 The biography referred to in this letter is the one 
 written by William Dean Howells, who was at the time 
 an editorial writer on the Ohio State Journal at Columbus. 
 Howells had access to a copy of the sketch Lincoln wrote 
 for Scripps, which was given to James Q. Howard, an 
 
HIS SPEECHES AND WRITINGS 557 
 
 agent sent to Springfield by Howells for the purpose of 
 collecting material. Lincoln later read and corrected a 
 copy of Howells' s book belonging to Samuel C. Parks, 
 which has been published in facsimile by The Abraham 
 Lincoln Association (1938). 
 
 LETTER TO ABRAHAM JONAS 
 JULY 21, 1860 
 
 Confidential 
 
 Springfield, Ills. July 21. 1860 
 Hon. A. Jonas 
 My dear Sir 
 
 Yours of the 20th. is received. I suppose as good, or even bet- 
 ter, men than I may have been in American, or Know-Nothing 
 lodges; but in point of fact, I never was in one, at Quincy, or 
 elsewhere. I was never in Quincy but one day and two nights, 
 while Know-Nothing lodges were in existence, and you were 
 with me that day and both those nights. I had never been there 
 before in my life; and never afterwards, till the joint debate with 
 Douglas in 1858. It was in 1854, when I spoke in some Hall there, 
 and after the speaking, you, with others, took me to an oyster 
 saloon, passed an hour there, and you walked with me to, and 
 parted with me at, the Quincy-House, quite late at night. I left 
 by stage for Naples before day-light in the morning, having come 
 in by the same route, after dark, the evening previous to the 
 speaking, when I found you waiting at the Quincy House to meet 
 me. A few days after I was there, Richardson, as I understood, 
 started this same story about my having been in a Know-Nothing 
 lodge. When I heard of the charge, as I did soon after, I taxed 
 my recollection for some incident which could have suggested it; 
 and I remembered that on parting with you the last night, I went 
 to the Office of the Hotel to take my stage passage for the morning, 
 
558 ABRAHAM LINCOLN: 
 
 was told that no stage office for that line was kept there, and 
 that I must see the driver, before retiring, to insure his calling 
 for me in the morning; and a servant was sent with me to find 
 the driver, who after taking me a square or two, stopped me, 
 and stepped perhaps a dozen steps farther, and in my hearing 
 called to some one, who answered him apparently from the 
 upper part of a building, and promised to call with the stage for 
 me at the Quincy House. I returned and went to bed; and before 
 day the stage called and took me. This is all. 
 
 That I never was in a Know-Nothing lodge in Quincy, I 
 should expect, could be easily proved, by respectable men, who 
 were always in the lodges and never saw me there. 
 
 An affidavit of one or two such would put the matter at rest. 
 
 And now, a word of caution. Our adversaries think they can 
 gain a point, if they could force me to openly deny the charge, 
 by which some degree of offence would be given to the Ameri- 
 cans. For this reason, it must not publicly appear that I am pay- 
 ing any attention to the charge. 
 
 Yours truly 
 
 A. Lincoln 
 
 Abraham Jonas of Jonas &■ Asbury, attorneys, 
 Quincy, Illinois, was an English Jew, a prominent 
 Mason, and a political organizer among the Jews. His 
 friendship with Lincoln was of long standing, and hence 
 Lincoln felt that he could he trusted to handle the deli- 
 cate political matter referred to. Lincoln had repeatedly 
 and publicly expressed his opposition to Know-Nothing 
 principles, but he did not wish to antagonize the Know- 
 Nothings who had "fused" with other dissidents in form- 
 ing the Republican party. 
 
HIS SPEECHES AND WRITINGS 559 
 
 LETTER TO GEORGE LATHAM 
 JULY 22, 1860 
 
 Springfield Ills July 22. 1860. 
 My dear George 
 
 I have scarcely felt greater pain in my life than on learning 
 yesterday from Bob's letter, that you had failed to enter Harvard 
 University. And yet there is very little in it, if you will allow no 
 feeling of discouragement to seize, and prey upon you. It is a 
 certain truth, that you can enter, and graduate in, Harvard Uni- 
 versity; and having made the attempt, you must succeed in it. 
 'Must' is the word. 
 
 I know not how to aid you, save in the assurance of one of 
 mature age, and much severe experience, that you can not fail, if 
 you resolutely determine, that you will not. 
 
 The President of the institution, can scarcely be other than 
 a kind man; and doubtless he would grant you an interview, and 
 point out the readiest way to remove, or overcome, the obstacles 
 which have thwarted you. 
 
 In your temporary failure there is no evidence that you may 
 not yet be a better scholar, and a more successful man in the 
 great struggle of life, than many others, who have entered col- 
 lege more easily. 
 
 Again I say let no feeling of discouragement prey upon you, 
 and in the end you are sure to succeed. 
 
 With more than a common interest I subscribe myself 
 
 Very truly your friend 
 
 A. Lincoln 
 
 Here Lincoln writes to a school friend of his son 
 Robert. George and Robert attended Exeter together, 
 and in March, 1860, had accompanied Lincoln from 
 Exeter to Concord, where Lincoln had a speaking en- 
 
560 ABRAHAM LINCOLN: 
 
 gagement on his New England tour. The following year 
 George was a member of the Presidential party on the 
 way to Washington. A remarkable glimpse into Lincoln's 
 inner self is revealed in this letter. More succinctly 
 and poignantly than any other statement, it reveals the 
 quality of spirit which underlies all that Lincoln 
 achieved. 
 
 LETTER TO CHARLES C. NOTT 
 SEPTEMBER 22, 1860 
 
 Springfield, Ills., Sept. 22, 1860. 
 Charles C. Nott, Esq., 
 My dear Sir: 
 
 Yours of the 17th was duly received. The 250 copies have 
 not yet arrived. I am greatly obliged to you for what you have 
 done, and what you propose to do. 
 
 The "Abraham Baldwin letter" in substance was that I could 
 not find the Journal of the Confederation Congress for the ses- 
 sion at which was passed the Ordinance of 1787 — and that in 
 stating Mr. Baldwin had voted for its passage, I had relied on a 
 communication of Mr. Greeley over his own signature, published 
 in the New York Weekly Tribune of October 15, 1859. If you 
 will turn to that paper, you will there see that Mr. Greeley ap- 
 parently copies from the Journal, and places the name of Mr. 
 Baldwin among those of the men who voted for the measure. 
 
 Still, if the Journal itself shows differently, of course it is 
 right. 
 
 Yours very truly, 
 
 A. Lincoln. 
 
HIS SPEECHES AND WRITINGS 561 
 
 LETTER TO MRS. M. J. GREEN 
 SEPTEMBER 22, 1860 
 
 Springfield, Ills. Sep. 22. 1860 
 Mrs. M. J. Green 
 My Dear Madam. 
 
 Your kind congratulatory letter, of August, was received in 
 due course — and should have been answered sooner. The truth is 
 I have never corresponded much with ladies; and hence I post- 
 pone writing letters to them, as a business which I do not under- 
 stand. I can only say now I thank you for the good opinion 
 you express of me, fearing, at the same time, I may not be able to 
 maintain it through life. 
 
 Yours very truly 
 
 A. Lincoln. 
 
 LETTER TO MISS GRACE BEDELL 
 OCTOBER 19, 1860 
 
 Private 
 
 Springfield, Ills. Oct 19. 1860 
 Miss. Grace Bedell 
 My dear little Miss. 
 
 Your very agreeable letter of the 15th. is received. 
 
 I regret the necessity of saying I have no daughters. I have 
 three sons — one seventeen, one nine, and one seven, years of age. 
 They, with their mother, constitute my whole family. 
 
 As to the whiskers, having never worn any, do you not think 
 
562 ABRAHAM LINCOLN: 
 
 people would call it a piece of silly affection [sic] if I were to 
 begin it now — ? 
 
 Your very sincere well-wisher 
 
 A. Lincoln. 
 
 The communication which called forth this letter is 
 as interesting as Lincoln's reply: 
 
 "NY 
 "Westfield Chatauqua Co 
 "Oct 15, 1860 
 "Hon A B Lincoln 
 "Dear Sir 
 
 "My father has just home from the fair and brought 
 home your picture and Mr. Hamlin's. I am a little girl only 
 eleven years old, hut want you should be President of the 
 United States very much so I hope you wont think me 
 very bold to write to such a great man as you are. Have 
 you any little girls about as large as I am if so give 
 them my love and tell her to write to me, if you cannot 
 answer this letter. I have got 4 [?] brothers and part of 
 them will vote for you anyway and if you will let your 
 whiskers grow I will try and get the rest of them to vote 
 for you you would look a great deal better for your face 
 is so thin. All the ladies like whiskers and they would 
 tease their husbands to vote for you and then you would 
 be President. My father is agoing to vote for you to but 
 I will try and get every one to vote for you that I can 
 think that rail fence around your picture makes it look 
 very pretty I have got a little baby sister she is nine 
 weeks old and is just as cunning as can be. When you 
 direct your letter diret [sic] to Grace Bedell Westfield 
 Chatauqua County New York. 
 
 "I must not write any more answer this letter right 
 off Good bye 
 
 "Grace Bedell" 
 
HIS SPEECHES AND WRITINGS 563 
 
 LETTER TO GEORGE T. M. DAVIS 
 OCTOBER 27, 1860 
 
 Private ir confidential. 
 
 Springfield, Ills. Oct. 27. 1860 
 Geo. T. M. Davis, Esq 
 My dear Sir: 
 
 Mr. Dubois has shown me your letter of the 20th.; and I 
 promised him to write you. What is it I could say which would 
 quiet alarm? Is it that no interference by the government, with 
 slaves or slavery within the states, is intended? I have said this so 
 often already, that a repetition of it is but mockery, bearing an 
 appearance of weakness, and cowardice, which perhaps should 
 be avoided. Why do not uneasy men read what I have already 
 said? and what our platform says? If they will not read, or heed, 
 then, would they read, or heed, a repetition of them? Of course 
 the declaration that there is no intention to interfere with slaves 
 or slavery, in the states, with all that is fairly implied in such 
 declaration, is true; and I should have no objection to make, and 
 repeat the declaration a thousand times, if there were no danger 
 of encouraging bold bad men to believe they are dealing with one 
 who can be scared into anything. 
 
 I have some reason to believe the Sub-National Committee, 
 at the Astor House, may be considering this question; and if their 
 judgment should be different from mine, mine might be modified 
 by theirs. 
 
 Yours very truly 
 
 A. Lincoln. 
 
 George Turnbull Moore Davis was a well-to-do 
 New York business man at the time this letter was writ- 
 ten. In early life he had worked on the staff of the 
 Louisville Courier Journal and practiced law in Alton, 
 
564 ABRAHAM LINCOLN: 
 
 Illinois, where he was one of the defenders of the pioneer 
 abolitionists associated with Elijah P. Lovejoy, who was 
 killed defending his press in 18S7. At the close of the 
 Mexican War — in which he volunteered, rose to the 
 rank of Colonel, and acted as General Quitman's Secre- 
 tary of State during his Governorship of Mexico City— 
 he became chief clerk in the War Department at Wash- 
 ington. From Washington he went to New York and 
 entered business. He became connected with several 
 Western railroads, and was, at his death in 1888, vice- 
 president of the Adirondack Railroad. (Autobiography 
 of the Late Colonel George T. M. Davis, pp. 390-91.) 
 
 LETTER TO H. J. RAYMOND 
 NOVEMBER 28, 1860 
 
 Private &- Confidential 
 
 Springfield, Ills. Nov. 28. 1860 
 Hon. H. J. Raymond 
 My dear Sir 
 
 Yours of the 14th. was received in due course. I have delayed 
 so long to answer it, because my reasons for not coming before 
 the public in any form just now, had substantially appeared in 
 your paper (The Times), and hence I feared they were not 
 deemed sufficient by you, else you would not have written me as 
 you did. 
 
 I now think we have a demonstration in favor of my view. 
 On the 20th. Inst. Senator Trumbull made a short speech which 
 I suppose you have both seen and approved. Has a single news- 
 paper, heretofore against us, urged that speech [upon its readers] 
 with a purpose to quiet public anxiety? Not one, so far as I know. 
 On the contrary the Boston Courier, and it's class, hold me 
 responsible for the speech, and endeavor to inflame the North 
 
HIS SPEECHES AND WRITINGS 565 
 
 with the belief that it foreshadows an abandonment of Repub- 
 lican ground by the incoming administration; while the Washing- 
 ton Constitution, and it's class hold the same speech up to the 
 South as an open declaration of war against them. 
 
 This is just as I expected, and just what would happen with 
 any declaration I could make. These political fiends are not half 
 sick enough yet. "Party malice" and not "public good" possesses 
 them entirely. "They seek a sign, and no sign shall be given them." 
 At least such is my present feeling and purpose. 
 
 [Signature cut off] 
 
 Raymond was editor of the New York Times and 
 had been Seward's staunch supporter for the nomination. 
 Upon Lincoln's election, he felt that a statement should 
 be issued to clarify the intentions of the newly-elected 
 President. Lincoln's policy of saying nothing is fully 
 explained here, and was held to strictly until his in- 
 auguration. 
 
 Raymond's note on the manuscript specifies that 
 "the signature was cut off to oblige a friend with an 
 autograph." 
 
 LETTER TO WILLIAM KELLOGG 
 DECEMBER 11, 1860 
 
 Private & Confidential 
 
 Springfield, Ills, Dec. 11. 1860 
 Hon. William Kellogg. 
 My dear Sir — 
 
 Entertain no proposition for a compromise in regard to the 
 extension of slavery. The instant you do, they have us under again; 
 all our labor is lost, and sooner or later must be done over. Douglas 
 
566 ABRAHAM LINCOLN: 
 
 is sure to be again trying to bring in his "Pop. Sov." Have none of 
 it. The tug has to come & better now than later. 
 
 You know I think the fugitive slave clause of the constitution 
 ought to be enforced — to put it in the mildest form, ought not to 
 be resisted. In haste 
 
 Yours as ever 
 
 A. Lincoln 
 
 In spite of Lincoln s insistence, Kellogg proceeded 
 in the following February to introduce a Compromise 
 Bill to amend the Constitution so that slaves could be 
 taken into any territory south of 36° 3(7. Kelloggs 
 closeness to Lincoln politically occasioned much specu- 
 lation that Lincoln was leaning toward compromise, but 
 Kellogg stated his sole responsibility on the floor of 
 the House of Representatives. For a detailed account 
 of Kelloggs association with Lincoln, see "The Recollec- 
 tions of William Pitt Kellogg," edited by Paul M. Angle, 
 in The Abraham Lincoln Quarterly. 
 
 LETTER TO JOHN D. DEFREES 
 DECEMBER 18, 1860 
 
 Confidential 
 
 Springfield Ills. Dec. 18. 1860 
 Hon. Jno. D. Defrees. 
 My dear Sir 
 
 Yours of the 15th. is received. I am sorry any republican 
 inclines to dally with Pop. Sov. of any sort. It acknowledges 
 that slavery has equal rights with liberty, and surrenders all we 
 have contended for. Once fastened on us as a settled policy, fili- 
 
HIS SPEECHES AND WRITINGS 567 
 
 blistering for all South of us, and making slave states of it, follows 
 in spite of us, with an early Supreme Court decision, holding our 
 free-state constitutions to be unconstitutional. 
 
 Would Scott or Stephens go into the Cabinet? And if yes, 
 on what terms? Do they come to me? or I go to them? or are we 
 to lead off in open hostility to each other? 
 
 Yours truly 
 
 A. Lincoln 
 
 Defrees was a native of South Bend, Indiana, where 
 he edited a newspaper until 1854. Politician and Repub- 
 lican party man, he was appointed government printer 
 by Lincoln, March 23, 1861. The well-known incident of 
 his tilt with Lincoln over the diction of Lincoln's first 
 "Message to Congress in Special Session' has been told 
 in "Lincoln's Development as a Writer." 
 
 LETTER TO A. H. STEPHENS 
 DECEMBER 22, 1860 
 
 For your own eye only 
 
 Springfield, Ills. Dec. 22. 1860 
 Hon. A. H. Stephens — 
 My dear Sir 
 
 Your obliging answer to my short note is just received, and 
 for which please accept my thanks. I fully appreciate the present 
 peril the country is in, and the weight of responsibility on me. 
 
 Do the people of the South really entertain fears that a 
 Republican administration would, directly, or indirectly, interfere 
 with their slaves, or with them, about their slaves? If they do, I 
 wish to assure you, as once a friend, and still, I hope, not an 
 enemy, that there is no cause for such fears. 
 
568 ABRAHAM LINCOLN: 
 
 The South would be in no more danger in this respect, than 
 it was in the days of Washington. I suppose, however, this does not 
 meet the case. You think slavery is right, and ought to be ex- 
 tended; while we think it is wrong and ought to be restricted. 
 That I suppose is the rub. It certainly is the only substantial dif- 
 ference between us. 
 
 Yours very truly 
 
 A. Lincoln 
 
 At the time of this letter Stephens was still support- 
 ing the Union, but when Georgia seceded on January 
 17, 1861 — in spite of Stephens's efforts — his loyalty went 
 with his State. 
 
 FAREWELL ADDRESS AT SPRINGFIELD, ILLINOIS 
 FEBRUARY 11, 1861 
 
 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 cen- 
 tury, and have passed from a young to an old man. Here my chil- 
 dren have been born, and one is buried. 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. Trusting 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 commend- 
 ing you, as I hope in your prayers you will commend me, I bid you 
 an affectionate farewell. 
 
HIS SPEECHES AND WRITINGS 569 
 
 The text of this address is from the Complete Works 
 of Abraham Lincoln. The manuscript is purported to he 
 in the Robert Lincoln Collection in the Library of Con- 
 gress. According to Nicolay's account in Abraham Lin- 
 coln: A History, Vol. Ill, p. 291 n., it was written out 
 on the train after the departure from Springfield, partly 
 by Lincoln and partly by Nicolay from Lincoln's dicta- 
 tion. 
 
 In view of Lincoln's general style, most of the dif- 
 ferences between this version and the versions printed in 
 newspapers at the time seem to be differences which Lin- 
 coln would have brought about in writing it out. This 
 version tends to enhance the alliterative sequences and to 
 strengthen the rhythm pattern, both of which are appar- 
 ent even in the newspaper versions. This is entirely in 
 keeping with Lincoln's usual practice. 
 
 Of the several newspaper versions, two are interest- 
 ing for purposes of comparison. The first is the version 
 which was published in the Illinois State Journal, Febru- 
 ary 12, 1861, and the second is the version of a contem- 
 porary broadside, published by the American News 
 Company of New York, which is in all but a few marks 
 of punctuation identical with the version which appeared 
 in Harper's Weekly and various eastern newspapers. The 
 two versions are as follows: 
 
 "Friends: 
 
 "No one who has never been placed in a like posi- 
 tion, can understand my feelings at this hour, nor the 
 oppressive sadness I feel at this parting. For more than 
 a quarter of a century I have lived among you, and dur- 
 ing all that time I have received nothing but kindness at 
 your hands. Here I have lived from my youth until now 
 I am an old man. Here the most sacred ties of earth were 
 assumed; here all my children were born; and here one 
 of them lies buried. To you, dear friends, I owe all that I 
 have, all that I am. All the strange, chequered past seems 
 
570 ABRAHAM LINCOLN: 
 
 to crowd now upon my mind. To-day I leave you; 1 go 
 to assume a task more difficult than that which devolved 
 upon general Washington. Unless the great God who 
 assisted him, shall be with and aid me, I must jail. But 
 if the same omniscient mind, and Almighty arm that 
 directed and protected him, shall guide and support me, 
 I shall not fail, I shall succeed. Let us all pray that the 
 God of our fathers may not forsake us now. To him I 
 commend you all — permit me to ask that with equal 
 security and faith, you all will invoke His wisdom and 
 guidance for me. With these few words I must leave 
 you — for how long I know not. Friends, one and all, I 
 must now bid you an affectionate farewell." 
 
 "My Friends: 
 
 "No one not in my position can appreciate the sad- 
 ness I feel at this parting. To this people I owe all that I 
 am. Here I have lived more than a quarter of a century; 
 here my children were born, and here one of them lies 
 buried. I know not how soon I shall see you again. A 
 duty devolves upon me which is, perhaps, greater than 
 that which devolved upon any other man since the days 
 of Washington. He never would have succeeded except 
 for the aid of Divine Providence, upon which he at all 
 times relied. I feel that I cannot succeed without the 
 same Divine aid which sustained him, and on the same 
 Almighty Being I place my reliance for support, and I 
 hope you, my friends, will all pray that I may receive that 
 Divine assistance without which I cannot succeed, but 
 with which success is certain. Again I bid you an affec- 
 tionate farewell." 
 
HIS SPEECHES AND WRITINGS 571 
 
 SPEECH AT INDIANAPOLIS, INDIANA 
 FEBRUARY 11, 1861 
 
 Fellow-Citizens of the State of Indiana: 
 
 I am here to thank you much for this magnificent welcome, 
 and still more for the very generous support given by your State 
 to that political cause which I think is the true and just cause of 
 the whole country and the whole world. Solomon says, "There is 
 a time to keep silence," and when men wrangle by the month with 
 no certainty that they mean the same thing while using the same 
 word, it perhaps were as well if they would keep silence. The 
 words "coercion" and "invasion" are much used in these days, and 
 often with some temper and hot blood. Let us make sure, if we 
 can, that we do not misunderstand the meaning of those who use 
 them. Let us get the exact definitions of these words, not from 
 dictionaries, but from the men themselves, who certainly deprecate 
 the things they would represent by the use of the words. What, 
 then, is "coercion?" What is "invasion?" Would the marching of 
 an army into South Carolina, without the consent of her people, 
 and with hostile intent toward them be invasion? I certainly think 
 it would; and it would be "coercion" also if the South Carolinians 
 were forced to submit. But if the United States should merely hold 
 and retake its own forts and other property, and collect the duties 
 on foreign importations, or even withhold the mails from places 
 where they were habitually violated, would any or all these things 
 be "invasion" or "coercion?" Do our professed lovers of the Union, 
 but who spitefully resolve that they will resist coercion and inva- 
 sion, understand that such things as these on the part of the 
 United States would be coercion or invasion of a State? If so, their 
 idea of means to preserve the object of their great affection would 
 seem to be exceedingly thin and airy. If sick, the little pills of the 
 homeopathist would be much too large for it to swallow. In their 
 view, the Union, as a family relation, would seem to be no regular 
 marriage, but rather a sort of free-love arrangement, to be main- 
 
572 ABRAHAM LINCOLN: 
 
 tained only on passional attraction. By the way, in what consists 
 the special sacredness of a State? I speak not of the position 
 assigned to a State in the Union by the Constitution, for that by 
 the bond we all recognize. That position, however, a State cannot 
 carry out of the Union with it. I speak of that assumed primary 
 right of a State to rule all which is less than itself, and to ruin all 
 which is larger than itself. If a State and a county, in a given 
 case, should be equal in extent of territory and equal in number of 
 inhabitants, in what, as a matter of principle, is the State better 
 than the county? Would an exchange of names be an exchange of 
 rights? Upon principle, on what rightful principle, may a State, 
 being no more than one-fiftieth part of the nation in soil and popu- 
 lation, break up the nation and then coerce a proportionably larger 
 subdivision of itself in the most arbitrary way? What mysterious 
 right to play tyrant is conferred on a district of country with its 
 people by merely calling it a State? Fellow-citizens, I am not 
 asserting anything. I am merely asking questions for you to con- 
 sider. And now allow me to bid you farewell. 
 
 ADDRESS TO GERMANS AT CINCINNATI, OHIO 
 FEBRUARY 12, 1861 
 
 Mr. Chairman: 
 
 I thank you and those whom you represent, for the compli- 
 ment you have paid me, by tendering me this address. In so far as 
 there is an allusion to our present national difficulties, which 
 expresses, as you have said, the views of the gentlemen present, 
 I shall have to beg pardon for not entering fully upon the ques- 
 tions which the address you have now read suggests. 
 
 I deem it my duty — a duty which I owe to my constituents 
 — to you, gentlemen, that I should wait until the last moment, for 
 a development of the present national difficulties, before I express 
 
HIS SPEECHES AND WRITINGS 573 
 
 myself decidedly what course I shall pursue. I hope, then, not to 
 be false to anything that you have to expect of me. 
 
 I agree with you, Mr. Chairman, that the working men are the 
 basis of all governments, for the plain reason that they are the 
 more numerous, and as you added that those were the sentiments 
 of the gentlemen present, representing not only the working class, 
 but citizens of other callings than those of the mechanic, I am 
 happy to concur with you in these sentiments, not only for the 
 native-born citizens, but also of the Germans and foreigners from 
 other countries. 
 
 Mr. Chairman, I hold that while man exists, it is his duty to 
 improve not only his own condition, but to assist in ameliorating 
 mankind; and therefore, without entering upon the details of the 
 question, I will simply say that I am for those means which will 
 give the greatest good to the greatest number. 
 
 In regard to the Homestead law, I have to say that in so far 
 as the Government lands can be disposed of, I am in favor of cut- 
 ting up the wild lands into parcels, so that every poor man may 
 have a home. 
 
 In regard to the Germans and foreigners, I esteem them no 
 better than other people, nor any worse. It is not my nature, when 
 I see a people borne down by the weight of their shackles — the 
 oppression of tyranny — to make their life more bitter by heaping 
 upon them greater burdens; but rather would I do all in my power 
 to raise the yoke, than to add anything that would tend to crush 
 them. 
 
 Inasmuch as our country is extensive and new, and the coun- 
 tries of Europe are densely populated, if there are any abroad 
 who desire to make this the land of their adoption, it is not in my 
 heart to throw aught in their way, to prevent them from coming 
 to the United States. 
 
 Mr. Chairman, and Gentlemen, I will bid you an affectionate 
 farewell. 
 
 The correspondent of the New York Daily Tribune 
 gives the circumstances of this address as follows: "In 
 the evening, Mr. Lincoln submitted to a public reception, 
 
574 ABRAHAM LINCOLN: 
 
 which he prolonged further than his friends would have 
 desired, but which was less severe than that at Indianap- 
 olis. During the evening a German club visited the 
 hotel in a torchlight procession. Mr. Lincoln was ad- 
 dressed on behalf of the Club by Fred Oberline, esq., 
 and Mr. Lincoln replied as follows": [Address], 
 
 ADDRESS TO THE SENATE OF NEW JERSEY 
 FEBRUARY 21, 1861 
 
 Mr. President and Gentlemen of the Senate of the State of New- 
 Jersey: 
 
 I am very grateful to you for the honorable reception of 
 which I have been the object. I cannot but remember the place 
 that New- Jersey holds in our early history. In the early Revolu- 
 tionary struggle, few of the States among the old Thirteen had 
 more of the battle-fields of the country within their limits than old 
 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' Life of Washington." I remem- 
 ber all the accounts 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 Hessians; 
 the great hardships endured at that time, all fixed themselves on 
 my memory more than any single revolutionary event; and you 
 all know, for you have all been boys, how these 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 those men struggled for. I am exceedingly anxious 
 that that thing which they struggled for; that something even 
 more than National Independence; that something that held out 
 
HIS SPEECHES AND WRITINGS 575 
 
 a great promise to all the people of the world to all time to come; 
 I am exceedingly anxious that this Union, the Constitution, and 
 the liberties of the people shall be perpetuated in accordance 
 with the original idea for which that struggle was made, and I 
 shall be most happy indeed if I shall be an 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 composed of a majority of gentlemen who, 
 in the exercise of their best judgment in the choice of a Chief 
 Magistrate, did not think I was the man. I understand, neverthe- 
 less, that they came forward here to greet me as the constitutional 
 President of the United States — as citizens of the United States, 
 to meet the man who, for the time being, is the representative man 
 of the nation, united by a purpose to perpetuate the Union and 
 liberties of the people. As such, I accept this reception more grate- 
 fully than I could do did I believe it was tendered to me as an 
 individual. 
 
 ADDRESS TO THE ASSEMBLY OF NEW JERSEY 
 FEBRUARY 21, 1861 
 
 Mr. Speaker and Gentlemen: 
 
 I have just enjoyed the honor of a reception by the other 
 branch of this Legislature, and I return to you and them my 
 thanks for the reception which the people of New-Jersey have 
 given, through their chosen representatives, to me, as the repre- 
 sentative, for the time being, of the majesty of the people of the 
 United States. I appropriate to myself very little of the demon- 
 strations of respect with which I have been greeted. I think little 
 should be given to any man, but that it should be a manifestation 
 of adherence to the Union and the Constitution. I understand my- 
 self to be received here by the representatives of the people of 
 
576 ABRAHAM LINCOLN: 
 
 New-Jersey, a majority of whom differ in opinion from those with 
 whom I have acted. This manifestation is therefore to be regarded 
 by me as expressing their devotion to the Union, the Constitu- 
 tion and the liberties of the people. 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 arrives in which 
 I must speak officially, I shall be able to take the ground which I 
 deem the best and safest, and from which I may have no occa- 
 sion 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 settlement 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. And if I do my duty, and do right, you will sus- 
 tain me, will you not? (Loud cheers, and cries of "Yes," "Yes," 
 "We will.") Received, as I am, by the members of a Legislature the 
 majority of whom do not agree with me in political sentiments, I 
 trust that I may have their assistance in piloting the ship of State 
 through this voyage, surrounded by perils as it is; for, if it should 
 suffer wreck now, there will be no pilot ever needed for another 
 voyage. 
 
 Gentlemen, I have already spoken longer than I intended, 
 and I must beg leave to stop here. 
 
HIS SPEECHES AND WRITINGS 577 
 
 ADDRESS IN INDEPENDENCE HALL, PHILADELPHIA 
 FEBRUARY 22, 1861 
 
 Mr. Cuyler: 
 
 I am filled with deep emotion at finding myself standing here, 
 in this place, where were collected together the wisdom, the 
 patriotism, the devotion to principle, from which sprang the insti- 
 tutions under which we live. You have kindly suggested to me that 
 in my hands is the task of restoring peace to the present distracted 
 condition of the country. I can say in return, Sir, that all the politi- 
 cal sentiments I entertain have been drawn, so far as I have been 
 able to draw them, from the sentiments which originated and 
 were given to the world from this hall. I have never had a feeling 
 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 of Independence. 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 long together. It was not the mere matter of 
 the separation of the Colonies from the motherland; but that senti- 
 ment in the Declaration of Independence which gave liberty, not 
 alone to the people of this country, but, I hope, to the world, 
 for all future time. It was that which gave promise that in due time 
 the weight would be lifted from the shoulders of all men. This is 
 a sentiment embodied in the Declaration of Independence. Now, 
 my friends, can this country be saved upon 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 need be no bloodshed or war. 
 
578 ABRAHAM LINCOLN: 
 
 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 
 be forced upon the Government, and then it will be compelled to 
 act in self-defense. 
 
 My friends, this is wholly an unexpected speech, and I did 
 not expect to be called upon to say a word when I came here. I 
 supposed it was merely to do something toward raising the flag. 
 I may, therefore, have said something indiscreet. (Cries of "No, 
 no") I have said nothing but what I am willing to live by and, if 
 it be the pleasure of Almighty God, die by. 
 
 The New York Daily Tribune's account of the cir- 
 cumstances attending this address runs in part as follows: 
 "At 7 o'clock Mr, Lincoln was escorted to the Hall, and 
 there received by Theodore Cuyler, who warmly wel- 
 comed him to its venerable walls in the hour of national 
 peril and distress, when the great work achieved by the 
 wisdom and patriotism of our fathers seems threatened 
 by instant ruin. Mr. Lincoln responded as follows': 
 [Address], 
 
 "Mr. Lincoln concluded amid great applause. The 
 members of the City Council paid their respects to him, 
 and the procession moved directly toward the platform 
 erected in front of the State-House . . . 
 
 "Mr. Benton of the Select Council made a brief 
 address inviting Mr. Lincoln to raise the flag. 
 
 "Mr. Lincoln replied in a patriotic speech, stating a 
 cheerful compliance with the request. He alluded to the 
 original flag of thirteen stars, saying that the number had 
 increased as time rolled on, and we became a happy, 
 powerful people, each star adding to its prosperity. The 
 future is in the hands of the people. It was on such an 
 occasion we could reason together, reaffirm our devotion 
 to the country, and the principles of the Declaration of 
 Independence. Let us make up our minds that when- 
 
HIS SPEECHES AND WRITINGS 579 
 
 ever we do put a new star upon our banner, it shall be a 
 fixed one, never to be dimmed by the horrors of war, but 
 brightened by the contentment and prosperity of peace. 
 Let us go on to extend the area of our usefulness, add star 
 upon star until their light shall shine over five hundred 
 millions of a free and happy people. [Lincoln's estimates 
 on prospective population, both here and in the "Mess- 
 age to Congress" December 1, 1862, were natural enough 
 at the time. Immigration was rapid and unrestricted, the 
 birthrate high, and the average increase per decade for 
 several decades past indicated Lincoln's figure as entirely 
 probable within a century.] 
 
 "Mr. Lincoln then threw off his overcoat in an off- 
 hand, easy manner, the backwoodsian style of which 
 caused many good-natured remarks. 
 
 "The Rev. Mr. Clark addressed the Throne of Grace 
 in an impressive prayer, many spectators uncovering 
 themselves, when the flag was rolled up in a man-of-war 
 style, then adjusted, a signal fired, and, amid the most 
 excited enthusiasm, the President elect hoisted the na- 
 tional ensign. A stiff breeze caught the folded bunting 
 and threw it out boldly to the winds. Cheer followed 
 cheer, until hoarseness prevented continuance." 
 
 FIRST INAUGURAL ADDRESS 
 MARCH 4, 1861 
 
 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 
 presence, the oath prescribed by the Constitution of the United 
 States, to be taken by the President "before he enters on the exe- 
 cution of his office." 
 
 I do not consider it necessary at present for me to discuss 
 
580 ABRAHAM LINCOLN: 
 
 those matters of administration about which there is no special 
 anxiety or excitement. 
 
 Apprehension seems to exist among the people of the South- 
 ern States, that by the accession of a Republican Administration, 
 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 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 inter- 
 fere 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." Those who nominated and elected me did so with full 
 knowledge that I had made this, and many similar 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 emphatic 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 exclu- 
 sively, is essential to that balance of power on which the perfec- 
 tion 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, consis- 
 tently 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 provisions: 
 
HIS SPEECHES AND WRITINGS 581 
 
 "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 was intended 
 by those who made it, for the reclaiming of what we call fugitive 
 slaves; and the intention of the law-giver 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 safe- 
 guards of liberty known in civilized and humane jurisprudence 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 citizens of each State shall be entitled to all 
 privileges and immunities of citizens in the several States"? 
 
 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 to specify 
 particular acts of Congress as proper to be enforced, I do suggest 
 that it will be much safer for all, both in official and private sta- 
 tions, to conform to, and abide by, all those acts which stand unre- 
 pealed, than to violate any of them, trusting to find impunity in 
 having them held to be unconstitutional. 
 
582 ABRAHAM LINCOLN: 
 
 It is seventy-two years since the first inauguration of a Presi- 
 dent 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 for [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. Perpetuity 
 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. Con- 
 tinue to execute all the express provisions of our national Con- 
 stitution, and the Union will endure forever — it being impossible 
 to destroy it, except by some action not provided for in the instru- 
 ment 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 violate it — break it, so 
 to speak; but does it not require all to lawfully rescind it? 
 
 Descending from these general principles, we find the propo- 
 sition that, in legal contemplation, the Union is perpetual, con- 
 firmed 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 and continued by the Declara- 
 tion 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 perpetual, by the Articles of Confederation in 1778. 
 And finally, in 1787, one of the declared objects for ordaining and 
 establishing 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 perfect 
 than before the Constitution, having lost the vital element of per- 
 petuity. 
 
 It follows from these views that no State, upon its own mere 
 
HIS SPEECHES AND WRITINGS 583 
 
 motion, can lawfully get out of the Union, — that resolves 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 revolutionary, according to circum- 
 stances. 
 
 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 practicable, 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 so 
 universal, as to prevent 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 with all, 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 experience shall show a modi- 
 fication or change to be proper; and in every case and exigency my 
 best discretion will be exercised according to circumstances actu- 
 ally existing, and with a view and a hope of a peaceful solution of 
 
584 ABRAHAM LINCOLN: 
 
 the national troubles, and the restoration of fraternal sympathies 
 and affections. 
 
 That there are persons in one section or another who seek 
 to destroy the Union at all events, and are glad of any pretext to 
 do it, I will neither affirm or 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 destruction 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, 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, guarantees and 
 prohibitions, in the Constitution, that controversies 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 administration. 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 territories? 
 The Constitution does not expressly say. Must Congress protect 
 slavery in the territories? The Constitution does not expressly say. 
 
 From questions of this class spring all our constitutional con- 
 troversies, and we divide upon them into majorities and minorities. 
 
HIS SPEECHES AND WRITINGS 585 
 
 If the minority will not acquiesce, the majority must, or the gov- 
 ernment 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 acquiesce, they make 
 a precedent which, in turn, will divide and ruin them; for a minor- 
 ity of their own will secede from them whenever 'a majority re- 
 fuses to be controlled by such minority. For instance, why may not 
 any portion of a new confederacy, a year or two hence, arbitrarily 
 secede again, precisely 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 
 to compose a new Union, as to produce harmony only, and pre- 
 vent renewed secession? 
 
 Plainly, the central idea of secession, is the essence of anarchy. 
 A majority, held in restraint by constitutional checks and limita- 
 tions, 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. Unanimity is impossible; the rule of a minority, 
 as a permanent arrangement, is wholly inadmissible; 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 constitu- 
 tional 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 departments 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 over-ruled, and 
 never become a precedent for other cases, can better be borne than 
 could the evils of a different 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 irrev- 
 ocably fixed by decisions of the Supreme Court, the instant they 
 are made, in ordinary litigation between parties, in personal 
 
586 ABRAHAM LINCOLN: 
 
 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 pur- 
 poses. 
 
 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 fugi- 
 tive slave clause of the Constitution, and the law for the suppres- 
 sion 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 imperfectly 
 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 country 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 
 intercourse more advantageous or more satisfactory, after separa- 
 tion than before? Can aliens make treaties easier than friends 
 can make laws? Can treaties be more faithfully enforced between 
 aliens than laws can among friends? Suppose 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 ques- 
 tions, as to terms of intercourse, are again upon you. 
 
 This country, with its institutions, belongs to the people who 
 inhabit it. Whenever they shall grow weary of the existing govern- 
 ment, they can exercise their constitutional right of amending it, 
 
HIS SPEECHES AND WRITINGS 587 
 
 or their revolutionary right to dismember or overthrow it. I can- 
 not be ignorant of the fact that many worthy and patriotic citizens 
 are desirous of having 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 instrument 
 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, originated 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 govern- 
 ment shall never interfere with the domestic institutions of the 
 States, including that of persons held to service. To avoid mis- 
 construction of what I have said, I depart from my purpose not 
 to speak of particular amendments, 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 ultimate 
 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 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, the American people. 
 
 By the frame of the government under which we live, this 
 same people have wisely given their public servants but little 
 
588 ABRAHAM LINCOLN: 
 
 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 ad- 
 ministration, by any extreme of wickedness or folly, can very seri- 
 ously 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 object 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 un- 
 impaired, and, on the sensitive point, the laws of your own fram- 
 ing 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. Intelligence, patri- 
 otism, Christianity, and a firm reliance on Him, who has never 
 yet forsaken this favored land, are still competent 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 "pre- 
 serve, protect and defend" it. 
 
 I am loth 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 mystic chords of memory, 
 stretching from every battle-field, and patriot grave, to every living 
 heart and hearth-stone, 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. 
 
 As most students of Lincoln know, this address was 
 written in Springfield late in January, 1861. According 
 to William H. Herndons account Lincoln "locked himself 
 up in a room upstairs over a store across the street from 
 the State House" and wrote the address, using only four 
 
HIS SPEECHES AND WRITINGS 589 
 
 references: "Henry Clays great speech delivered in 1850, 
 Andrew Jackson's proclamation against Nullification, a 
 copy of the Constitution . . . [and] Webster's reply to 
 Hayne." 
 
 This first draft was finished and several copies 
 printed for Lincoln before he left Springfield for Wash- 
 ington. The subsequent revisions of several passages 
 make an interesting study, especially in the light of 
 Lincoln's usual inflexibility in the face of suggestions as 
 to changes in language which involved a change in 
 sentiment. Lincoln wished to be completely firm and 
 unequivocal in his language, but he did not wish to fan 
 the flames of secession. Hence, he adopted for this most 
 important utterance some changes in language suggested 
 by O. H. Browning and W. H. Seward. Even here, 
 however, Herndon's statement of Lincoln's inflexibility 
 is not disproved by the adoptions, for in no instance does 
 any suggestion which Lincoln adopted actually involve 
 a change of sentiment. 
 
 For a comparative study of the revisions in this 
 address the reader should consult Louis A. Warren's 
 article in Lincoln Lore, No. 858 and No. 859. The most 
 significant revision is the concluding paragraph in which 
 Lincoln accepted a suggestion from Seward and revised 
 it in his own way. For convenience in making compari- 
 son, Seward's suggested close is given as in the facsimile 
 of the original. It will be observed that Lincoln adopted 
 Seward's first choice of diction more often than his final 
 suggestion: 
 
 "I close. We are not we must not be aliens or enemies 
 but countrym fellow countrymen and brethren. Although 
 passion has strained our bonds of affection too hardly 
 they must not be broken they will not I am sure they will 
 not be broken. The mystic chords of memory which 
 proceeding from every ba so many battle fields and 
 patriot so many patriot graves -b*- pass through all the 
 hearts and hearths all the hearths in this broad continent 
 
590 ABRAHAM LINCOLN: 
 
 of ours will yet harmo - again harmonize in their ancient 
 music when touched as they surety breathed upon again , 
 by the better angel guardian angel of the nation" 
 
 Two similar "final" copies of the address are in ex- 
 istence, made up of passages clipped from the first print- 
 ing and pasted on sheets of paper, with the revised 
 passages written in between and in the margins. In one 
 of these copies the revised passages appear in Nicolay's 
 handwriting. This was the copy prepared for and deliv- 
 ered to the press. In the other copy, from which Lincoln 
 read at the inaugural ceremony, the revised passages are 
 partly in Lincoln's handwriting. After the ceremony Lin- 
 coln turned this reading copy over to Crosby Stuart 
 Noyes of the Washington Star, and from it the Star 
 printed the speech on the day it was delivered. A few 
 unimportant variants in the two copies are indicated 
 in the present text, and the punctuation of the con- 
 cluding paragraph follows (to the extent of two addi- 
 tional commas) the paragraph in Lincoln's handwriting 
 rather than the press copy. 
 
 REPLY TO SECRETARY SEWARD'S MEMORANDUM 
 APRIL 1, 1861 
 
 Executive Mansion, April 1, 1861. 
 Hon. W. H. Seward. 
 My dear Sir: 
 
 Since parting with you I have been considering 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." 
 
HIS SPEECHES AND WRITINGS 591 
 
 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 government, and to 
 collect the duties and imposts." This had your distinct approval 
 at the time; and, taken in connection with the order I immedi- 
 ately gave General Scott, directing him to employ every 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 reinforcement of Fort Sum- 
 ter would be done on a slavery or a party issue, while that of 
 Fort Pickens would be on a more national and patriotic one. 
 
 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 instruc- 
 tions 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 continuing to be a subject of unnecessary 
 debate; still, upon points arising in its progress I wish, and sup- 
 pose I am entitled to have, the advice of all the cabinet. 
 
 Your obedient servant, 
 
 A. Lincoln. 
 
592 ABRAHAM LINCOLN 
 
 LETTER TO COLONEL E. E. ELLSWORTH 
 APRIL 15, 1861 
 
 Washington, April 15. 1861 
 Col. E. E. Ellsworth 
 My dear Sir: 
 
 Ever since the beginning of our acquaintance, I have valued 
 you highly as a person [sic] friend, and at the same time (with- 
 out much capacity of judging) have had a very high estimate 
 of your military talent. Accordingly I have been, and still am 
 anxious for you to have the best position in the military which 
 can be given you, consistently with justice and proper courtesy 
 towards the older officers of the army. I can not incurr [sic] the 
 risk of doing them injustice, or a discurtesy [sic] ; but I do say they 
 would personally oblige me, if they could, and would place you in 
 some position, or in some service, satisfactory to yourself. 
 
 Your Obt. Servt. 
 
 A. Lincoln 
 
 Ellsworth had been a student of law in Lincoln's 
 office and had accompanied him to Washington as a 
 personal friend and quasi bodyguard. He organized 
 a volunteer regiment of Zouaves that achieved fame for 
 martial appearance and precise drill. During the 
 occupation of Alexandria, Virginia, he became one of the 
 early casualties of the war (the only casualty on this 
 occasion), when he was shot by a hotel proprietor whose 
 Confederate flag Ellsworth was personally removing 
 from the building. Lincoln s admiration for him is fully 
 expressed in the succeeding letter written to Ellsworth's 
 parents. 
 
HIS SPEECHES AND WRITINGS 593 
 
 LETTER TO COLONEL E. E. ELLSWORTH'S 
 PARENTS. MAY 25, 1861 
 
 Washington D. C. May 25. 1861. 
 
 To the Father and Mother of Col. Elmer E. Ellsworth: 
 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 en- 
 gagements, would permit. To me, he appeared to have no in- 
 dulgences 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, in the sad end, 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 
 
594 ABRAHAM LINCOLN 
 
 MESSAGE TO CONGRESS IN SPECIAL SESSION 
 JULY 4, 1861 
 
 Fellow-Citizens of the Senate and House of Representatives: 
 
 Having been convened on an extraordinary occasion, as au- 
 thorized by the Constitution, your attention is not called to any 
 ordinary subject of legislation. 
 
 At the beginning of the present presidential term, four 
 months ago, the functions of the Federal Government were found 
 to be generally suspended within the several States of South Caro- 
 lina, Georgia, Alabama, Mississippi, Louisiana, and Florida, ex- 
 cepting only those of the Post Office Department. 
 
 Within these States all the forts, arsenals, dockyards, cus- 
 tom-houses, and the like, including the movable and stationary 
 property in and about them, had been seized, and were held in 
 open hostility to this Government, excepting only Forts Pickens, 
 Taylor, and Jefferson, on and near the Florida coast, and Fort 
 Sumter, in Charleston harbor, South Carolina. The forts thus 
 seized had been put in improved condition, new ones had been 
 built, and armed forces had been organized and were organizing, 
 all avowedly with the same hostile purpose. 
 
 The forts remaining in the possession of the Federal Gov- 
 ernment in and near these States were either besieged or menaced 
 by warlike preparations, and especially Fort Sumter was nearly 
 surrounded by well-protected hostile batteries, with guns equal 
 in quality to the best of its own, and outnumbering the latter 
 as perhaps ten to one. A disproportionate share of the Federal 
 muskets and rifles had somehow found their way into these States, 
 and had been seized to be used against the Government. Ac- 
 cumulations of the public revenue, lying within them, had been 
 seized for the same object. The Navy was scattered in distant 
 seas, leaving but a very small part of it within the immediate 
 reach of the Government. Officers of the Federal Army and Navy 
 
HIS SPEECHES AND WRITINGS 595 
 
 had resigned in great numbers; and of those resigning, a large 
 proportion had taken up arms against the Government. Simul- 
 taneously, and in connection with all this, the purpose to sever 
 the Federal Union was openly avowed. In accordance with this 
 purpose, an ordinance had been adopted in each of these States, 
 declaring the States, respectively, to be separated from the Na- 
 tional Union. A formula for instituting a combined government 
 of these States had been promulgated; and this illegal organiza- 
 tion in the character of confederate States, was already invoking 
 recognition, aid, and intervention, from foreign Powers. 
 
 Finding this condition of things, and believing it to be an 
 imperative duty upon the incoming Executive to prevent, if pos- 
 sible, the consummation of such attempt to destroy the Federal 
 Union, a choice of means to that end became indispensable. This 
 choice was made, and was declared in the inaugural address. The 
 policy chosen looked to the exhaustion of all peaceful measures, 
 before a resort to any stronger ones. It sought only to hold the 
 public places and property not already wrested from the Govern- 
 ment, and to collect the revenue, relying for the rest on time, 
 discussion, and the ballot-box. It promised a continuance of the 
 mails, at Government expense, to the very people who were re- 
 sisting the Government; and it gave repeated pledges against 
 any disturbance to any of the people, or any of their rights. Of 
 all that which a President might constitutionally and justifiably 
 do in such a case, everything was forborne, without which it was 
 believed possible to keep the government on foot. 
 
 On the 5th of March, (the present incumbent's first full day 
 in office,) a letter of Major Anderson, commanding at Fort 
 Sumter, written on the 28th of February, and received at the 
 War Department on the 4th of March, was, by that Department, 
 placed in his hands. This letter expressed the professional opinion 
 of the writer, that reinforcements could not be thrown into that 
 fort within the time for his relief, rendered necessary by the 
 limited supply of provisions, and with a view of holding posses- 
 sion of the same, with a force of less than twenty thousand good 
 and well disciplined men. This opinion was concurred in by all 
 the officers of his command, and their memoranda on the subject 
 were made inclosures of Major Anderson's letter. The whole 
 
596 ABRAHAM LINCOLN: 
 
 was immediately laid before Lieutenant General Scott, who at 
 once concurred with Major Anderson in opinion. On reflection, 
 however, he took full time, consulting with other officers, both 
 of the Army and the Navy, and, at the end of four days, came 
 reluctantly, but decidedly, to the same conclusion as before. He 
 also stated at the same time that no such sufficient force was then 
 at the control of the Government, or could be raised and brought 
 to the ground within the time when the provisions in the fort 
 would be exhausted. In a purely military point of view, this re- 
 duced the duty of the Administration in the case, to the mere 
 matter of getting the garrison safely out of the fort. 
 
 It was believed, however, that to so abandon that position, 
 under the circumstances, would be utterly ruinous; that the neces- 
 sity under which it was to be done would not be fully under- 
 stood; that by many it would be construed as a part of a voluntary 
 policy; that at home it would discourage the friends of the Union, 
 embolden its adversaries, and go far to insure to the latter a 
 recognition abroad; that, in fact, it would be our national destruc- 
 tion consummated. This could not be allowed. Starvation was not 
 yet upon the garrison; and ere it would be reached Fort Pickens 
 might be reinforced. This last would be a clear indication of policy, 
 and would better enable the country to accept the evacuation of 
 Fort Sumter as a military necessity. An order was at once directed 
 to be sent for the landing of the troops from the steamship Brook- 
 lyn into Fort Pickens. This order could not go by land, but must 
 take the longer and slower route by sea. The first return news 
 from the order was received just one week before the fall of Fort 
 Sumter. The news itself was that the officer commanding the 
 Sabine, to which vessel the troops had been transferred from the 
 Brooklyn, acting upon some quasi armistice of the late Administra- 
 tion, (and of the existence of which the present Administration, 
 up to the time the order was dispatched, had only too vague and 
 uncertain rumors to fix attention,) had refused to land the troops. 
 To now reinforce Fort Pickens before a crisis would be reached at 
 Fort Sumter was impossible — rendered so by the near exhaustion 
 of provisions in the latter-named fort. In precaution against such a 
 conjuncture, the Government had a few days before commenced 
 preparing an expedition, as well adapted as might be, to relieve 
 
HIS SPEECHES AND WRITINGS 597 
 
 Fort Sumter, which expedition was intended to be ultimately used 
 or not, according to circumstances. The strongest anticipated case 
 for using it was now presented; and it was resolved to send it for- 
 ward. As had been intended in this contingency, it was also re- 
 solved to notify the Governor of South Carolina that he might ex- 
 pect an attempt would be made to provision the fort; and that, if 
 the attempt should not be resisted, there would be no effort to 
 throw in men, arms, or ammunition, without further notice, or in 
 case of an attack upon the fort. This notice was accordingly 
 given; whereupon the fort was attacked and bombarded to its fall, 
 without even awaiting the arrival of the provisioning expedition. 
 It is thus seen that the assault upon and reduction of Fort 
 Sumter was in no sense a matter of self defense on the part of the 
 assailants. They well knew that the garrison in the fort could by 
 no possibility commit aggression upon them. They knew — they 
 were expressly notified — that the giving of bread to the few brave 
 and hungiy men of the garrison was all which would on that occa- 
 sion be attempted, unless themselves, by resisting so much, should 
 provoke more. They knew that this Government desired to keep 
 the garrison in the fort, not to assail them, but merely to maintain 
 visible possession, and thus to preserve the Union from actual 
 and immediate dissolution — trusting, as hereinbefore stated, to 
 time, discussion, and the ballot-box, for final adjustment; and 
 they assailed and reduced the fort for precisely the reverse object 
 — to drive out the visible authority of the Federal Union, and 
 thus force it to immediate dissolution. That this was their object, 
 the Executive well understood; and having said to them in the in- 
 augural address, "You can have no conflict without being your- 
 selves the aggressors," he took pains not only to keep this 
 declaration good, but also to keep the case so free from the power 
 of ingenious sophistry that the world should not be able to mis- 
 understand it. By the affair at Fort Sumter, with its surrounding 
 circumstances, that point was reached. Then and thereby the 
 assailants of the Government began the conflict of arms, without 
 a gun in sight or in expectancy to return their fire, save only the 
 few in the fort, sent to that harbor years before for their own 
 protection, and still ready to give that protection in whatever 
 was lawful. In this act, discarding all else, they have forced upon 
 
598 ABRAHAM LINCOLN: 
 
 the country the distinct issue, "immediate dissolution or blood." 
 And this issue embraces more than the fate of these United 
 States. It presents to the whole family of man the question, 
 whether a constitutional republic, or democracy — a Government 
 of the people by the same people — can or cannot maintain its 
 territorial integrity against its own domestic foes. It presents the 
 question, whether discontented individuals, too few in numbers to 
 control administration, according to organic law, in any case, can 
 always, upon the pretenses made in this case, or on any other pre- 
 tenses, or arbitrarily, without any pretense, break up their Gov- 
 ernment, and thus practically put an end to free government upon 
 the earth. It forces us to ask: "Is there, in all republics, this in- 
 herent and fatal weakness?" "Must a Government, of necessity, be 
 too strong for the liberties of its own people, or too weak to main- 
 tain its own existence?" 
 
 So viewing the issue, no choice was left but to call out the 
 war power of the Government; and so to resist force employed for 
 its destruction, by force for its preservation. 
 
 The call was made, and the response of the country was most 
 gratifying, surpassing in unanimity and spirit the most sanguine 
 expectation. Yet none of the States commonly called slave States, 
 except Delaware, gave a regiment through regular State organiza- 
 tion. A few regiments have been organized within some others of 
 those States by individual enterprise, and received into the Gov- 
 ernment service. Of course, the seceded States, so called, (and to 
 which Texas had been joined about the time of the inauguration, ) 
 gave no troops to the cause of the Union. The border States, so 
 called, were not uniform in their action, some of them being 
 almost for the Union, while in others — as Virginia, North Car- 
 olina, Tennessee, and Arkansas — the Union sentiment was nearly 
 repressed and silenced. The course taken in Virginia was the most 
 remarkable — perhaps the most important. A convention, elected 
 by the people of that State to consider this very question of dis- 
 rupting the Federal Union, was in session at the capital of Virginia 
 when Fort Sumter fell. To this body the people had chosen a large 
 majority of professed Union men. Almost immediately after 
 the fall of Sumter, many members of that majority went over to 
 the original disunion minority, and, with them, adopted an ordi- 
 
HIS SPEECHES AND WRITINGS 599 
 
 nance for withdrawing the State from the Union. Whether this 
 change was wrought by their great approval of the assault upon 
 Sumter, or their great resentment at the Government's resistance 
 to that assault, is not definitely known. Although they submitted 
 the ordinance, for ratification, to a vote of the people, to be taken 
 on a day then somewhat more than a month distant, the conven- 
 tion and the Legislature, (which was also in session at the same 
 time and place,) with leading men of the State, not members 
 of either, immediately commenced acting as if the State were 
 already out of the Union. They pushed military preparations 
 vigorously forward all over the State. They seized the United 
 States armory at Harper's Ferry, and the navy-yard at Gosport, 
 near Norfolk. They received — perhaps invited — into their State 
 large bodies of troops, with their warlike appointments, from the 
 so-called seceded States. They formally entered into a treaty of 
 temporary alliance and cooperation with the so-called "Confeder- 
 ate States," and sent members to their congress at Montgomery; 
 and, finally, they permitted the insurrectionary government to be 
 transferred to their capital at Richmond. 
 
 The people of Virginia have thus allowed this giant insurrec- 
 tion to make its nest within her borders; and this Government 
 has no choice left but to deal with it where it finds it. And it has 
 the less regret, as the loyal citizens have in due form claimed its 
 protection. Those loyal citizens this Government is bound to recog- 
 nize and protect as being Virginia. 
 
 In the border States, so called — in fact, the Middle States 
 — there are those who favor a policy which they call "armed 
 neutrality;" that is, an arming of those States to prevent the Union 
 forces passing one way, or the disunion the other, over their soil. 
 This would be disunion completed. Figuratively speaking, it 
 would be the building of an impassable wall along the line of 
 separation — and yet not quite an impassable one; for, under 
 the guise of neutrality, it would tie the hands of the Union men, 
 and freely pass supplies from among them to the insurrectionists, 
 which it could not do as an open enemy. At a stroke it would take 
 all the trouble off the hands of secession, except only what 
 proceeds from the external blockade. It would do for the dis- 
 unionists that which of all things they most desire — feed them well 
 
600 ABRAHAM LINCOLN: 
 
 and give them disunion without a struggle of their own. It recog- 
 nizes no fidelity to the Constitution, no obligation to maintain the 
 Union; and while very many who have favored it are doubtless 
 loyal citizens, it is, nevertheless, very injurious in effect. 
 
 Recurring to the action of the Government, it may be stated 
 that at first a call was made for seventy-five thousand militia; and 
 rapidly following this a proclamation was issued for closing the 
 ports of the insurrectionary districts by proceedings in the nature 
 of a blockade. So far all was believed to be strictly legal. At 
 this point the insurrectionists announced their purpose to enter 
 upon the practice of privateering. 
 
 Other calls were made for volunteers to serve for three years, 
 unless sooner discharged, and also for large additions to the 
 regular Army and Navy. These measures, whether strictly legal 
 or not, were ventured upon under what appeared to be a popular 
 demand and a public necessity; trusting then as now that Congress 
 would readily ratify them. It is believed that nothing has been 
 done beyond the constitutional competency of Congress. 
 
 Soon after the first call for militia, it was considered a duty 
 to authorize the commanding general in proper cases, according 
 to his discretion, to suspend the privilege of the writ of habeas 
 corpus, or, in other words, to arrest and detain, without resort to 
 the ordinary processes and forms of law, such individuals as he 
 might deem dangerous to the public safety. This authority has 
 purposely been exercised but very sparingly. Nevertheless, the 
 legality and propriety of what has been done under it are ques- 
 tioned, and the attention of the country has been called to the 
 proposition that one who is sworn to "take care that the laws be 
 faithfully executed" should not himself violate them. Of course 
 some consideration was given to the questions of power and 
 propriety before this matter was acted upon. The whole of the 
 laws which were required to be faithfully executed were being 
 resisted, and failing of execution in nearly one third of the States. 
 Must they be allowed to finally fail of execution, even had it been 
 perfectly clear that by the use of the means necessary to their 
 execution some single law, made in such extreme tenderness of 
 the citizen's liberty, that practically it relieves more of the guilty 
 than of the innocent, should to a very limited extent be violated? 
 
HIS SPEECHES AND WRITINGS 601 
 
 To state the question more directly: are all the laws but one to go 
 unexecuted, and the Government itself go to pieces, lest that one 
 be violated? Even in such a case, would not the official oath be 
 broken if the government should be overthrown, when it was be- 
 lieved that disregarding the single law would tend to preserve 
 it? But it was not believed that this question was presented. It 
 was not believed that any law was violated. The provision of the 
 Constitution that "the privilege of the writ of habeas corpus shall 
 not be suspended unless when, in cases of rebellion or invasion, 
 the public safety may require it," is equivalent to a provision — 
 is a provision — that such privilege may be suspended when, in 
 case of rebellion or invasion, the public safety does require it. 
 It was decided that we have a case of rebellion, and that the pub- 
 lic safety does require the qualified suspension of the privilege 
 of the writ which was authorized to be made. Now, it is insisted 
 that Congress, and not the Executive, is vested with this power. 
 But the Constitution itself is silent as to which or who is to 
 exercise the power; and as the provision was plainly made for a 
 dangerous emergency, it cannot be believed the framers of the 
 instrument intended that in every case the danger should run its 
 course until Congress could be called together; the very assem- 
 bling of which might be prevented, as was intended in this case, 
 by the rebellion. 
 
 No more extended argument is now offered, as an opinion, 
 at some length, will probably be presented by the Attorney Gen- 
 eral. Whether there shall be any legislation upon the subject, and 
 if any, what, is submitted entirely to the better judgment of 
 Congress. 
 
 The forbearance of this Government had been so extraor- 
 dinary, and so long continued, as to lead some foreign nations to 
 shape their action as if they supposed the early destruction of 
 our national Union was probable. While this, on discovery, gave 
 the Executive some concern, he is now happy to say that the 
 sovereignty and rights of the United States are now everywhere 
 practically respected by foreign Powers; and a general sympathy 
 with the country is manifested throughout the world. 
 
 The reports of the Secretaries of the Treasury, War, and the 
 Navy, will give the information in detail deemed necessary and 
 
602 ABRAHAM LINCOLN: 
 
 convenient for your deliberation and action; while the Executive 
 and all the Departments will stand ready to supply omissions, or 
 to communicate new facts considered important for you to know. 
 
 It is now recommended that you give the legal means for 
 making this contest a short and a decisive one; that you place at 
 the control of the Government, for the work, at least four hundred 
 thousand men, and $400,000,000. That number of men is about 
 one tenth of those of proper ages within the regions where, 
 apparently, all are willing to engage; and the sum is less than a 
 twenty-third part of the money value owned by the men who 
 seem ready to devote the whole. A debt of $600,000,000 now, is 
 a less sum per head than was the debt of our Revolution when 
 we came out of that struggle; and the money value in the country 
 now bears even a greater proportion to what it was then, than 
 does the population. Surely each man has as strong a motive now 
 to preserve our liberties, as each had then to establish them. 
 
 A right result, at this time, will be worth more to the world 
 than ten times the men and ten times the money. The evidence 
 reaching us from the country leaves no doubt that the material 
 for the work is abundant, and that it needs only the hand of legis- 
 lation to give it legal sanction, and the hand of the executive to 
 give it practical shape and efficiency. One of the greatest per- 
 plexities of the Government is to avoid receiving troops faster 
 than it can provide for them. In a word, the people will save 
 their Government if the Government itself will do its part only 
 indifferently well. 
 
 It might seem, at first thought, to be of little difference 
 whether the present movement at the South be called "secession" 
 or ' rebellion. " The movers, however, well understand the differ- 
 ence. At the beginning they knew they could never raise their 
 treason to any respectable magnitude by any name which implies 
 violation of law. They knew their people possessed as much of 
 moral sense, as much of devotion to law and order, and as much 
 pride in, and reverence for, the history and Government of their 
 common country, as any other civilized and patriotic people. They 
 knew they could make no advancement directly in the teeth of 
 these strong and noble sentiments. Accordingly they commenced 
 by an insidious debauching of the public mind. They invented an 
 
HIS SPEECHES AND WRITINGS 603 
 
 ingenious sophism, which, if conceded, was followed by perfectly 
 logical steps, through all the incidents, to the complete destruc- 
 tion of the Union. The sophism itself is, that any State of the 
 Union may, consistently with the national Constitution, and there- 
 fore lawfully and peacefully, withdraw from the Union without 
 the consent of the Union or of any other State. The little dis- 
 guise that the supposed right is to be exercised only for just 
 cause, themselves to be the sole judge of its justice, is too thin 
 to merit any notice. 
 
 With rebellion thus sugar-coated they have been drugging 
 the public mind of their section for more than thirty years, and 
 until at length they have brought many good men to a willing- 
 ness to take up arms against the Government the day after some 
 assemblage of men have enacted the farcical pretense of taking 
 their State out of the Union, who could have been brought to 
 no such thing the day before. 
 
 This sophism derives much, perhaps the whole, of its cur- 
 rency from the assumption that there is some omnipotent and 
 sacred supremacy pertaining to a State — to each State of our 
 Federal Union. Our States have neither more nor less power 
 than that reserved to them in the Union by the Constitution — 
 no one of them ever having been a State out of the Union. The 
 original ones passed into the Union even before they cast off their 
 British colonial dependence; and the new ones each came into 
 the Union directly from a condition of dependence, excepting 
 Texas. And even Texas, in its temporary independence, was never 
 designated a State. The new ones only took the designation of 
 States on coming into the Union, while that name was first 
 adopted for the old ones in and by the Declaration of Inde- 
 pendence. Therein the "United Colonies'* were declared to be 
 "free and independent States;" but, even then, the object plainly 
 was not to declare their independence of one another, or of the 
 Union, but directly the contrary, as their mutual pledge, and 
 their mutual action, before, at the time, and afterwards, abun- 
 dantly show. The express plighting of faith by each and all of the 
 original thirteen in the Articles of Confederation, two years later, 
 that the Union shall be perpetual, is most conclusive. Having 
 never been States, either in substance or in name, outside of the 
 
604 ABRAHAM LINCOLN: 
 
 Union, whence this magical omnipotence of "State rights," assert- 
 ing a claim of power to lawfully destroy the Union itself? Much 
 is said about the "sovereignty" of the States; but the word, even, 
 is not in the national Constitution; nor, as is believed, in any of 
 the State constitutions. What is "sovereignty," in the political 
 sense of the term? Would it be far wrong to define it "a political 
 community, without a political superior ? Tested by this, no one of 
 our States, except Texas, ever was a sovereignty. And even Texas 
 gave up the character on coming into the Union; by which act she 
 acknowledged the Constitution of the United States and the laws 
 and treaties of the United States made in pursuance of the Consti- 
 tution to be, for her, the supreme law of the land. The States 
 have their status in the Union, and they have no other legal 
 status. If they break from this, they can only do so against law 
 and by revolution. The Union, and not themselves separately, 
 procured their independence and their liberty. By conquest, or 
 purchase, the Union gave each of them whatever of independence 
 and liberty it has. The Union is older than any of the States, and, 
 in fact, it created them as States. Originally some dependent 
 colonies made the Union, and, in turn, the Union threw off their 
 old dependence for them, and made them States, such as they are. 
 Not one of them ever had a State constitution independent of the 
 Union. Of course, it is not forgotten that all the new States framed 
 their constitutions before they entered the Union; nevertheless, 
 dependent upon, and preparatory to, coming into the Union. 
 
 Unquestionably the States have the powers and rights re- 
 served to them in and by the national Constitution; but among 
 these, surely, are not included all conceivable powers, however 
 mischievous or destructive; but, at most, such only as were known 
 in the world, at the time, as governmental powers; and certainly 
 a power to destroy the Government itself had never been known 
 as a governmental — as a merely administrative power. This rela- 
 tive matter of national power and State rights, as a principle, is 
 no other than the principle of generality and locality. Whatever 
 concerns the whole should be confided to the whole — to the Gen- 
 eral Government; while whatever concerns only the State should 
 be left exclusively to the State. This is all there is of original 
 principle about it. Whether the National Constitution in defining 
 
HIS SPEECHES AND WRITINGS 605 
 
 boundaries between the two has applied the principle with exact 
 accuracy, is not to be questioned. We are all bound by that 
 defining, without question. 
 
 What is now combated, is the position that secession is con- 
 sistent with the Constitution — is lawful and peaceful. It is not 
 contended that there is any express law for it; and nothing should 
 ever be implied as law which leads to unjust or absurd conse- 
 quences. The nation purchased with money the countries out of 
 which several of these States were formed: is it just that they 
 shall go off without leave and without refunding? The nation 
 paid very large sums (in the aggregate, I believe, nearly a hun- 
 dred millions) to relieve Florida of the aboriginal tribes: is it 
 just that she shall now be off without consent, or without making 
 any return? The nation is now in debt for money applied to the 
 benefit of these so-called seceding States in common with the 
 rest: is it just either that creditors shall go unpaid, or the re- 
 maining States pay the whole? A part of the present national debt 
 was contracted to pay the old debts of Texas: is it just that she 
 shall leave and pay no part of this herself? 
 
 Again: if one State may secede, so may another; and when 
 all shall have seceded, none is left to pay the debts. Is this quite 
 just to creditors? Did we notify them of this sage view of ours 
 when we borrowed their money? If we now recognize this doc- 
 trine by allowing the seceders to go in peace, it is difficult to see 
 what we can do if others choose to go, or to extort terms upon 
 which they will promise to remain. 
 
 The seceders insist that our Constitution admits of secession. 
 They have assumed to make a national constitution of their own, 
 in which, of necessity, they have either discarded or retained the 
 right of secession, as they insist it exists in ours. If they have dis- 
 carded it, they thereby admit that, on principle, it ought not to 
 be in ours. If they have retained it, by their own construction of 
 ours they show that, to be consistent, they must secede from one 
 another whenever they shall find it the easiest way of settling 
 their debts, or effecting any other selfish or unjust object. The prin- 
 ciple itself is one of disintegration, and upon which no Govern- 
 ment can possibly endure. 
 
 If all the States, save one, should assert the power to drive 
 
606 ABRAHAM LINCOLN: 
 
 that one out of the Union, it is presumed the whole class of 
 seceder politicians would at once deny the power, and denounce 
 the act as the greatest outrage upon State rights. But suppose that 
 precisely the same act, instead of being called "driving the one 
 out," should be called "the seceding of the others from that one:" 
 it would be exactly what the seceders claim to do; unless, indeed, 
 they make the point that the one, because it is a minority, may 
 rightfully do what the others, because they are a majority, may 
 not rightfully do. These politicians are subtile and profound on the 
 rights of minorities. They are not partial to that power which 
 made the Constitution, and speaks from the preamble, calling 
 itself "We, the People." 
 
 It may well be questioned whether there is, to-day, a majority 
 of the legally-qualified voters of any State, except perhaps South 
 Carolina, in favor of disunion. There is much reason to believe 
 that the Union men are the majority in many, if not in every other 
 one, of the so-called seceded States. The contrary has not been 
 demonstrated in any one of them. It is ventured to affirm this 
 even of Virginia and Tennessee; for the result of an election held 
 in military camps, where the bayonets are all on one side of the 
 question voted upon, can scarcely be considered as demonstrating 
 popular sentiment. At such an election, all that large class who are 
 at once for the Union, and against coercion, would be coerced to 
 vote against the Union. 
 
 It may be affirmed, without extravagance, that the free insti- 
 tutions we enjoy have developed the powers and improved the 
 condition of our whole people, beyond any example in the world. 
 Of this we now have a striking and an impressive illustration. 
 So large an army as the government has now on foot was never 
 before known without a soldier in it but who had taken his place 
 there of his own free choice. But more than this: there are many 
 single regiments whose members, one and another, possess full 
 practical knowledge of all the arts, sciences, professions, and 
 whatever else, whether useful or elegant, is known in the world; 
 and there is scarcely one from which there could not be selected 
 a President, a Cabinet, a Congress, and perhaps a court, abun- 
 dantly competent to administer the Government itself! Nor do I 
 say this is not true also in the army of our late friends, now adver- 
 
HIS SPEECHES AND WRITINGS 607 
 
 saries, in this contest; but if it is, so much better the reason why 
 the Government which has conferred such benefits on both them 
 and us should not be broken up. Whoever, in any section, pro- 
 poses to abandon such a Government, would do well to consider, 
 in deference to what principle it is that he does it; what better he 
 is likely to get in its stead; whether the substitute will give, or 
 be intended to give, so much of good to the people? There are some 
 foreshadowings on this subject. Our adversaries have adopted 
 some declarations of independence, in which, unlike the good old 
 one, penned by Jefferson, they omit the words "all men are created 
 equal." Why? They have adopted a temporary national constitu- 
 tion, in the preamble of which, unlike our good old one, signed by 
 Washington, they omit "We, the People," and substitute "We, 
 the deputies of the sovereign and independent States." Why? 
 Why this deliberate pressing out of view the rights of men and 
 the authority of the people? 
 
 This is essentially a people's contest. On the side of the Union, 
 it is a struggle for maintaining in the world that form and sub- 
 stance of government whose leading object is to elevate the con- 
 dition of men; to lift artificial weights from all shoulders; to 
 clear the paths of laudable pursuit for all; to afford all an un- 
 fettered start and a fair chance in the race of life. Yielding to 
 partial and temporary departures, from necessity, this is the lead- 
 ing object of the Government for whose existence we contend. 
 
 I am most happy to believe that the plain people under- 
 stand and appreciate this. It is worthy of note, that while in this 
 the Government's hour of trial, large numbers of those in the 
 Army and Navy who have been favored with the offices have 
 resigned and proved false to the hand which had pampered them, 
 not one common soldier or common sailor is known to have 
 deserted his flag. 
 
 Great honor is due to those officers who remained true, 
 despite the example of their treacherous associates; but the great- 
 est honor, and most important fact of all, is the unanimous firm- 
 ness of the common soldiers and common sailors. To the last man, 
 so far as known, they have successfully resisted the traitorous 
 efforts of those whose commands, but an hour before, they obeyed 
 as absolute law. This is the patriotic instinct of plain people. They 
 
608 ABRAHAM LINCOLN: 
 
 understand, without an argument, that the destroying the Govern- 
 ment which was made by Washington means no good to them. 
 
 Our popular government has often been called an experiment. 
 Two points in it our people have already settled— the successful 
 establishing and the successful administering of it. One still re- 
 mains — its successful maintenance against a formidable internal 
 attempt to overthrow it. It is now for them to demonstrate to 
 the world that those who can fairly carry an election can also 
 suppress a rebellion; that ballots are the rightful and peaceful 
 successors of bullets; and that when ballots have fairly and consti- 
 tutionally decided, there can be no successful appeal back to 
 bullets; that there can be no successful appeal except to ballots 
 themselves, at succeeding elections. Such will be a great lesson 
 of peace; teaching men that what they cannot take by an election, 
 neither can they take by a war; teaching all the folly of being 
 the beginners of a war. 
 
 Lest there be some uneasiness in the minds of candid men as 
 to what is to be the course of the Government towards the south- 
 ern States after the rebellion shall have been suppressed, the 
 Executive deems it proper to say, it will be his purpose then, as 
 ever, to be guided by the Constitution and the laws; and that he 
 probably will have no different understanding of the powers and 
 duties of the Federal Government relatively [relative?] to the 
 rights of the States and the people, under the Constitution than 
 that expressed in the inaugural address. 
 
 He desires to preserve the Government, that it may be admin- 
 istered for all, as it was administered by the men who made it. 
 Loyal citizens everywhere have the right to claim this of their 
 Government, and the Government has no right to withhold or 
 neglect it. It is not perceived that, in giving it, there is any coer- 
 cion, any conquest, or any subjugation, in any just sense of those 
 terms. 
 
 The Constitution provides, and all the States have accepted 
 the provision, that "the United States shall guaranty to every 
 State in this Union a republican form of Government." But if a 
 State may lawfully go out of the Union, having done so, it may 
 also discard the republican form of Government; so that to pre- 
 vent its going out is an indispensable means to the end of main- 
 
HIS SPEECHES AND WRITINGS 609 
 
 taming the guarantee mentioned; and when an end is lawful and 
 obligatory, the indispensable means to it are also lawful and 
 obligatory. 
 
 It was with the deepest regret that the Executive found the 
 duty of employing the war power in defense of the Government 
 forced upon him. He could but perform this duty, or surrender 
 the existence of the Government. No compromise by public serv- 
 ants could in this case be a cure; not that compromises are not 
 often proper, but that no popular Government can long survive a 
 marked precedent that those who carry an election can only save 
 the Government from immediate destruction by giving up the 
 main point upon which the people gave the election. The people 
 themselves, and not their servants, can safely reverse their own 
 deliberate decisions. 
 
 As a private citizen, the Executive could not have consented 
 that these institutions shall perish; much less could he, in betrayal 
 of so vast and so sacred a trust as these free people have confided 
 to him. He felt that he had no moral right to shrink, or even to 
 count the chances of his own life, in what might follow. In full 
 view of his great responsibility, he has, so far, done what he has 
 deemed his duty. You will now, according to your own judgment, 
 perform yours. He sincerely hopes that your views and your action 
 may so accord with his as to assure all faithful citizens who have 
 been disturbed in their rights of a certain and speedy restora- 
 tion to them, under the Constitution and the laws. 
 
 And having thus chosen our course, without guile and with 
 pure purpose, let us renew our trust in God, and go forward 
 without fear and with manly hearts. 
 
 Abraham Lincoln. 
 
 July 4, 1861. 
 
 The text of this message is from the Congressional 
 Globe. Although the editor was able to locate the official 
 manuscripts of the other messages and proclamations in 
 the National Archives or the Library of Congress, he 
 failed to find any trace of the manuscript of this one. 
 
610 ABRAHAM LINCOLN 
 
 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 requested him 
 to "recommend a day of public humiliation, prayer 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 
 offences, 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 remem- 
 brance 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 farther punishment, though most 
 justly deserved; that our arms may be blessed and made effectual 
 for the reestablishment 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 blessing, by 
 the labors and sufferings of our fathers, may be restored in all its 
 original excellence: — 
 
HIS SPEECHES AND WRITINGS 611 
 
 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 denomina- 
 tions, 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 
 [L ' S ' J affixed, this 12th day of August A.D. 1861, and of the 
 
 Independence of the United States of America the 86th. 
 
 By the President: Abraham Lincoln. 
 
 William H. Seward, 
 Secretary of State 
 
 LETTER TO GOVERNOR BERIAH MAGOFFIN 
 AUGUST 24, 1861 
 
 Washington D. C August 24. 1861 
 To His Excellency 
 B. Magoffin 
 
 Governor of the State of Kentucky 
 Sir: 
 
 Your letter of the 19th. Inst, in which you "urge the removal 
 from the limits of Kentucky of the military force now organized, 
 and in camp within said State'* is received. 
 
 I may not possess full and precisely accurate knowledge upon 
 
612 ABRAHAM LINCOLN: 
 
 this subject; but I believe it is true that there is a military force 
 in camp within Kentucky, acting by authority of the United States, 
 which force is not very large, and is not now being augmented. 
 
 I also believe that some arms have been furnished to this 
 force by the United States. 
 
 I also believe that this force consists exclusively of Kentuck- 
 ians, having their camp in the immediate vicinity of their own 
 homes, and not assailing, or menacing, any of the good people 
 of Kentucky. 
 
 In all I have done in the premises, I have acted upon the 
 urgent solicitation of many Kentuckians, and in accordance with 
 what I believed, and still believe, to be the wish of a majority 
 of all the Union-loving people of Kentucky 
 
 While I have conversed on this subject with many eminent 
 men of Kentucky, including a large majority of her Members of 
 Congress, I do not remember that any one of them, or any other 
 person, except your Excellency and the bearers of your Ex- 
 cellency's letter, has urged me to remove the military force from 
 Kentucky, or to disband it. One other very worthy citizen of 
 Kentucky did solicit me to have the augmenting of the force 
 suspended for a time. 
 
 Taking all the means within my reach to form a judgment, I 
 do not believe it is the popular wish of Kentucky that this force 
 shall be removed beyond her limits; and, with this impression, I 
 must respectfully decline to so remove it. 
 
 I most cordially sympathize with your Excellency, in the wish 
 to preserve the peace of my own native State, Kentucky; but it is 
 with regret I search, and can not find, in your not very short letter, 
 any declaration, or intimation, that you entertain any desire for 
 the preservation of the Federal Union. 
 
 Your Obedient Servant, 
 
 A. Lincoln 
 
 Governor Beriah Magoffin consistently attempted to 
 take Kentucky into the Confederacy hut was thwarted by 
 the majority of Union members in the two branches of the 
 Kentucky Legislature. Lincoln's irony is at its best here. 
 
HIS SPEECHES AND WRITINGS 613 
 
 LETTER TO O. H. BROWNING 
 SEPTEMBER 22, 1861 
 
 Private b- Confidential. 
 
 Executive Mansion 
 Washington Sept 22d 1861. 
 Hon. O. H. Browning 
 My dear Sir 
 
 Yours of the 17th is just received; and coming from you, I 
 confess it astonishes me. That you should object to my adhering 
 to a law, which you had assisted in making, and presenting to me, 
 less than a month before, is odd enough. But this is a very small 
 part. Genl. Fremont's proclamation, as to confiscation of property, 
 and the liberation of slaves, is 'purely 'political, and not within the 
 range of military law, or necessity. If a commanding General finds 
 a necessity to seize the farm of a private owner, for a pasture, and 
 encampment, or a fortification, he has the right to do so, and to so 
 hold it, as long as the necessity lasts; and this is within military 
 law, because within military necessity. But to say the farm shall 
 no longer belong to the owner, or his heirs forever; and this as 
 well when the farm is not needed for military purposes as when 
 it is, is purely political, without the savor of military law about it. 
 And the same is true of slaves. If the General needs them, he can 
 seize them, and use them; but when the need is past, it is not 
 for him to fix their permanent future condition. That must be 
 settled according to laws made by law-makers, and not by military 
 proclamations. The proclamation in the point in question, is simply 
 "dictatorship." It assumes that the general may do anything he 
 pleases — confiscate the lands and free the slaves of loyal people, 
 as well as of disloyal ones. And going the whole figure I have no 
 doubt would be more popular with some thoughtless people, than 
 that which has been done! But I cannot assume this reckless posi- 
 tion, nor allow others to assume it on my responsibility. You speak 
 of it as being the only means of saving the government. On the 
 
614 ABRAHAM LINCOLN: 
 
 contrary it is itself the surrender of the government. Gan it be 
 pretended that it is any longer the Government of the U. S. — any 
 government of Constitution and laws, — wherein a General, or a 
 President, may make permanent rules of property by proclamation? 
 
 I do not say Congress might not with propriety pass a law, on 
 the point, just such as General Fremont proclaimed. I do not say 
 I might not, as a member of Congress, vote for it. What I object 
 to is, that I as President, shall expressly or impliedly seize and exer- 
 cise the permanent legislative functions of the government. 
 
 So much as to principle. Now as to policy. No doubt the thing 
 was popular in some quarters, and would have been more so if it 
 had been a general declaration of emancipation. The Kentucky 
 Legislature would not budge till that proclamation was modified; 
 and Gen. Anderson telegraphed me that on the news of Gen. 
 Fremont having actually issued deeds of manumission, a whole 
 company of our Volunteers threw down their arms and disbanded. 
 I was so assured, as to think it probable, that the very arms we 
 had furnished Kentucky would be turned against us. I think to 
 lose Kentucky is nearly the same as to lose the whole game. Ken- 
 tucky gone, we can not hold Missouri, nor, as I think, Maryland. 
 These all against us, and the job on our hands is too large for us. 
 We would as well consent to separation at once, including the sur- 
 render of this capitol. On the contrary, if you will give up your 
 restlessness for new positions, and back me manfully on the 
 grounds upon which you and other kind friends gave me the 
 election, and have approved in my public documents, we shall 
 go through triumphantly. 
 
 You must not understand I took my course on the proclama- 
 tion because of Kentucky. I took the same ground in a private 
 letter to General Fremont before I heard from Kentucky. 
 
 You think I am inconsistent because I did not also forbid Gen. 
 Fremont to shoot men under the proclamation. I understand that 
 part to be within military law; but I also think, and so privately 
 wrote Gen. Fremont, that it is impolitic in this, that our adversaries 
 have the power, and will certainly exercise it, to shoot as many of 
 our men as we shoot of theirs. I did not say this in the public letter, 
 because it is a subject I prefer not to discuss in the hearing of 
 our enemies. 
 
HIS SPEECHES AND WRITINGS 615 
 
 There has been no thought of removing Gen. Fremont on any 
 ground connected with his proclamation; and if there has been any 
 wish for his removal on any ground, our mutual friend Sam Glover 
 can probably tell you what it was. I hope no real necessity for it 
 exists on any ground. 
 
 Suppose you write to Hurlbut and get him to resign. 
 
 Your friend as ever 
 
 A. Lincoln 
 
 Browning, a lawyer of Quincy, Illinois, and one 
 of Lincoln's oldest and most trusted political associates, 
 was Senator from Illinois. He had written to Lincoln, 
 quizzing Lincoln's action in countermanding General 
 Fremont's proclamation freeing slaves in the area under 
 his command. 
 
 This letter was apparently dictated to Nicolay, in 
 whose handwriting the manuscript is, but several emen- 
 dations and the signature are in Lincoln's hand. 
 
 LETTER TO MAJOR [G. D.?] RAMSAY 
 OCTOBER 17, 1861 
 
 Executive Mansion 
 Oct. 17, 1861 
 Majr. Ramsay 
 My dear Sir 
 
 The lady — bearer of this — says she has two sons who want 
 work. Set them at it, if possible. Wanting to work is so rare a merit, 
 that it should be encouraged 
 
 Yours truly 
 
 A. Lincoln 
 
616 ABRAHAM LINCOLN: 
 
 The difficulty involved in reading Lincoln's script 
 has usually resulted in the word merit which appears in 
 this letter being transcribed as want. Lincoln's a and e 
 are often identical, his i undotted (hence ri appearing 
 here as nearly like n as can be), and his w and m so 
 nearly alike as to be difficult of determining. The word 
 may as well end ant as erit, but since Lincoln rarely if 
 ever begins an initial w with an upstroke of the pen, the 
 editor has decided that the first letter is m, and hence 
 that the word is merit, though he is ready to grant other 
 Lincoln students the reading of want. 
 
 ANNUAL MESSAGE TO CONGRESS 
 DECEMBER 3, 1861 
 
 Fellow-citizens of the Senate and House of Representatives: 
 
 In the midst of unprecedented political troubles, we have 
 cause of great gratitude to God for unusual good health, and most 
 abundant harvests. 
 
 You will not be surprised to learn that, in the peculiar ex- 
 igencies of the times, our intercourse with foreign nations has 
 been attended with profound solicitude, chiefly turning upon our 
 own domestic affairs. 
 
 A disloyal portion of the American people have, during the 
 whole year, been engaged in an attempt to divide and destroy 
 the Union. A nation which endures factious domestic division, 
 is exposed to disrespect abroad; and one party, if not both, is 
 sure, sooner or later, to invoke foreign intervention. 
 
 Nations, thus tempted to interfere, are not always able to 
 resist the counsels of seeming expediency, and ungenerous am- 
 bition, although measures adopted under such influences seldom 
 fail to be unfortunate and injurious to those adopting them. 
 
HIS SPEECHES AND WRITINGS 617 
 
 The disloyal citizens of the United States who have offered 
 the ruin of our country, in return for the aid and comfort which 
 they have invoked abroad, have received less patronage and 
 encouragement than they probably expected. If it were just to 
 suppose, as the insurgents have seemed to assume, that foreign 
 nations, in this case, discarding all moral, social, and treaty obliga- 
 tions, would act solely, and selfishly, for the most speedy restora- 
 tion of commerce, including, especially, the acquisition of cotton, 
 those nations appear, as yet, not to have seen their way to their 
 object more directly, or clearly, through the destruction, than 
 through the preservation, of the Union. If we could dare to be- 
 lieve that foreign nations are actuated by no higher principle than 
 this, I am quite sure a sound argument could be made to show 
 them that they can reach their aim more readily, and easily, 
 by aiding to crush this rebellion, than by giving encouragement 
 to it. 
 
 The principal lever relied on by the insurgents for exciting 
 foreign nations to hostility against us, as already intimated, is 
 the embarrassment of commerce. Those nations, however, not 
 improbably, saw from the first, that it was the Union which made 
 as well our foreign, as our domestic, commerce. They can scarcely 
 have failed to perceive that the effort for disunion produces the 
 existing difficulty; and that one strong nation promises more 
 durable peace, and a more extensive, valuable and reliable com- 
 merce, than can the same nation broken into hostile fragments. 
 
 It is not my purpose to review our discussions with foreign 
 states; because whatever might be their wishes, or dispositions, 
 the integrity of our country, and the stability of our government, 
 mainly depend, not upon them, but on the loyalty, virtue, patriot- 
 ism, and intelligence of the American people. The correspondence 
 itself, with the usual reservations, is herewith submitted. 
 
 I venture to hope it will appear that we have practised pru- 
 dence, and liberality towards foreign powers, averting causes of 
 irritation; and, with firmness, maintaining our own rights and 
 honor. 
 
 Since, however, it is apparent that here, as in every other 
 state, foreign dangers necessarily attend domestic difficulties, I 
 recommend that adequate and ample measures be adopted for 
 
618 ABRAHAM LINCOLN: 
 
 maintaining the public defences on every side. While, under this 
 general recommendation, provision for defending our sea-coast 
 line readily occurs to the mind, I also, in the same connexion, 
 ask the attention of Congress to our great lakes and rivers. It is 
 believed that some fortifications and depots of arms and muni- 
 tions, with harbor and navigation improvements, all at well 
 selected points upon these, would be of great importance to the 
 national defence and preservation. I ask attention to the views 
 of the Secretary of War, expressed in his report, upon the same 
 general subject. 
 
 I deem it of importance that the loyal regions of East Tennes- 
 see and western North Carolina should be connected with Ken- 
 tucky, and other faithful parts of the Union, by railroad. I there- 
 fore recommend, as a military measure, that Congress provide 
 for the construction of such road, as speedily as possible. Ken- 
 tucky, no doubt, will co-operate, and, through her legislature, 
 make the most judicious selection of a line. The northern ter- 
 minus must connect with some existing railroad; and whether the 
 route shall be from Lexington, or Nicholasville, to the Cumber- 
 land Gap; or from Lebanon to the Tennessee line, in the direction 
 of Knoxville; or on some still different line, can easily be deter- 
 mined. Kentucky and the general government co-operating, the 
 work can be completed in a very short time; and when done, it 
 will be not only of vast present usefulness, but also a valuable 
 permanent improvement, worth its cost in all the future. 
 
 Some treaties, designed chiefly for the interests of commerce, 
 and having no grave political importance, have been negotiated, 
 and will be submitted to the Senate for their consideration. 
 
 Although we have failed to induce some of the commercial 
 powers to adopt a desirable melioration of the rigor of maritime 
 war, we have removed all obstructions from the way of this 
 humane reform, except such as are merely of temporary and acci- 
 dental occurrence. 
 
 I invite your attention to the correspondence between her 
 Britannic Majesty's minister accredited to this government, and 
 the Secretary of State, relative to the detention of the British 
 ship Perthshire in June last, by the United States steamer Massa- 
 chusetts, for a supposed breach of the blockade. As this detention 
 
HIS SPEECHES AND WRITINGS 619 
 
 was occasioned by an obvious misapprehension of the facts, and 
 as justice requires that we should commit no belligerent act not 
 founded in strict right, as sanctioned by public law, I recommend 
 that an appropriation be made to satisfy the reasonable demand 
 of the owners of the vessel for her detention. 
 
 I repeat the recommendation of my predecessor, in his an- 
 nual message to Congress in December last, in regard to the dis- 
 position of the surplus which will probably remain after satisfy- 
 ing the claims of American citizens against China, pursuant to the 
 awards of the commissioners under the act of the 3rd of March, 
 1859. If, however, it should not be deemed advisable to carry 
 that recommendation into effect, I would suggest that authority be 
 given for investing the principal, over the proceeds of the sur- 
 plus referred to, in good securities, with a view to the satisfaction 
 of such other just claims of our citizens against China as are not 
 unlikely to arise hereafter in the course of our extensive trade 
 with that Empire. 
 
 By the act of the 5th of August last, Congress authorized 
 the President to instruct the commanders of suitable vessels to 
 defend themselves against, and to capture pirates. This authority 
 has been exercised in a single instance only. For the more effec- 
 tual protection of our extensive and valuable commerce, in the 
 eastern seas especially, it seems to me that it would also be ad- 
 visable to authorize the commanders of sailing vessels to re-cap- 
 ture any prizes which pirates might make of United States vessels 
 and their cargoes, and the consular courts, now established by 
 law in eastern countries, to adjudicate the cases, in the event that 
 this should not be objected to by the local authorities. 
 
 If any good reason exists why we should persevere longer in 
 withholding our recognition of the independence and sovereignty 
 of Hayti and Liberia, I am unable to discern it. Unwilling, how- 
 ever, to inaugurate a novel policy in regard to them without the 
 approbation of Congress, I submit for your consideration the 
 expediency of an appropriation for maintaining a charge d'affaires 
 near each of those new states. It does not admit of doubt that 
 important commercial advantages might be secured by favorable 
 commercial treaties with them. 
 
 The operations of the treasury during the period which has 
 
620 ABRAHAM LINCOLN: 
 
 elapsed since your adjournment have been conducted with sig- 
 nal success. The patriotism of the people has placed at the dis- 
 posal of the government the large means demanded by the public 
 exigencies. Much of the national loan has been taken by citizens 
 of the industrial classes, whose confidence in their country's faith, 
 and zeal for their country's deliverance from present peril, have 
 induced them to contribute to the support of the government the 
 whole of their limited acquisitions. This fact imposes peculiar 
 obligations to economy in disbursement and energy in action. 
 
 The revenue from all sources, including loans, for the finan- 
 cial year ending on the 30th June, 1861, was eighty six million, 
 eight hundred and thirty five thousand, nine hundred dollars, and 
 twenty seven cents, ($86,835,900.27,) and the expenditures for 
 the same period, including payments on account of the public 
 debt, were eighty four million, five hundred and seventy eight 
 thousand, eight hundred and thirty four dollars and forty seven 
 cents, ($84,578,834.47;) leaving a balance in the treasury, on the 
 1st July, of two million, two hundred and fifty seven thousand, 
 sixty five dollars and eighty cents, ($2,257,065.80.) For the first 
 quarter of the financial year, ending on the 30th September, 1861, 
 the receipts from all sources, including the balance of first of 
 July, were $102,532,509.27, and the expenses $98,239,733.09; leav- 
 ing a balance on the 1st October, 1861, of $4,292,776.18. 
 
 Estimates for the remaining three quarters of the year, and 
 for the financial year 1863, together with his views of ways and 
 means for meeting the demands contemplated by them, will be 
 submitted to Congress by the Secretary of the Treasury. It is 
 gratifying to know that the expenditures made necessary by the 
 rebellion are not beyond the resources of the loyal people, and 
 to believe that the same patriotism which has thus far sustained 
 the government will continue to sustain it till peace and union 
 shall again bless the land. 
 
 I respectfully refer to the report of the Secretary of War for 
 information respecting the numerical strength of the Army, and 
 for recommendations having in view an increase of its efficiency 
 and the well-being of the various branches of the service in- 
 trusted to his care. It is gratifying to know that the patriotism of 
 the people has proved equal to the occasion, and that the num- 
 
HIS SPEECHES AND WRITINGS 621 
 
 ber of troops tendered greatly exceeds the force which Congress 
 authorized me to call into the field. 
 
 I refer with pleasure to those portions of his report which 
 make allusion to the creditable degree of discipline already at- 
 tained by our troops, and to the excellent sanitary condition of 
 the entire army. 
 
 The recommendation of the secretary for an organization of 
 the militia upon a uniform basis, is a subject of vital importance 
 to the future safety of the country, and is commended to the 
 serious attention of Congress. 
 
 The large addition to the regular Army, in connection with 
 the defection that has so considerably diminished the number 
 of its officers, gives peculiar importance to his recommendation 
 for increasing the corps of cadets to the greatest capacity of the 
 Military Academy. 
 
 By mere omission, I presume, Congress has failed to pro- 
 vide chaplains for hospitals occupied by volunteers. This subject 
 was brought to my notice, and I was induced to draw up the 
 form of a letter, one copy of which, properly addressed, has been 
 delivered to each of the persons, and at the dates respectively 
 named and stated, in a schedule, containing also the form of the 
 letter, marked A, and herewith transmitted. 
 
 These gentlemen, I understand, entered upon the duties 
 designated, at the times respectively stated in the schedule, and 
 have labored faithfully therein ever since. I therefore recom- 
 mend that they be compensated at the same rate as chaplains in 
 the army. I further suggest that general provision be made for 
 chaplains to serve at hospitals, as well as with regiments. 
 
 The report of the Secretary of the Navy presents in detail 
 the operations of that branch of the service, the activity and 
 energy which have characterized its administration, and the re- 
 sults of measures to increase its efficiency and power. Such have 
 been the additions, by construction and purchase, that it may 
 almost be said a navy has been created and brought into service 
 since our difficulties commenced. 
 
 Besides blockading our extensive coast, squadrons larger 
 than ever before assembled under our flag have been put afloat 
 and performed deeds which have increased our naval renown. 
 
622 ABRAHAM LINCOLN: 
 
 I would invite special attention to the recommendation of 
 the Secretary for a more perfect organization of the Navy by in- 
 troducing additional grades in the service. 
 
 The present organization is defective and unsatisfactory, and 
 the suggestions submitted by the Department will, it is believed, 
 if adopted, obviate the difficulties alluded to, promote harmony, 
 and increase the efficiency of the Navy. 
 
 There are three vacancies on the bench of the Supreme 
 Court — two by the decease of Justices Daniel and McLean, and 
 one by the resignation of Justice Campbell. I have so far forborne 
 making nominations to fill these vacancies for reasons which I 
 will now state. Two of the outgoing judges resided within the 
 States now overrun by revolt; so that if successors were appointed 
 in the same localities, they could not now serve upon their cir- 
 cuits; and many of the most competent men there probably would 
 not take the personal hazard of accepting to serve, even here, 
 upon the supreme bench. I have been unwilling to throw all the 
 appointments northward, thus disabling myself from doing justice 
 to the South on the return of peace; although I may remark that 
 to transfer to the North one which has heretofore been in the 
 South, would not, with reference to territory and population, be 
 unjust. 
 
 During the long and brilliant judicial career of Judge McLean 
 his circuit grew into an empire — altogether too large for any one 
 judge to give the courts therein more than a nominal attendance — 
 rising in population from one million four hundred and seventy 
 thousand and eighteen in 1830, to six million one hundred and 
 fifty-one thousand four hundred and five in 1860. 
 
 Besides this, the country generally has outgrown our present 
 judicial system. If uniformity was at all intended, the system re- 
 quires that all the States shall be accommodated with circuit 
 courts, attended by supreme judges, while, in fact, Wisconsin, 
 Minnesota, Iowa, Kansas, Florida, Texas, California, and Oregon, 
 have never had any such courts. Nor can this well be remedied 
 without a change of the system; because the adding of judges to 
 the Supreme Court, enough for the accommodation of all parts 
 of the country, with circuit courts, would create a court altogether 
 too numerous for a judicial body of any sort. And the evil, if it be 
 
HIS SPEECHES AND WRITINGS 623 
 
 one, will increase as new States come into the Union. Circuit 
 courts are useful, or they are not useful. If useful, no State should 
 be denied them; if not useful, no State should have them. Let 
 them be provided for all, or abolished as to all. 
 
 Three modifications occur to me, either of which, I think, 
 would be an improvement upon our present system. Let the 
 Supreme Court be of convenient number in every event. Then, 
 first, let the whole country be divided into circuits of convenient 
 size, the supreme judges to serve in a number of them correspond- 
 ing to their own number, and independent circuit judges be pro- 
 vided for all the rest. Or, secondly, let the supreme judges be 
 relieved from circuit duties, and circuit judges provided for all 
 the circuits. Or, thirdly, dispense with circuit courts altogether, 
 leaving the judicial functions wholly to the district courts and an 
 independent Supreme Court. 
 
 I respectfully recommend to the consideration of Congress 
 the present condition of the Statute laws, with the hope that 
 Congress will be able to find an easy remedy for many of the in- 
 conveniences and evils which constantly embarrass those engaged 
 in the practical administration of them. Since the organization of 
 the government, Congress has enacted some five thousand acts 
 and joint resolutions, which fill more than six thousand closely 
 printed pages, and are scattered through many volumes. Many 
 of these acts have been drawn in haste and without sufficient 
 caution, so that their provisions are often obscure in themselves, 
 or in conflict with each other, or at least so doubtful as to render 
 it very difficult for even the best informed persons to ascertain 
 precisely what the statute law really is. 
 
 It seems to me very important that tire statute laws should be 
 made as plain and intelligible as possible, and be reduced to as 
 small a compass as may consist with the fullness and precision of 
 the will of the legislature and the perspicuity of its language. 
 This, well done, would, I think, greatly facilitate the labors of 
 those whose duty it is to assist in the administration of the laws, 
 and would be a lasting benefit to the people, by placing before 
 them, in a more accessible and intelligible form, the laws which so 
 deeply concern their interests and their duties. 
 
 I am informed by some whose opinions I respect, that all 
 
624 ABRAHAM LINCOLN: 
 
 the acts of Congress now in force, and of a permanent and gen- 
 eral nature, might be revised and rewritten, so as to be embraced 
 in one volume (or at most, two volumes) of ordinary and con- 
 venient size. And I respectfully recommend to Congress to con- 
 sider of the subject, and, if my suggestion be approved, to devise 
 such plan as to their wisdom shall seem most proper for the at- 
 tainment of the end proposed. 
 
 One of the unavoidable consequences of the present insur- 
 rection is the entire suppression, in many places, of all the or- 
 dinary means of administering civil justice by the officers and in 
 the forms of existing law. This is the case, in whole or in part, 
 in all the insurgent States; and as our armies advance upon and 
 take possession of parts of those States, the principal evil becomes 
 more apparent. There are no courts nor officers to whom the 
 citizens of other States may apply for the enforcement of their 
 lawful claims against citizens of the insurgent States; and there 
 is a vast amount of debt constituting such claims. Some have 
 estimated it as high as two hundred million dollars, due, in large 
 part, from insurgents, in open rebellion, to loyal citizens who are, 
 even now, making great sacrifices in the discharge of their patri- 
 otic duty to support the government. 
 
 Under these circumstances, I have been urgently solicited 
 to establish, by military power, courts to administer summary 
 justice in such cases. I have thus far declined to do it, not because 
 I had any doubt that the end proposed — the collection of the 
 debts — was just and right in itself, but because I have been un- 
 willing to go beyond the pressure of necessity in the unusual ex- 
 ercise of power. But the powers of Congress I suppose are equal 
 to the anomalous occasion, and therefore I refer the whole mat- 
 ter to Congress, with the hope that a plan may be devised for 
 the administration of justice in all such parts of the insurgent 
 States and Territories as may be under the control of this gov- 
 ernment, whether by a voluntary return to allegiance and order 
 or by the power of our arms. This, however, not to be a perma- 
 nent institution, but a temporary substitute, and to cease as soon 
 as the ordinary courts can be reestablished in peace. 
 
 It is important that some more convenient means should be 
 provided, if possible, for the adjustment of claims against the 
 
HIS SPEECHES AND WRITINGS 625 
 
 government, especially in view of their increased number by 
 reason of the war. It is as much the duty of government to ren- 
 der prompt justice against itself, in favor of citizens, as it is to 
 administer the same, between private individuals. The investi- 
 gation and adjudication of claims, in their nature belong to the 
 judicial department; besides, it is apparent that the attention 
 of Congress will be more than usually engaged, for some time to 
 come, with great national questions. It was intended, by the or- 
 ganization of the Court of Claims mainly to remove this branch 
 of business from the Halls of Congress; but while the court has 
 proved to be an effective and valuable means of investigation, it 
 in great degree fails to effect the object of its creation, for want 
 of power to make its judgments final. 
 
 Fully aware of the delicacy, not to say the danger, of the 
 subject, I commend to your careful consideration whether this 
 power of making judgments final may not properly be given to 
 the court, reserving the right of appeal on questions of law to 
 the Supreme Court, with such other provisions as experience may 
 have shown to be necessary. 
 
 I ask attention to the report of the Postmaster General, the 
 following being a summary statement of the condition of the de- 
 partment: 
 
 The revenue from all sources during the fiscal year ending 
 June 30, 1861, including the annual permanent appropriation 
 of seven hundred thousand dollars ($700,000) for the trans- 
 portation of "free mail matter," was nine million, forty nine 
 thousand, two hundred and ninety six dollars and forty cents 
 ($9,049,296.40,) being about two per cent, less than the revenue 
 for 1860. 
 
 The expenditures were thirteen million, six hundred and six 
 thousand, seven hundred and fifty nine dollars and eleven cents 
 ($13,606,759.11) showing a decrease of more than eight per cent, 
 as compared with those of the previous year, and leaving an ex- 
 cess of expenditure over the revenue for the last fiscal year of 
 four million, five hundred and fifty seven thousand, four hundred 
 and sixty two dollars and seventy one cents ($4,557,462.71) 
 
 The gross revenue for the year ending June 30, 1863, is esti- 
 mated at an increase of four per cent, on that of 1861, making 
 
626 ABRAHAM LINCOLN: 
 
 eight million, six hundred and eighty three thousand dollars 
 ($8,683,000) to which should be added the earnings of the de- 
 partment in carrying free matter, viz: seven hundred thousand 
 dollars ( $700,000. ) making nine million, three hundred and eighty 
 three thousand dollars ($9,383,000.) 
 
 The total expenditures for 1863 are estimated at $12,528,000, 
 leaving an estimated deficiency of $3,145,000, to be supplied from 
 the treasury, in addition to the permanent appropriation. 
 
 The present insurrection shows, I think, that the extension 
 of this District across the Potomac river, at the time of establishing 
 the capital here, was eminently wise, and consequently that the 
 relinquishment of that portion of it which lies within the State 
 of Virginia was unwise and dangerous. I submit for your consid- 
 eration the expediency of regaining that part of the District, and 
 the restoration of the original boundaries thereof, through nego- 
 tiations with the State of Virginia. 
 
 The report of the Secretary of the Interior, with the accom- 
 panying documents, exhibits the condition of the several branches 
 of the public business pertaining to that department. The de- 
 pressing influences of the insurrection have been especially felt 
 in the operations of the Patent and General Land Offices. The 
 cash receipts from the sales of public lands during the past year 
 have exceeded the expenses of our land system only about 
 $200,000. The sales have been entirely suspended in the southern 
 States, while the interruptions to the business of the country, 
 and the diversion of large numbers of men from labor to military 
 service, have obstructed settlements in the new States and Ter- 
 ritories of the northwest. 
 
 The receipts of the Patent Office have declined in nine 
 months about $100,000, rendering a large reduction of the force 
 employed necessary to make it self sustaining. 
 
 The demands upon the Pension Office will be largely in- 
 creased by the insurrection. Numerous applications for pensions, 
 based upon the casualties of the existing war, have already been 
 made. There is reason to believe that many who are now upon the 
 pension rolls and in receipt of the bounty of the government, are 
 in the ranks of the insurgent army, or giving them aid and com- 
 fort. The Secretary of the Interior has directed a suspension of 
 
HIS SPEECHES AND WRITINGS 627 
 
 the payment of the pensions of such persons upon proof of their 
 disloyalty. I recommend that Congress authorize that officer to 
 cause the names of such persons to be stricken from the pension 
 rolls. 
 
 The relations of the government with the Indian tribes have 
 been greatly disturbed by the insurrection, especially in the south- 
 ern superintendency and in that of New Mexico. The Indian 
 country south of Kansas is in the possession of insurgents from 
 Texas and Arkansas. The agents of the United States appointed 
 since the 4th of March for this superintendency have been un- 
 able to reach their posts, while the most of those who were in 
 office before that time have espoused the insurrectionary cause, 
 and assume to exercise the powers of agents by virtue of com- 
 missions from the insurrectionists. It has been stated in the pub- 
 lic press that a portion of those Indians have been organized as 
 a military force, and are attached to the army of the insurgents. 
 Although the government has no official information upon this 
 subject, letters have been written to the Commissioner of Indian 
 Affairs by several prominent chiefs, giving assurance of their 
 loyalty to the United States, and expressing a wish for the pres- 
 ence of federal troops to protect them. It is believed that upon 
 the repossession of the country by the federal forces the Indians 
 will readily cease all hostile demonstrations, and resume their 
 former relations to the government. 
 
 Agriculture, confessedly the largest interest of the nation, 
 has, not a department, nor a bureau, but a clerkship only, assigned 
 to it in the government. While it is fortunate that this great inter- 
 est is so independent in its nature as to not have demanded and 
 extorted more from the government, I respectfully ask Congress 
 to consider whether something more cannot be given voluntarily 
 with general advantage. 
 
 Annual reports exhibiting the condition of our agriculture, 
 commerce, and manufactures would present a fund of informa- 
 tion of great practical value to the country. While I make no sug- 
 gestion as to details, I venture the opinion that an agricultural 
 and statistical bureau might profitably be organized. 
 
 The execution of the laws for the suppression of the African 
 slave trade, has been confided to the Department of the Interior. 
 
628 ABRAHAM LINCOLN: 
 
 It is a subject of gratulation that the efforts which have been made 
 for the suppression of this inhuman traffic, have been recently 
 attended with unusual success. Five vessels being fitted out for 
 the slave trade have been seized and condemned. Two mates of 
 vessels engaged in the trade, and one person in equipping a ves- 
 sel as a slaver, have been convicted and subjected to the penalty 
 of fine and imprisonment, and one captain, taken with a cargo of 
 Africans on board his vessel, has been convicted of the highest 
 grade of offence under our laws, the punishment of which is 
 death. 
 
 The Territories of Colorado, Dakotah [sic] and Nevada, 
 created by the last Congress, have been organized, and civil 
 administration has been inaugurated therein under auspices espe- 
 cially gratifying, when it is considered that the leaven of treason 
 was found existing in some of these new countries when the 
 federal officers arrived there. 
 
 The abundant natural resources of these Territories, with 
 the security and protection afforded by organized government, 
 will doubtless invite to them a large immigration when peace 
 shall restore the business of the country to its accustomed chan- 
 nels. I submit the resolutions of the legislature of Colorado, which 
 evidence the patriotic spirit of the people of the Territory. So far 
 the authority of the United States has been upheld in all the Ter- 
 ritories, as it is hoped it will be in the future. I commend their 
 interests and defence to the enlightened and generous care of 
 Congress. 
 
 I recommend to the favorable consideration of Congress the 
 interests of the District of Columbia. The insurrection has been 
 the cause of much suffering and sacrifice to its inhabitants, and 
 as they have no representative in Congress, that body should not 
 overlook their just claims upon the government. 
 
 At your late session a joint resolution was adopted authoriz- 
 ing the President to take measures for facilitating a proper repre- 
 sentation of the industrial interests of the United States at the 
 exhibition of the industry of all nations to be holden at London in 
 the year 1862. I regret to say I have been unable to give personal 
 attention to this subject, — a subject at once so interesting in 
 itself, and so extensively and intimately connected v/ith the ma- 
 
HIS SPEECHES AND WRITINGS 629 
 
 terial prosperity of the world. Through the Secretaries of State 
 and of the Interior a plan, or system, has been devised, and partly 
 matured, and which will be laid before you. 
 
 Under and by virtue of the act of Congress entitled "An 
 act to confiscate property used for insurrectionary purposes," 
 approved August 6, 1861, the legal claims of certain persons to 
 the labor and service of certain other persons have become for- 
 feited; and numbers of the latter, thus liberated, are already de- 
 pendent on the United States, and must be provided for in some 
 way. Besides this, it is not impossible that some of the States will 
 pass similar enactments for their own benefit respectively, and 
 by operation of which persons of the same class will be thrown 
 upon them for disposal. In such case I recommend that Congress 
 provide for accepting such persons from such States, according to 
 some mode of valuation, in lieu, pro tanto, of direct taxes, or upon 
 some other plan to be agreed on with such States respectively; 
 that such persons, on such acceptance by the general government, 
 be at once deemed free; and that, in any event, steps be taken 
 for colonizing both classes, (or the one first mentioned, if the 
 other shall not be brought into existence,) at some place, or 
 places, in a climate congenial to them. It might be well to con- 
 sider, too, whether the free colored people already in the United 
 States could not, so far as individuals may desire, be included in 
 such colonization. 
 
 To carry out the plan of colonization may involve the acquir- 
 ing of territory, and also the appropriation of money beyond that 
 to be expended in the territorial acquisition. Having practiced 
 the acquisition of territory for nearly sixty years, the question of 
 constitutional power to do so is no longer an open one with us. 
 The power was questioned at first by Mr. Jefferson, who, however, 
 in the purchase of Louisiana, yielded his scruples on the plea of 
 great expediency. If it be said that the only legitimate object of 
 acquiring territory is to furnish homes for white men, this meas- 
 ure effects that object; for the emigration of colored men leaves 
 additional room for white men remaining or coming here. Mr. 
 Jefferson, however, placed the importance of procuring Louisiana 
 more on political and commercial grounds than on providing 
 room for population. 
 
630 ABRAHAM LINCOLN: 
 
 On this whole proposition, including the appropriation of 
 money with the acquisition of territory, does not the expediency 
 amount to absolute necessity — that, without which the govern- 
 ment itself cannot be perpetuated? The war continues. In consider- 
 ing the policy to be adopted for suppressing the insurrection, I 
 have been anxious and careful that the inevitable conflict for this 
 purpose shall not degenerate into a violent and remorseless revolu- 
 tionary struggle. I have, therefore, in every case, thought it proper 
 to keep the integrity of the Union prominent as the primary ob- 
 ject of the contest on our part, leaving all questions which are not 
 of vital military importance to the more deliberate action of the 
 legislature. 
 
 In the exercise of my best discretion I have adhered to the 
 blockade of the ports held by the insurgents, instead of putting 
 in force, by proclamation, the law of Congress enacted at the late 
 session, for closing those ports. So, also, obeying the dictates of 
 prudence, as well as the obligations of law, instead of transcend- 
 ing, I have adhered to the act of Congress to confiscate property 
 used for insurrectionary purposes. If a new law upon the same 
 subject shall be proposed, its propriety will be duly considered. 
 
 The Union must be preserved, and hence, all indispensable 
 means must be employed. We should not be in haste to determine 
 that radical and extreme measures, which may reach the loyal as 
 well as the disloyal, are indispensable. 
 
 The inaugural address at the beginning of the Administration, 
 and the message to Congress at the late special session, were 
 both mainly devoted to the domestic controversy out of which 
 the insurrection and consequent war have sprung. Nothing now 
 occurs to add or subtract, to or from, the principles or general 
 purposes stated and expressed in those documents. 
 
 The last ray of hope for preserving the Union peaceably, 
 expired at the assault upon Fort Sumter; and a general review of 
 what has occurred since may not be unprofitable. What was pain- 
 fully uncertain then, is much better defined and more distinct 
 now; and the progress of events is plainly in the right direction. 
 The insurgents confidently claimed a strong support from north 
 of Mason and Dixon's line; and the friends of the Union were not 
 free from apprehension on the point. This, however, was soon 
 
HIS SPEECHES AND WRITINGS 631 
 
 settled definitely and on the right side. South of the line, noble 
 little Delaware led off right from the first. Maryland was made to 
 seem against the Union. Our soldiers were assaulted, bridges 
 were burned, and railroads torn up, within her limits; and we 
 were many days, at one time, without the ability to bring a single 
 regiment over her soil to the capital. Now, her bridges and rail- 
 roads are repaired and open to the government; she already gives 
 seven regiments to the cause of the Union and none to the enemy; 
 and her people, at a regular election, have sustained the Union, 
 by a larger majority, and a larger aggregate vote than they ever 
 before gave to any candidate, or any question. Kentucky, too, for 
 some time in doubt, is now decidedly, and, I think, unchangeably, 
 ranged on the side of the Union. Missouri is comparatively quiet; 
 and I believe cannot again be overrun by the insurrectionists. 
 These three States of Maryland, Kentucky, and Missouri, neither 
 of which would promise a single soldier at first, have now an 
 aggregate of not less than forty thousand in the field, for the 
 Union; while, of their citizens, certainly not more than a third of 
 that number, and they of doubtful whereabouts, and doubtful 
 existence, are in arms against it. After a somewhat bloody struggle 
 of months, winter closes on the Union people of western Virginia, 
 leaving them masters of their own country. 
 
 An insurgent force of about fifteen hundred, for months 
 dominating the narrow peninsular region, constituting the coun- 
 ties of Accomac and Northampton, and known as eastern shore 
 of Virginia, together with some contiguous parts of Maryland, 
 have laid down their arms; and the people there have renewed 
 their allegiance to, and accepted the protection of, the old flag. 
 This leaves no armed insurrectionist north of the Potomac, or 
 east of the Chesapeake. 
 
 Also we have obtained a footing at each of the isolated points, 
 on the southern coast, of Hatteras, Port Royal, Tybee Island, near 
 Savannah, and Ship Island; and we likewise have some general 
 accounts of popular movements, in behalf of the Union, in North 
 Carolina and Tennessee. 
 
 These things demonstrate that the cause of the Union is ad- 
 vancing steadily and certainly southward. 
 
 Since your last adjournment, Lieutenant General Scott has 
 
632 ABRAHAM LINCOLN: 
 
 retired from the head of the army. During his long life, the nation 
 has not been unmindful of his merit; yet, on calling to mind how 
 faithfully, ably and brilliantly he has served the country, from 
 a time far back in our history, when few of the now living had 
 been born, and thenceforward continually, I cannot but think we 
 are still his debtors. I submit, therefore, for your consideration, 
 what further mark of recognition is due to him, and to ourselves, 
 as a grateful people. 
 
 With the retirement of General Scott came the executive 
 duty of appointing, in his stead, a general-in-chief of the army. It 
 is a fortunate circumstance that neither in council nor country 
 was there, so far as I know, any difference of opinion as to the 
 proper person to be selected. The retiring chief repeatedly 
 expressed his judgment in favor of General McClellan for the posi- 
 tion; and in this the nation seemed to give a unanimous concur- 
 rence. The designation of General McClellan is therefore in con- 
 siderable degree, the selection of the Country as well as of the 
 Executive; and hence there is better reason to hope there will be 
 given him, the confidence, and cordial support thus, by fair im- 
 plication, promised, and without which, he cannot, with so full 
 efficiency, serve the country. 
 
 It has been said that one bad general is better than two good 
 ones; and the saying is true, if taken to mean no more than that an 
 army is better directed by a single mind, though inferior, than 
 by two superior ones, at variance, and cross-purposes with each 
 other. 
 
 And the same is true, in all joint operations wherein those 
 engaged, can have none but a common end in view, and can 
 differ only as to the choice of means. In a storm at sea, no one 
 on board can wish the ship to sink; and yet, not unfrequently, all 
 go down together, because too many will direct, and no single 
 mind can be allowed to control. 
 
 It continues to develop that the insurrection is largely, if 
 not exclusively, a war upon the first principle of popular govern- 
 ment — the rights of the people. Conclusive evidence of this is 
 found in the most grave and maturely considered public docu- 
 ments, as well as in the general tone of the insurgents. In those 
 documents we find the abridgement of the existing right of suf- 
 
 
HIS SPEECHES AND WRITINGS 633 
 
 frage and the denial to the people of all right to participate in the 
 selection of public officers, except the legislative boldly advocated, 
 with labored arguments to prove that large control of the people 
 in government, is the source of all political evil. Monarchy itself 
 is sometimes hinted at as a possible refuge from the power of the 
 people. 
 
 In my present position, I could scarcely be justified were I 
 to omit raising a warning voice against this approach of returning 
 despotism. 
 
 It is not needed, not fitting here, that a general argument 
 should be made in favor of popular institutions; but there is one 
 point, with its connexions, not so hackneyed as most others, to 
 which I ask a brief attention. It is the effort to place capital on an 
 equal footing with, if not above labor, in the structure of govern- 
 ment. It is assumed that labor is available only in connexion with 
 capital; that nobody labors unless somebody else, owning capital, 
 somehow by the use of it, induces him to labor. This assumed, it 
 is next considered whether it is best that capital shall hire laborers, 
 and thus induce them to work by their own consent, or buy them, 
 and drive them to it without their consent. Having proceeded so 
 far, it is naturally concluded that all laborers are either hired 
 laborers, or what we call slaves. And further it is assumed that 
 whoever is once a hired laborer, is fixed in that condition for life. 
 
 Now, there is no such relation between capital and labor as 
 assumed; nor is there any such thing as a free man being fixed 
 for life in the condition of a hired laborer. Both these assumptions 
 are false, and all inferences from them are groundless. Labor is 
 prior to, and independent of, capital. Capital is only the fruit of 
 labor, and could never have existed if labor had not first existed. 
 Labor is the superior of capital, and deserves much the higher 
 consideration. Capital has its rights, which are as worthy of pro- 
 tection as any other rights. Nor is it denied that there is, and 
 probably always will be, a relation between labor and capital, 
 producing mutual benefits. The error is in assuming that the whole 
 labor of community exists within that relation. A few men own 
 capital, and that few avoid labor themselves, and, with their 
 capital, hire or buy another few to labor for them. A large ma- 
 jority belong to neither class — neither work for others, nor have 
 
634 ABRAHAM LINCOLN: 
 
 others working for them. In most of the southern states, a majority 
 of the whole people of all colors are neither slaves nor masters; 
 while in the northern a large majority are neither hirers nor hired. 
 Men with their families — wives, sons, and daughters — work for 
 themselves, on their farms, in their houses, and in their shops, 
 taking the whole product to themselves, and asking no favors of 
 capital on the one hand, nor of hired laborers or slaves on the 
 other. It is not forgotten that a considerable number of persons 
 mingle their own labor with capital — that is, they labor with their 
 own hands, and also buy or hire others to labor for them; but this 
 is only a mixed, and not a distinct class. No principle stated is 
 disturbed by the existence of this mixed class. 
 
 Again: as has already been said, there is not, of necessity, any 
 such thing as the free hired laborer being fixed to that condition 
 for life. Many independent men everywhere in these States, a few 
 years back in their lives, were hired laborers. The prudent, penni- 
 less beginner in the world, labors for wages awhile, saves a sur- 
 plus with which to buy tools or land for himself; then labors on 
 his own account another while, and at length hires another new 
 beginner to help him. This is the just, and generous, and pros- 
 perous system, which opens the way to all— gives hope to all, and 
 consequent energy, and progress, and improvement of condition 
 to all. No men living are more worthy to be trusted than those 
 who toil up from poverty — none less inclined to take, or touch, 
 aught which they have not honestly earned. Let them beware 
 of surrendering a political power which they already possess, 
 and which, if surrendered, will surely be used to close the door 
 of advancement against such as they, and to fix new disabilities 
 and burdens upon them, till all of liberty shall be lost. 
 
 From the first taking of our national census to the last are 
 seventy years; and we find our population at the end of the period 
 eight times as great as it was at the beginning. The increase of 
 those other things which men deem desirable has been even 
 greater. We thus have at one view, what the popular principle 
 applied to government, through the machinery of the States and 
 the Union, has produced in a given time; and also what, if firmly 
 maintained, it promises for the future. There are already among 
 us those, who, if the Union be preserved, will live to see it con- 
 
HIS SPEECHES AND WRITINGS 635 
 
 tain two hundred and fifty millions. The struggle of to-day, is not 
 altogether for to-day — it is for a vast future also. With a reliance 
 on Providence, all the more firm and earnest, let us proceed in 
 the great task which events have devolved upon us. 
 
 Abraham Lincoln 
 December 3, 1861 
 
 LETTER TO MRS. SUSANNAH WEATHERS 
 DECEMBER 4, 1861 
 
 Executive Mansion, 
 Washington, Dec. 4 1861. 
 My dear Madam 
 
 I take great pleasure in acknowledging the receipt of your 
 letter of Nov. 26; and in thanking you for the present by which 
 it was accompanied. A pair of socks so fine, and soft, and warm, 
 could hardly have been manufactured in any other way than the 
 old Kentucky fashion. Your letter informs me that your maiden 
 name was Crume, and that you were raised in Washington 
 County, Kentucky, by which I infer that an uncle of mine by 
 marriage was a relative of yours. Nearly, or quite sixty years ago, 
 Ralph Crume married Mary Lincoln, a sister of my father, in 
 Washington County, Kentucky. 
 
 Accept my thanks, and believe me 
 
 Very truly 
 Your friend 
 
 A. Lincoln. 
 Mrs. Susannah Weathers 
 Rossville, Clinton Co. Ind. 
 
636 ABRAHAM LINCOLN 
 
 TELEGRAM TO GENERAL D. C. BUELL 
 JANUARY 4, 1862 
 
 Washington, D. C. Jan. 4. 1862 
 Brig. Gen. Buell 
 Louisville, Ky. 
 
 Have arms gone forward for East-Tennessee? Please tell 
 me the progress and condition of the movement in that direction. 
 Answer. 
 
 A. Lincoln 
 
 LETTER TO GENERAL D. C. BUELL 
 JANUARY 6, 1862 
 
 Executive Mansion, 
 Washington, January 6, 1862. 
 Brig. Gen. Buell 
 My dear Sir 
 
 Your despatch of yesterday has been received, and it dis- 
 appoints and distresses me. I have shown it to Gen. McClellan, 
 who says he will write you to-day. I am not competent to criticise 
 your views, and therefore what I offer is merely in justification of 
 myself. Of the two, I would rather have a point on the Railroad 
 south of Cumberland Gap, than Nashville, first, because it cuts 
 a great artery of the enemies' communication, which Nashville 
 does not, and secondly because it is in the midst of loyal people, 
 who would rally around it, while Nashville is not. Again, I can- 
 not see why the movement on East Tennessee would not be a 
 
HIS SPEECHES AND WRITINGS 637 
 
 diversion in your favor, rather than a disadvantage, assuming 
 that a movement towards Nashville is the main object. 
 
 But my distress is that our friends in East Tennessee are 
 being hanged and driven to despair, and even now I fear, are 
 thinking of taking rebel arms for the sake of personal protection. 
 In this we lose the most valuable stake we have in the South. My 
 despatch, to which yours is an answer, was sent with the knowl- 
 edge of Senator Johnson and Representative Maynard of East 
 Tennessee, and they will be upon me to know the answer, which 
 I cannot safely show them. They would despair — possibly resign 
 to go and save their families somehow, or die with them. 
 
 I do not intend this to be an order in any sense, but merely, 
 as intimated before, to show you the grounds of my anxiety. 
 
 Yours very Truly, 
 
 A. Lincoln 
 
 LETTER TO GENERAL A. E. BURNSIDE 
 JANUARY 28, 1862 
 
 Executive Mansion, 
 Washington, January 28, 1862 
 Major Gen. Burnside 
 My dear Sir 
 
 Gen. Humphreys is now with me saying that you told him 
 that you had strongly urged upon me, his, Gen. H's promotion, 
 and that I in response had used such strong language, that you 
 were sure his name would be sent to the Senate. I remember 
 nothing of your speaking to me; or I to you, about Gen. H. still 
 this is far from conclusive that nothing was said. I will now thank 
 you to drop me a note, saying what you think is right and just 
 about Gen. Humphreys. 
 
 Yours as ever 
 
 A. Lincoln 
 
638 ABRAHAM LINCOLN 
 
 LETTER TO GENERAL G. B. McCLELLAN 
 APRIL 9, 1862 
 
 Washington, April 9. 1862 
 Major General McClellan. 
 My dear Sir. 
 
 Your despatches complaining that you are not properly sus- 
 tained, while they do not offend me, do pain me very much. 
 
 Blencker's [sic] Division was withdrawn from you before you 
 left here; and you knew the pressure under which I did it, and, 
 as I thought, acquiesced in it — certainly not without reluctance. 
 
 After you left, I ascertained that less than twenty thousand 
 unorganized men, without a single field battery, were all you de- 
 signed to be left for the defence of Washington, and Manassas 
 Juntion [sic] and part of this even, was to go to Gen. Hookers 
 old position. General Banks' corps, once designed for Manassas 
 Junction, was diverted, and tied up on the line of Winchester 
 and Strausburg [sic], and could not leave it without again expos- 
 ing the upper Potomac, and the Baltimore and Ohio Railroad. 
 This presented, ( or would present, when McDowell and Sumner 
 should be gone) a great temptation to the enemy to turn back 
 from the Rappahonock [sic] 9 and sack Washington. My explicit 
 order that Washington should, by the judgment of all the com- 
 manders of Army corps, be left entirely secure, had been neglected. 
 It was precisely this that drove me to detain McDowell. 
 
 I do not forget that I was satisfied with your arrangement 
 to leave Banks at Mannassas [sic] Junction; but when that ar- 
 rangement was broken up, and nothing was substituted for it, of 
 course I was not satisfied. I was constrained to substitute some- 
 thing for it myself. And now allow me to ask "Do you really think 
 I should permit the line from Richmond, via Mannassas [sic] 
 Junction, to this city to be entirely open, except what resistence 
 [sic] could be presented by less than twenty thousand unorgan- 
 
HIS SPEECHES AND WRITINGS 639 
 
 ized troops ?" This is a question which the country will not allow 
 me to evade. 
 
 There is a curious mystery about the number of the troops 
 now with you. When I telegraphed you on the 6th. saying you 
 had over a hundred thousand with you, I had just obtained from 
 the Secretary of War, a statement, taken as he said, from your 
 own returns, making 108.000 then with you, and en route to you. 
 You now say you will have but 85,000, when all en route to you 
 shall have reached you. How can this discrepancy of 23.000 be 
 accounted for? 
 
 As to Gen. Wool's command, I understand it is doing for you 
 precisely what a like number of your own would have to do, if 
 that command was away. 
 
 I suppose the whole force which has gone forward for you, 
 is with you by this time; and if so, I think it is the precise time 
 for you to strike a blow. By delay the enemy will relatively gain 
 upon you — that is, he will gain faster, by fortifications and re- 
 inforcements ; than you can by re-inforcements alone. 
 
 And, once more let me tell you, it is indispensable to you 
 that you strike a blow. I am poweless [sic] to help this. You will 
 do me the justice to remember I always insisted, that going down 
 the Bay in search of a field, instead of fighting at or near Man- 
 nassas [sic] y was only shifting, and not surmounting, a difficulty — 
 that we would find the same enemy, and the same, or equal, in- 
 trenchments, at either place. The country will not fail to note — 
 is now noting — that the present hesitation to move upon an in- 
 trenched enemy, is but the story of Manassas repeated. 
 
 I beg to assure you that I have never written you, or spoken 
 to you, in greater kindness of feeling than now, nor with a fuller 
 purpose to sustain you, so far as in my most anxious judgment, I 
 consistently can. But you must act. 
 
 Yours very truly 
 
 A. Lincoln 
 
 Lincoln's numerous letters and telegrams to Mc- 
 Clellan — represented by this and several of the most 
 interesting ones written between this date and Novem- 
 
640 ABRAHAM LINCOLN: 
 
 ber 5, 1862, when Lincoln removed McClellan from 
 command of the Union Army — reveal Lincoln's constant 
 dissatisfaction with McClellan s inaction. The consensus 
 of military opinion in later years has sustained Lincoln's 
 views for the most part and has rated McClellan as an 
 efficient organizer, but a poor commander for offensive 
 action. Some students have felt that Lincoln meddled 
 too much with strategy and interfered too often with 
 the plans of his commanders. It should be noted, how- 
 ever, that there was little inclination on Lincoln's part 
 to interfere with those generals who got results. The con- 
 trast between his letters to Grant and those to Mc- 
 Clellan is obvious; although Lincoln sometimes disagreed 
 with Grant, as he admits in the letter written July 13, 
 1868, he kept the matter to himself. 
 
 LETTER TO THE SENATE AND HOUSE 
 OF REPRESENTATIVES, APRIL 16, 1862 
 
 Fellow Citizens of the Senate, and House of Representatives. 
 
 The Act entitled "An Act for the release of certain persons 
 held to service, or labor in the District of Columbia" has this day 
 been approved, and signed. 
 
 I have never doubted the constitutional authority of Congress 
 to abolish slavery in this District; and I have ever desired to see 
 the national capital freed from the institution in some satisfactory 
 way. Hence there has never been; in my mind, any question upon 
 the subject, except the one of expediency, arising in view of all 
 the circumstances. If there be matters within and above this act, 
 which might have taken a course or shape, more satisfactory to 
 my judgment, I do-not attempt to specify them. I am gratified 
 that the two principles of compensation, and colonization, are 
 both recognized, and practically applied in the act. 
 
HIS SPEECHES AND WRITINGS 641 
 
 In the matter of compensation, it is provided that claims may 
 be presented within ninety days from the passage of the act "but 
 not thereafter"; and there is no saving for minors, femes-covert, 
 insane, or absent persons. I presume this is an omission by mere 
 over-sight, and I recommend that it be supplied by an amendatory 
 or supplemental act. 
 
 Abraham Lincoln 
 
 April 16, 1862. 
 
 LETTER TO GENERAL G. B. McCLELLAN 
 MAY 9, 1862 
 
 Head-quarters, Department of Va. 
 
 Fort Monroe, Va. May 9 1862. 
 Major General McClellan 
 My dear Sir 
 
 I have just assisted the Secretary of War in framing the part 
 of a despatch to you relating to army corps, which despatch of 
 course will have reached you long before this will. I wish to say 
 a few words to you privately on this subject. I ordered the army 
 corps organization not only on the unanimous opinion of the 
 twelve generals whom you had selected and assigned as Generals 
 of Division but also on the unanimous opinion of every military 
 man I could get an opinion from, and every modern military 
 book, yourself only excepted. Of course I did not, on my own 
 judgment pretend to understand the subject. I now think it indis- 
 pensable for you to know how your struggle against it is received 
 in quarters which we cannot entirely disregard. It is looked upon 
 as merely an effort to pamper one or two pets and to persecute 
 and degrade their supposed rivals. I have no word from Sumner 
 Heintzlman [sic] or Keyes — the commanders of these corps are 
 of course the three highest officers with you, but I am constantly 
 told that you have no consultation or communication with them; 
 
642 ABRAHAM LINCOLN: 
 
 that you consult and communicate with no body but Gen. Fitz 
 John Porter and perhaps Gen Franklin. I do not say these com- 
 plaints are true or just, but at all events it is proper you should 
 know of their existence. Do the Commanders of Corps disobey 
 your orders in anything? 
 
 When you relieved Gen Hamilton of his command the other 
 day, you thereby lost the confidence of at least one of your best 
 friends in the Senate. And here let me say, not as applicable to 
 you personally, that Senators and Representatives speak of me in 
 their places as they please without question; and that officers of 
 the army must cease addressing insulting letters to them for 
 taking no greater liberty with them. But to return. Are you 
 strong enough — are you strong enough even with my help — to set 
 your foot upon the necks of Sumner Heintzleman [sic] and Keyes 
 all at once? This is a practical and very serious question for you. 
 
 The success of your army and the cause of the country are 
 the same; and of course I only desire the good of the cause. 
 
 Yours truly 
 
 A Lincoln 
 
 The text of this letter has been edited from a con- 
 temporary copy, made on the same day Lincoln wrote 
 the letter at Fort Monroe, and now among the Papers 
 of Edward M. Stanton in the Library of Congress. The 
 editor has not been able to locate the original manu- 
 script. 
 
HIS SPEECHES AND WRITINGS 643 
 
 TELEGRAM TO GENERAL G. B. McCLELLAN 
 
 MAY 28, 1862 
 
 Washington City, D. C. 
 May 28, 1862. 8.40 p. m. 
 Maj. Gen. McClellan 
 
 I am very glad of Gen. F. J. Porter's victory. Still, if it was 
 a total rout of the enemy, I am puzzled to know why the Rich- 
 mond and Fredericksburg Railroad was not seized. Again, as you 
 say you have all the Railroads but the Richmond and Fredericks- 
 burg, I am puzzled to see how, lacking that, you can have any, 
 except the scrap from Richmond to West Point. The scrap of the 
 Virginia Central from Richmond to Hanover Junction, without 
 more, is simply nothing. 
 
 That the whole force of the enemy is concentrating in Rich- 
 mond, I think can not be certainly known to you or me. Saxton, 
 at Harper's Ferry, informs us that a large force (supposed to be 
 Jackson's and Ewells) forced his advance from Charleston to-day. 
 Gen. King telegraphs us from Fredericksburg that contrabands 
 give certain information that fifteen thousand left Hanover Junc- 
 tion Monday morning to re-inforce Jackson. I am painfully im- 
 pressed with the importance of the struggle before you; and I 
 shall aid you all I can consistently with my view of due regard to 
 all points.* 
 
 A. Lincoln 
 
 *A last phrase, which Lincoln deleted, reads as follows: "but I must be the 
 Judge as to the duty, of the government in this respect." 
 
644 ABRAHAM LINCOLN: 
 
 TELEGRAM TO GENERAL G. B. McCLELLAN 
 JUNE 28, 1862 
 
 Washington City, D. C. June 28—1862. 
 Major Gen. McClellan 
 
 Save your Army at all events. Will send re-inforcements as 
 fast as we can. Of course they can not reach you to-day, to-mor- 
 row, or next day. I have not said you were ungenous [sic] for 
 saying you needed re-inforcements. I thought you were ungen- 
 erous in assuming that I did not send them as fast as I could. I 
 feel any misfortune to you and your Army quite as keenly as you 
 feel it yourself. If you have had a drawn battle, or a repulse, it 
 is the price we pay for the enemy not being in Washington. We 
 protected Washington, and the enemy concentrated on you; had 
 we stripped Washington, he would have been upon us before the 
 troops sent could have got to you. Less than a week ago you 
 notified us that re-inforcements were leaving Richmond to come 
 in front of us. It is the nature of the case, and neither you or the 
 government that is to blame. Please tell at once the present condi- 
 tion and aspect of things. 
 
 A. Lincoln 
 P. S. 
 
 Gen. Pope thinks if you fall back, it would be much better 
 towards York River, than towards the James. As Pope now has 
 charge of the Capital, please confer with him through the 
 telegraph. 
 
 A. L. 
 
HIS SPEECHES AND WRITINGS 645 
 
 TELEGRAM TO GENERAL G. B. McCLELLAN 
 JULY 1, 1862 
 
 Executive Mansion, 
 Washington, July 1 1862. 
 Major Genl. McClellan — 
 
 It is impossible to re-inforce you for your present emergency. 
 If we had a million of men we could not get them to you in time. 
 We have not the men to send. If you are not strong enough to 
 face the enemy you must find a place of security, and wait, rest, 
 and repair. Maintain your ground if you can; but save the Army 
 at all events, even if you fall back to Fortress-Monroe. We still 
 have strength enough in the country, and will bring it out. 
 
 A. Lincoln 
 
 LETTER TO GENERAL G. B. McCLELLAN 
 JULY 2, 1862 
 
 Washington, D. C, July 2, 1862. 
 Major Gen. McClellan 
 
 Your despatch of Tuesday morning induces me to hope your 
 Army is having some rest. In this hope, allow me to reason with 
 you a moment. When you ask for fifty thousand men to be 
 promptly sent you, you surely labor under some gross mistake of 
 fact. Recently you sent papers showing your disposal of forces, 
 made last spring, for the defence of Washington, and advising a 
 return to that plan. I find it included in, and about Washington 
 seventyfive thousand men. Now please be assured, I have not men 
 enough to fill that very plan by fifteen thousand. All of Fremont 
 
646 ABRAHAM LINCOLN: 
 
 in the valley, all of Banks, all of McDowell, not with you, and 
 all in Washington, taken together do not exceed, if they reach 
 sixty thousand. With Wool and Dix added to those mentioned, 
 I have not, outside of your Army, seventyfive thousand men East 
 of the mountains. Thus, the idea of sending you fifty thousand, 
 or any other considerable force promptly, is simply absurd. If in 
 your frequent mention of responsibility, you have the impression 
 that I blame you for not doing more than you can, please be 
 relieved of such impression. I only beg that in like manner, you 
 will not ask impossibilities of me. If you think you are not strong 
 enough to take Richmond just now, I do not ask you to try just 
 now. Save the Army, material and personal; and I will strengthen 
 it for the offensive again, as fast as I can. The governors of 
 eighteen states offer me a new levy of three hundred thousand, 
 which I accept. 
 
 A. Lincoln 
 
 TELEGRAM TO GENERAL G. B. McCLELLAN 
 JULY 3, 1862 
 
 Washington City, D. C. July 3, 1862. 
 Major Genl. McClellan 
 
 Yours of 5.30. yesterday is just received. I am satisfied that 
 yourself, officers and men have done the best you could. All 
 accounts say better fighting was never done. Ten thousand thanks 
 for it. 
 
 On the 28th. we sent Gen. Burnside an order to send all the 
 force he could spare, to you. We then learned that you had 
 requested him to go to Goldsborough, upon which, we said to 
 him our order was intended for your benefit, and we did not 
 wish to be in conflict with your views. We hope you will have 
 help from him soon. To-day we have ordered Gen. Hunter to 
 
HIS SPEECHES AND WRITINGS 647 
 
 send you all he can spare. At last advices Halleck thinks he can 
 not send reinforcements, without endangering all he has gained.* 
 
 A. Lincoln 
 
 TELEGRAM TO GENERAL G. B. McCLELLAN 
 JULY 5, 1862 
 
 Washington City, D. C. July 5. 1862. 
 Major Genl. McClellan 
 
 A thousand thanks for the relief your two despatches of 
 12 & 1 p. m. yesterday give me. Be assured the heroism and skill 
 of yourself, officers, and men, are, and forever will be appreciated. 
 If you can hold your present position, we shall "hive" the enemy 
 yet. 
 
 A. Lincoln 
 
 LETTER TO GENERAL G. B. McCLELLAN 
 JULY 13, 1862 
 
 Executive Mansion, 
 Washington, July 13 1862. 
 
 Major General McClellan 
 
 My dear Sir — 
 
 I am told that over 160-000 men have gone into your Army 
 
 on the Peninsula. When I was with you the other day we made 
 
 * The last sentence as it stands is written above the following sentence, 
 which Lincoln deleted: "I repeat what Thave twice before said, 'save the Army, 
 at all events/" 
 
648 ABRAHAM LINCOLN: 
 
 out 86,500 remaining, leaving 73,500 to be accounted for. I 
 believe 23,500 will cover all the killed, wounded and missing in 
 all your battles and skirmishes, leaving 50-000 who have left 
 otherwise. Not more than 5000 of these have died, leaving 45-000 
 of your Army still alive, and not with it. I believe half, or two 
 thirds of them are fit for duty to-day. Have you any more perfect 
 knowledge of this than I have? If I am right, and you had these 
 men with you, you could go into Richmond in the next three 
 days. How can they be got to you? and how can they be prevented 
 from getting away in such numbers for the future? 
 
 A. Lincoln 
 
 LETTER TO CUTHBERT BULLITT 
 JULY 28, 1862 
 
 ( Private. ) 
 
 Washington, D. C, July 28, 1862. 
 Cuthbert Bullitt, Esq., 
 New Orleans, Louisiana. 
 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 
 
HIS SPEECHES AND WRITINGS 649 
 
 paralysis — the dead palsy — of the government in this whole 
 struggle is, that this class of men will do nothing for the govern- 
 ment, nothing for themselves, except demanding that the govern- 
 ment shall not strike its open enemies, lest they be struck by 
 accident! 
 
 Mr. Durant complains that in various ways the relation of 
 master and slave is disturbed by the presence of our army, and 
 he considers it particularly vexatious that this, in part, is done 
 under cover of an act of Congress, while constitutional guaranties 
 are suspended on the plea of military necessity. The truth is, that 
 what is done and omitted about slaves is done and omitted on the 
 same military necessity. It is a military necessity to have men and 
 money; and we can get neither in sufficient numbers or amounts 
 if we keep from or drive from our lines slaves coming to them. 
 Mr. Durant cannot be ignorant of the pressure in this direction, 
 nor of my efforts to hold it within bounds till he and such as he 
 shall have time to help themselves. 
 
 I am not posted to speak understanding^ 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 com- 
 fort for themselves while it rages, and to fall in with the vic- 
 torious side at the end of it without loss to themselves, their 
 advice as to the mode of conducting the contest would be pre- 
 cisely 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 
 
650 ABRAHAM LINCOLN: 
 
 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 what is 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 na- 
 tional authority, and set up a State government conforming 
 thereto under the Constitution. They know how to do it, and can 
 have the protection of the army while doing it. The army will be 
 withdrawn so soon as such State 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 unapplied? 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. 
 
 Yours truly, 
 
 A. Lincoln. 
 
HIS SPEECHES AND WRITINGS 651 
 
 LETTER TO JOHN M. CLAY 
 AUGUST 9, 1862 
 
 Executive Mansion, 
 Washington, August 9, 1862 
 Mr. John M. Clay. 
 My dear Sir: 
 
 The snuff-box you sent, with the accompanying note, was 
 received yesterday. Thanks for this memento of your great and 
 patriotic father. Thanks also for the assurance that, in these days 
 of dereliction, you remain true to his principles. In the concurrent 
 sentiment of your venerable mother, so long the partner of his 
 bosom and his honors, and lingering now, where he was, but for 
 the call to rejoin him where he is, I recognize his voice, speaking 
 as it ever spoke, for the Union, the Constitution, and the freedom 
 of mankind. 
 
 Your Obt. Servt. 
 
 A. Lincoln 
 
 LETTER TO HORACE GREELEY 
 AUGUST 22, 1862 
 
 Executive Mansion, 
 Washington, August 22, 1862. 
 Hon. Horace Greeley: 
 Dear Sir. 
 
 I have just read yours of the 19th. addressed to myself through 
 the New- York Tribune. If there be in it any statements, or assump- 
 tions of fact, which I may know to be erroneous, I do not, now and 
 
V 
 
 652 ABRAHAM LINCOLN: 
 
 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 perceptable [sic] in it an impatient and dicta- 
 torial 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 the shortest way under 
 the Constitution. The sooner the national authority can be 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, and 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 
 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 official 
 duty; and I intend no modification of my oft-expressed personal 
 wish that all men everywhere could be free. 
 
 Yours, 
 
 A. Lincoln. 
 
 Lincoln wrote this public letter in answer to a com- 
 munication entitled "The Prayer of Twenty Millions'' 
 
 *At this point Lincoln deleted a sentence which stood as follows: "Broken 
 eggs can never be mended, and the longer the breaking proceeds the more 
 will be broken." 
 
HIS SPEECHES AND WRITINGS 653 
 
 addressed to Lincoln by Greeley in his paper the New 
 York Tribune. It was characteristic of Greeley to presume 
 that his views were those of a majority of the people. The 
 "Prayer' expressed the opinion that Lincoln might have 
 dealt the rebellion a staggering blow in its infancy by 
 holding out the threat of emancipation in his "Inaugural 
 Address" and that a rigid execution of laws passed by 
 Congress — especially the confiscation measure — would go 
 far toward concluding the war. The people were lost and 
 uncertain as to where the administration was taking the 
 country because Lincoln himself seemed not to know. 
 Lincoln seized the opportunity not so much to answer 
 Greeley as to explain to the supposed "Twenty Millions" 
 what he was trying to do. 
 
 TELEGRAM TO GENERAL G. B. McCLELLAN 
 SEPTEMBER 15, 1862 
 
 Washington, D. C., Sep. 15, 2:45 1862. 
 Major General McClellan. 
 
 Your despatches of to-day received. God bless you, and all 
 with you. Destroy the rebel army, if possible. 
 
 A. Lincoln 
 
654 ABRAHAM LINCOLN: 
 
 TESTIMONIAL FOR DOCTOR ISACHAR ZACHARIE 
 SEPTEMBER 22, 1862 
 
 Dr. Zacharie has operated on my feet with great success, and 
 considerable addition to my comfort. 
 
 A. Lincoln 
 Sep. 22, 1862. 
 
 LETTER TO JOHN ROSS 
 SEPTEMBER 25, 1862 
 
 Executive Mansion, 
 Washington, Sept. 25, 1862. 
 John Ross 
 
 Principal Chief of the Cherokee Nation 
 Sir. 
 
 Your letter of the 16th. Inst, was received two days ago. In 
 the multitude of cares claiming my constant attention I have been 
 unable to examine and determine the exact treaty relations be- 
 tween the United States and the Cherokee Nation. Neither have 
 I been able to investigate and determine the exact state of facts 
 claimed by you as constituting a failure of treaty obligation on 
 our part, excusing the Cherokee Nation for making a treaty with 
 a portion of the people of the United States in open rebellion 
 against the government thereof. This letter therefore, must not 
 be understood to decide anything upon these questions. I shall, 
 however, cause a careful investigation of them to be made. Mean- 
 while the Cherokee people remaining practically loyal to the 
 
HIS SPEECHES AND WRITINGS 655 
 
 federal Union will receive all the protection which can be given 
 them consistently with the duty of the government to the whole 
 country. I sincerely hope the Cherokee country may not again 
 be over-run by the enemy; and I shall do all I consistently can to 
 prevent it. 
 
 Your Obt. Servt. 
 
 A. Lincoln. 
 
 MEDITATION ON THE DIVINE WILL 
 SEPTEMBER [30?], 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 yet the human instrumentalities, working just as they 
 do, are of the best adaptation 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. 
 
 According to Nicolay and Hay's account in Abra- 
 ham Lincoln: A History, the meditation "was not written 
 to be seen of men." Finding the piece of paper on which 
 it was written, John Hay made a copy and thus preserved 
 the text as printed in the Complete Works of Abraham 
 Lincoln. When one reviews the disappointments which 
 
656 ABRAHAM LINCOLN: 
 
 Lincoln had experienced in the repeated failures of 
 General McClellan during preceding months, the drift 
 of Lincoln's thought in this piece is more than adequately 
 accounted for. 
 
 REMARKS TO THE ARMY OF THE POTOMAC 
 AT FREDERICK, MARYLAND. OCTOBER 4, 1862 
 
 Fellow Citizens: 
 
 I see myself surrounded by soldiers, and a little further off I 
 note the citizens of this good city of Frederick, anxious to hear 
 something from me. I can only say, as I did five minutes ago, it is 
 not proper for me to make speeches in my present position. I 
 return thanks to our soldiers for the good service they have 
 rendered, for the energies they have shown, the hardships they 
 have endured, and the blood they have so nobly shed for this 
 dear Union of ours; and I also return thanks not only to the 
 soldiers, but to the good citizens of Maryland, and to all good men 
 and women in this land, for their devotion to our glorious cause. 
 I say this without any malice in my heart to those who have done 
 otherwise. May our children and our children's children, to a 
 thousand generations, continue to enjoy the benefits conferred 
 upon us by a united country, and have cause yet to rejoice under 
 those glorious institutions bequeathed us by Washington and his 
 compeers. Now, my friends, soldiers and citizens, I can only say 
 once more, farewell. 
 
HIS SPEECHES AND WRITINGS 657 
 
 LETTER TO GENERAL G. B. McCLELLAN 
 OCTOBER 13, 1862 
 
 Executive Mansion, 
 
 Washington, D.C., October 13, 1862. 
 Major-General McClellan. 
 My dear Sir: 
 
 You remember my speaking to you of what I called your 
 over-cautiousness. Are you not over-cautious when you assume 
 that you cannot do what the enemy is constantly doing? Should 
 you not claim to be at least his equal in prowess, and act upon 
 the claim? As I understand, you telegraphed General Halleck 
 that you cannot subsist your army at Winchester unless the rail- 
 road from Harper's Ferry to that point be put in working order. 
 But the enemy does now subsist his army at Winchester, at a 
 distance nearly twice as great from railroad transportation as 
 you would have to do without the railroad last named. He now 
 wagons from Culpeper Court House, which is just about twice as 
 far as you would have to do from Harper's Ferry. He is certainly 
 not more than half as well provided with wagons as you are. I 
 certainly should be pleased for you to have the advantage of the 
 railroad from Harper's Ferry to Winchester, but it wastes all the 
 remainder of autumn to give it to you, and in fact ignores the 
 question of time, which cannot and must not be ignored. Again, 
 one of the standard maxims of war, as you know, is to "operate 
 upon the enemy's communications as much as possible without 
 exposing your own." You seem to act as if this applies against you, 
 but cannot apply in your favor. Change positions with the enemy, 
 and think you not he would break your communication with 
 Richmond within the next twenty-four hours? You dread his 
 going into Pennsylvania; but if he does so in full force, he gives 
 up his communications to you absolutely, and you have nothing 
 to do but to follow and ruin him. If he does so with less than full 
 force, fall upon and beat what is left behind all the easier. Ex- 
 
658 ABRAHAM LINCOLN: 
 
 elusive of the water-line, you are now nearer Richmond than the 
 enemy is by the route that you can and he must take. Why can 
 you not reach there before him, unless you admit that he is more 
 than your equal on a march? His route is the arc of a circle, while 
 yours is the chord. The roads are as good on yours as on his. You 
 know I desired, but did not order, you to cross the Potomac 
 below, instead of above, the Shenandoah and Blue Ridge. My 
 idea was that this would at once menace the enemy's communi- 
 cations, which I would seize if he would permit. 
 
 If he should move northward, I would follow him closely, 
 holding his communications. If he should prevent our seizing his 
 communications and move toward Richmond, I would press 
 closely to him, fight him if a favorable opportunity should present, 
 and at least try to beat him to Richmond on the inside track. I 
 say "try"; if we never try, we shall never succeed. If he makes 
 a stand at Winchester, moving neither north nor south, I would 
 fight him there, on the idea that if we cannot beat him when he 
 bears the wastage of coming to us, we never can when we bear 
 the wastage of going to him. This proposition is a simple truth, 
 and is too important to be lost sight of for a moment. In coming 
 to us he tenders us an advantage which we should not waive. 
 We should not so operate as to merely drive him away. As we 
 must beat him somewhere or fail finally, we can do it, if at all, 
 easier near to us than far away. If we cannot beat the enemy 
 where he now is, we never can, he again being within the in- 
 trenchments of Richmond. 
 
 Recurring to the idea of going to Richmond on the inside 
 track, the facility of supplying from the side away from the 
 enemy is remarkable, as it were, by the different spokes of a 
 wheel extending from the hub toward the rim, and this whether 
 you move directly by the chord or on the inside arc, hugging the 
 Blue Ridge more closely. The chord-line, as you see, carries you 
 by Aldie, Hay Market, and Fredericksburg; and you see how 
 turnpikes, railroads, and finally the Potomac, by Aquia Creek, 
 meet you at all points from Washington; the same, only the lines 
 lengthened a little, if you press closer to the Blue Ridge part of 
 the way. 
 
 The gaps through the Blue Ridge I understand to be about 
 
HIS SPEECHES AND WRITINGS 659 
 
 the following distances from Harper's Ferry, to wit: Vestal's 5 
 miles; Gregory's, 13; Snicker's, 18; Ashby's, 28; Manassas, 38; 
 Chester, 45; and Thornton's, 53. I should think it preferable to 
 take the route nearest the enemy, disabling him to make an 
 important move without your knowledge, and compelling him to 
 keep his forces together for dread of you. The gaps would enable 
 you to attack if you should wish. For a great part of the way you 
 would be practically between the enemy and both Washington 
 and Richmond, enabling us to spare you the greatest number of 
 troops from here. When at length running for Richmond ahead 
 of him enables him to move this way, if he does so, turn and 
 attack him in rear. But I think he should be engaged long before 
 such point is reached. It is all easy if our troops march as well as 
 the enemy, and it is unmanly to say they cannot do it. This letter 
 is in no sense an order. 
 
 Yours truly, 
 
 A. Lincoln. 
 
 TELEGRAM TO GENERAL G. B. McCLELLAN 
 OCTOBER 24, 1862 
 
 Washington City, D. C. Oct. 24. 1862 
 Majr. Genl. McClellan 
 
 I have just read your despatch about sore tongued and 
 fatigued horses. 
 
 Will you pardon me for asking what the horses of your army 
 have done since the battle of Antietam that fatigue anything? 
 
 A. Lincoln 
 
660 ABRAHAM LINCOLN 
 
 TELEGRAM TO GENERAL G. B. McCLELLAN 
 OCTOBER 27, 1862 
 
 Executive Mansion, 
 Washington, Oct. 27, 1862 
 Majr. Gen. McClellan. 
 
 Yours of yesterday received. Most certainly I intend no in- 
 justice to any; and if I have done any, I deeply regret it. To be 
 told after more than five weeks total inaction of the Army, and 
 during which period we had sent to that Army every fresh horse 
 we possibly could, amounting in the whole to 7918 that the 
 cavalry horses were too much fatigued to move, presented a very 
 cheerless, almost hopeless, prospect for the future; and it may 
 have forced something of impatience into my despatches. If not 
 recruited, and rested then, when could they ever be? I suppose 
 the river is rising, and I am glad to believe you are crossing. 
 
 A. Lincoln 
 
 LETTER TO GENERAL CARL SCHURZ 
 NOVEMBER 10, 1862 
 
 "Private 6- ConfidentiaY* 
 
 Executive Mansion, 
 Washington, Nov. 10, 1862. 
 
 Gen. Schurz. 
 My dear Sir 
 
 Yours of the 8th. was, to-day, read to me by Mrs. S. We have 
 lost the elections; and it is natural that each of us will believe, 
 and say, it has been because his peculiar view was not made suffi- 
 
HIS SPEECHES AND WRITINGS 661 
 
 ciently prominent. I think I know what it was, but I may be mis- 
 taken. Three main causes told the whole story. 1. The democrats 
 were left in a majority by our friends going to the war. 2. The 
 democrats observed this & determined to re-instate themselves in 
 power, and 3. Our newspaper's, by vilifying and disparaging the 
 administration, furnished them all the weapons to do it with. 
 Certainly, the ill-success of the war had much to do with this. 
 
 You give a different set of reasons. If you had not made the 
 following statements, I should not have suspected them to be 
 true. "The defeat of the administration is the administrations own 
 fault." (Opinion) "It admitted its professed opponents to its coun- 
 sels" (Asserted as a fact) "It placed the Army, now a great power 
 in this Republic, into the hands of it's enemys [sic]" (Asserted as 
 a fact) "In all personal questions, to be hostile to the party of the 
 Government, seemed, to be a title to consideration." (Asserted as 
 a fact) "If to forget the great rule, that if you are true to your 
 friends, your friends will be true to you, and that you make your 
 enemies stronger by placing them upon an equality with your 
 friends." "Is it surprising that the opponents of the administration 
 should have got into their hands the government of the principal 
 states, after they have had for a long time the principal manage- 
 ment of the war, the great business of the national government." 
 
 I can not dispute about the matter of opinion. On the the 
 [sic] three matters (stated as facts) I shall be glad to have your 
 evidence upon them when I shall meet you. The plain facts, as 
 they appear to me, are these. The administration came into power, 
 very largely in a minority of the popular vote. Nothwithstanding 
 this, it distributed to it's party friends as nearly all the civil 
 patronage as any administration ever did. The war came. The 
 administration could not even start in this, without assistance 
 outside of it's party. It was mere nonsense to suppose a minority 
 could put down a majority in rebellion. Mr. Schurz (now Gen. 
 Schurz) was about here then & I do not recollect that he then 
 considered all who were not republicans, were enemies of the 
 government, and that none of them must be appointed to to [sic] 
 military positions. He will correct me if I am mistaken. It so 
 happened that very few of our friends had a military education 
 or were of the profession of arms. It would have been a question 
 
662 ABRAHAM LINCOLN: 
 
 whether the war should be conducted on military knowledge, or 
 on political affinity, only that our own friends (I think Mr. Schurz 
 included) seemed to think that such a question was inadmissable 
 [sic]. Accordingly I have scarcely appointed a democrat to a com- 
 mand, who was not urged by many republicans and opposed by 
 none. It was so as to McClellan. He was first brought forward by 
 the Republican Governor of Ohio, & claimed, and contended for 
 at the same time by the Republican Governor of Pennsylvania. 
 I received recommendations from the republican delegations in 
 Congress, and I believe every one of them recommended a 
 majority of democrats. But, after all many Republicans were 
 appointed; and I mean no disparagement to them when I say I do 
 not see that their superiority of success has been so marked as to 
 throw great suspicion on the good faith of those who are not 
 Republicans. 
 
 Yours truly, 
 
 A. Lincoln 
 
 Schurz was an intellectual and political leader 
 among the German-American population which had 
 swelled so rapidly in the years following the German 
 Revolution of 1848. Lincoln had cultivated their support 
 even to the extent of subsidizing a German language 
 newspaper, 1859-60, and in fact all over the North a 
 large percentage of them had joined the Republican 
 party. 
 
 Lincoln's ironical treatment of Schurz's criticism 
 of administration policy in appointing Democrats to 
 important commands was prompted by the fact that 
 Republicans in general and Schurz in particular had 
 displayed little evidence of their superior military 
 ability. 
 
HIS SPEECHES AND WRITINGS 663 
 
 LETTER TO SAMUEL TREAT 
 NOVEMBER 19, 1862 
 
 Private 
 
 Executive Mansion, 
 Washington, Nov. 19, 1862. 
 Judge S. Treat 
 St. Louis, Mo. 
 My dear Sir 
 
 Your very patriotic and judicious letter, addressed to Judge 
 Davis, in relation to the Mississippi, has been left with me by 
 him for perusal. You do not estimate the value of the object you 
 press, more highly than it is estimated here. It is now the object 
 of particular attention. It has not been neglected, as you seem to 
 think, because the West was divided into different Military De- 
 partments. The cause is much deeper. The country will not allow 
 us to send our whole Western force down the Mississippi, while 
 the enemy sacks Louisville and Cincinnati. Possibly it would be 
 better if the country would allow this, but it will not. I confidently 
 believed, last September that we could end the war by allowing 
 the enemy to go to Harrisburg and Philadelphia, only that we 
 could not keep down mutiny, and utter demoralization among the 
 Pennsylvanians. And this, though very unhandy sometimes, is 
 not at all strange. I presume if an army was starting to-day for 
 New-Orleans, and you confidently believed that St. Louis would 
 be sacked in consequence, you would be in favor of stopping such 
 army. 
 
 We are compelled to watch all these things. 
 
 With great respect 
 
 Your Obt. Servt 
 
 A. Lincoln. 
 
664 ABRAHAM LINCOLN: 
 
 Samuel Treat, United States Judge at St. Louis, was 
 impatient that General Grant had not moved to free the 
 Mississippi as rapidly as Treat and other residents of St. 
 Louis desired. 
 
 LETTER TO GENERAL CARL SCHURZ 
 NOVEMBER 24, 1862 
 
 Executive Mansion, 
 Washington, Nov. 24., 1862. 
 Gen. Carl Schurz 
 My dear Sir 
 
 I have just received, and read, your letter of the 20th. The 
 purport of it is that we lost the late elections, and the adminis- 
 tration 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 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, republicans, 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 
 dissatisfied with the slowness of Buell and McClellan; but before 
 I relieved them I had great fears I should not find successors to 
 
HIS SPEECHES AND WRITINGS 665 
 
 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 movements. I fear we shall at last find out that 
 the difficulty 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 sym- 
 pathy, 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, repub- 
 licans, 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 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 confidential subordi- 
 nates of as important an officer as Adjutant General Thomas?" 
 I must say "no" so far as my knowledge extends. And I add that 
 if you can give any tangible evidence upon that subject, I will 
 thank you to come to the City and do so. 
 
 Very truly your friend 
 
 A. Lincoln 
 
666 ABRAHAM LINCOLN 
 
 ANNUAL MESSAGE TO CONGRESS 
 DECEMBER 1, 1862 
 
 Fellow-citizens of the Senate and House of Representatives: 
 
 Since your last annual assembling another year of health and 
 bountiful harvests has passed. And while it has not pleased the 
 Almighty to bless us with a return of peace, we can but press on, 
 guided by the best light He gives us, trusting that in His own 
 good time, and wise way, all will yet be well. 
 
 The correspondence touching foreign affairs which has taken 
 place during the last year is herewith submitted, in virtual com- 
 pliance with a request to that effect, made by the House of Rep- 
 resentatives near the close of the last session of Congress. 
 
 If the condition of our relations with other nations is less 
 gratifying than it has usually been at former periods, it is cer- 
 tainly more satisfactory than a nation so unhappily distracted as 
 we are might reasonably have apprehended. In the month of June 
 last there were some grounds to expect that the maritime Powers 
 which, at the beginning of our domestic difficulties, so unwisely 
 and unnecessarily, as we think, recognized the insurgents as a 
 belligerent, would soon recede from that position, which has 
 proved only less injurious to themselves than to our own country. 
 But the temporary reverses which afterwards befell the national 
 arms, and which were exaggerated by our own disloyal citizens 
 abroad have hitherto delayed that act of simple justice. 
 
 The civil war, which has so radically changed for the mo- 
 ment, the occupations and habits of the American people, has 
 necessarily disturbed the social condition, and affected very 
 deeply the prosperity of the nations with which we have carried 
 on a commerce that has been steadily increasing throughout a 
 period of half a century. It has, at the same time, excited political 
 ambitions and apprehensions which have produced a profound 
 agitation throughout the civilized world. In this unusual agitation 
 we have forborne from taking part in any controversy between 
 
HIS SPEECHES AND WRITINGS 667 
 
 foreign states, and between parties or factions in such states. 
 We have attempted no propagandism, and acknowledged no revo- 
 lution. But we have left to every nation the exclusive conduct 
 and management of its own affairs. Our struggle has been, of 
 course, contemplated by foreign nations with reference less to its 
 own merits, than to its supposed, and often exaggerated effects 
 and consequences resulting to those nations themselves. Never- 
 theless, complaint on the part of this government, even if it were 
 just, would certainly be unwise. 
 
 The treaty with Great Britain for the suppression of the slave 
 trade has been put into operation with a good prospect of com- 
 plete success. It is an occasion of special pleasure to acknowledge 
 that the execution of it, on the part of her Majesty's government 
 has been marked with a jealous respect for the authority of the 
 United States, and the rights of their moral and loyal citizens. 
 
 The convention with Hanover for the abolition of the stade 
 dues has been carried into full effect, under the act of Congress 
 for that purpose. 
 
 A blockade of three thousand miles of sea-coast could not 
 be established, and vigorously enforced, in a season of great 
 commercial activity like the present, without committing occa- 
 sional mistakes, and inflicting unintentional injuries upon foreign 
 nations and their subjects. 
 
 A civil war occurring in a country where foreigners reside 
 and carry on trade under treaty stipulations, is necessarily fruitful 
 of complaints of the violation of neutral rights. All such collisions 
 tend to excite misapprehensions, and possibly to produce mutual 
 reclamations between nations which have a common interest in 
 preserving peace and friendship. In clear cases of these kinds 
 I have, so far as possible, heard and redressed complaints which 
 have been presented by friendly powers. There is still, however, 
 a large and an augmenting number of doubtful cases upon which 
 the government is unable to agree with the governments whose 
 protection is demanded by the claimants. There are, moreover, 
 many cases in which the United States, or their citizens, suffer 
 wrongs from the naval or military authorities of foreign nations, 
 which the governments of those states are not at once prepared to 
 redress. I have proposed to some of the foreign states, thus inter- 
 
668 ABRAHAM LINCOLN: 
 
 ested, mutual conventions to examine and adjust such complaints. 
 This proposition has been made especially to Great Britain, to 
 France, to Spain, and to Prussia. In each case it has been kindly 
 received, but has not yet been formally adopted. 
 
 I deem it my duty to recommend an appropriation in behalf 
 of the owners of the Norwegian bark Admiral P. Tordenskiold, 
 which vessel was, in May, 1861, prevented by the commander of 
 the blockading force off Charleston from leaving that port with 
 cargo, notwithstanding a similar privilege had, shortly before, 
 been granted to an English vessel. I have directed the Secretary 
 of State to cause the papers in the case to be communicated to 
 the proper committees. 
 
 Applications have been made to me by many free Americans 
 of African descent to favor their emigration, with a view to such 
 colonization as was contemplated in recent acts of Congress. 
 Other parties, at home and abroad — some from interested mo- 
 tives, others upon patriotic considerations, and still others in- 
 fluenced by philanthropic sentiments — have suggested similar 
 measures; while, on the other hand, several of the Spanish- 
 American republics have protested against the sending of such 
 colonies to their respective territories. Under these circumstances, 
 I have declined to move any such colony to any state, without 
 first obtaining the consent of its government, with an agreement 
 on its part to receive and protect such emigrants in all the rights 
 of freemen; and I have, at the same time, offered to the several 
 states situated within the tropics, or having colonies there, to 
 negotiate with them, subject to the advice and consent of the 
 Senate, to favor the voluntary emigration of persons of that class 
 to their respective territories, upon conditions which shall be 
 equal, just, and humane. Liberia and Hayti are, as yet, the only 
 countries to which colonists of African descent from here, could 
 go with certainty of being received and adopted as citizens; and 
 I regret to say such persons, contemplating colonization do not 
 seem so willing to migrate to those countries as to some others, 
 nor so willing as I think their interest demands. I believe, how- 
 ever, opinion among them, in this respect, is improving; and that, 
 ere long, there will be an augmented, and considerable migration 
 to both these countries, from the United States. 
 
HIS SPEECHES AND WRITINGS 669 
 
 The new commercial treaty between the United States and 
 the Sultan of Turkey has been carried into execution. 
 
 A commercial and consular treaty has been negotiated, sub- 
 ject to the Senate's consent, with Liberia; and a similar nego- 
 tiation is now pending with the republic of Hayti. A considerable 
 improvement of our national commerce is expected to result from 
 these measures. 
 
 Our relations with Great Britain, France, Spain, Portugal, 
 Russia, Prussia, Denmark, Sweden, Austria, the Netherlands, 
 Italy, Rome, and the other European states, remain undisturbed. 
 Very favorable relations also continue to be maintained with 
 Turkey, Morocco, China and Japan. 
 
 During the last year there has not only been no change of 
 our previous relations with the independent states of our own 
 continent, but, more friendly sentiments than have heretofore 
 existed, are believed to be entertained by these neighbors, whose 
 safety and progress, are so intimately connected with our own. 
 This statement especially applies to Mexico, Nicaragua, Costa 
 Rica, Honduras, Peru, and Chile. 
 
 The commission under the convention with the republic of 
 New Granada closed its session, without having audited and 
 passed upon, all the claims which were submitted to it. A propo- 
 sition is pending to revive the convention, that it may be able to 
 do more complete justice. The joint commission between the 
 United States and the republic of Costa Rica has completed its 
 labors and submitted its report. 
 
 I have favored the project for connecting the United States 
 with Europe by an Atlantic telegraph, and a similar project to 
 extend the telegraph from San Francisco, to connect by a Pacific 
 telegraph with the line which is being extended across the Russian 
 empire. 
 
 The Territories of the United States, with unimportant ex- 
 ceptions, have remained undisturbed by the civil war, and they 
 are exhibiting such evidence of prosperity as justifies an expec- 
 tation that some of them will soon be in a condition to be 
 organized as States, and be constitutionally admitted into the 
 federal Union. 
 
 The immense mineral resources of some of those Territories 
 
670 ABRAHAM LINCOLN: 
 
 ought to be developed as rapidly as possible. Every step in that 
 direction would have a tendency to improve the revenues of the 
 government, and diminish the burdens of the people. It is worthy 
 of your serious consideration whether some extraordinary 
 measures to promote that end cannot be adopted. The means 
 which suggests itself as most likely to be effective, is a scientific 
 exploration of the mineral regions in those Territories, with a 
 view to the publication of its results at home and in foreign coun- 
 tries — results which cannot fail to be auspicious. 
 
 The condition of the finances will claim your most diligent 
 consideration. The vast expenditures incident to the military and 
 naval operations required for the suppression of the rebellion, 
 have hitherto been met with a promptitude, and certainty, un- 
 usual in similar circumstances, and the public credit has been 
 fully maintained. The continuance of the war, however, and the 
 increased disbursements made necessary by the augmented forces 
 now in the field, demand your best reflections as to the best 
 modes of providing the necessary revenue, without injury to 
 business and with the least possible burdens upon labor. 
 
 The suspension of specie payments by the banks, soon after 
 the commencement of your last session, made large issues of 
 United States notes unavoidable. In no other way could the pay- 
 ment of the troops, and the satisfaction of other just demands, be 
 so economically, or so well provided for. The judicious legislation 
 of Congress, securing the receivability of these notes for loans and 
 internal duties, and making them a legal tender for other debts, 
 has made them an universal currency; and has satisfied, partially, 
 at least, and for the time, the long felt want of an uniform cir- 
 culating medium, saving thereby to the people, immense sums in 
 discounts and exchanges. 
 
 A return to specie payments, however, at the earliest period 
 compatible with due regard to all interests concerned, should 
 ever be kept in view. Fluctuations in the value of currency are 
 always injurious, and to reduce these fluctuations to the lowest 
 possible point will always be a leading purpose in wise legis- 
 lation. Convertibility, prompt and certain convertibility into coin, 
 is generally acknowledged to be the best and surest safeguard 
 against them; and it is extremely doubtful whether a circulation 
 
Meserve No. 85. A photograph made by Mathew B. Brady 
 on February 9, 1864. Mr. Robert Todd Lincoln stated to 
 Frederick Hill Meserve that he considered this to be the 
 best photograph of his father. It is the most widely known 
 of all the portraits of Lincoln, as it appears on the five- 
 dollar bill. 
 
HIS SPEECHES AND WRITINGS 671 
 
 of United States notes, payable in coin, and sufficiently large for 
 trie wants of the people, can be permanently, usefully and safely 
 maintained. 
 
 Is there, then, any other mode in which the necessary pro- 
 vision for the public wants can be made, and the great advantages 
 of a safe and uniform currency secured? 
 
 I know of none which promises so certain results, and is, at 
 the same time, so unobjectionable, as the organization of banking 
 associations, under a general act of Congress, well guarded in its 
 provisions. To such associations the government might furnish 
 circulating notes, on the security of United States bonds deposited 
 in the treasury. These notes, prepared under the supervision of 
 proper officers, being uniform in appearance and security, and 
 convertible always into coin, would at once protect labor against 
 the evils of a vicious currency, and facilitate commerce by cheap 
 and safe exchanges. 
 
 A moderate reservation from the interest on the bonds would 
 compensate the United States for the preparation and distribution 
 of the notes and a general supervision of the system, and would 
 lighten the burden of that part of the public debt employed as 
 securities. The public credit, moreover, would be greatly im- 
 proved, and the negotiation of new loans greatly facilitated by 
 the steady market demand for government bonds which the 
 adoption of the proposed system would create. 
 
 It is an additional recommendation of the measure, of con- 
 siderable weight, in my judgment, that it would reconcile, as 
 far as possible, all existing interests, by the opportunity offered 
 to existing institutions to reorganize under the act, substituting 
 only the secured uniform national circulation for the local 
 and various circulation, secured and unsecured, now issued 
 by them. 
 
 The receipts into the treasury from all sources, including 
 loans and balance from the preceding year, for the fiscal year end- 
 ing on the 30th June, 1862, were $583,885,247.06, of which sum 
 $49,056,397.62 were derived from customs; $1,795,331.73 from the 
 direct tax; from public lands, $152,203.77; from miscellaneous 
 sources, $931,787.64; from loans in all forms, $529,692,460.50. The 
 remainder, $2,257,065.80, was the balance from last year. 
 
672 ABRAHAM LINCOLN: 
 
 The disbursements during the same period were for con- 
 gressional, executive, and judicial purposes, $5,939,009.29; for 
 foreign intercourse, $1,339,710.35; for miscellaneous expenses, 
 including the mints, loans, post office deficiencies, collection of 
 revenue, and other like charges, $14,129,771.50; for expenses 
 under the Interior Department, $3,102,985.52; under the War 
 Department, $394,368,407.36; under the Navy Department, 
 $42,674,569.69; for interest on public debt, $13,190,324.45; and 
 for payment of public debt, including reimbursement of tem- 
 porary loan, and redemptions, $96,096,922.09; making an aggre- 
 gate of $570,841,700.25, and leaving a balance in the treasury on 
 the first day of July, 1862, of $13,043,546.81. 
 
 It should be observed that the sum of $96,096,922.09, ex- 
 pended for reimbursements and redemption of public debt, being 
 included also in the loans made, may be properly deducted, both 
 from receipts and expenditures, leaving the actual receipts for 
 the year $487,788,324.97; and the expenditures, $474,744,778.16. 
 
 Other information on the subject of the finances will be 
 found in the report of the Secretary of the Treasury, to whose 
 statements and views I invite your most candid and considerate 
 attention. 
 
 The reports of the Secretaries of War, and of the Navy, are 
 herewith transmitted. These reports, though lengthy, are scarcely 
 more than brief abstracts of the very numerous and extensive 
 transactions and operations conducted through those depart- 
 ments. Nor could I give a summary of them here, upon any prin- 
 ciple, which would admit of its being much shorter than the 
 reports themselves. I therefore content myself with laying the 
 reports before you, and asking your attention to them. 
 
 It gives me pleasure to report a decided improvement in 
 the financial condition of the Post Office Department, as compared 
 with several preceding years. The receipts for the fiscal year 1861 
 amounted to $8,349,296.40, which embraced the revenue from all 
 the States of the Union for three quarters of that year. Notwith- 
 standing the cessation of revenue from the so-called seceded 
 States during the last fiscal year, the increase of the correspon- 
 dence of the loyal States has been sufficient to produce a revenue 
 during the same year of $8,299,820.90, being only $50,000 less 
 
HIS SPEECHES AND WRITINGS 673 v 
 
 than was derived from all the States of the Union during the 
 previous year. The expenditures show a still more favorable result. 
 The amount expended in 1861 was $13,606,759.11. For the last 
 year the amount has been reduced to $11,125,364.13, showing a 
 decrease of about $2,481,000 in the expenditures as compared 
 with the preceding year and about $3,750,000 as compared with 
 the fiscal year 1860. The deficiency in the department for the 
 previous year was $4,551,966.98. For the last fiscal year it was 
 reduced to $2,112,814.57. These favorable results are in part 
 owing to the cessation of mail service in the insurrectionary 
 States, and in part to a careful review of all expenditures in that 
 department in the interest of economy. The efficiency of the 
 postal service, it is believed, has also been much improved. The 
 Postmaster General has also opened a correspondence, through 
 the Department of State, with foreign governments, proposing a 
 convention of postal representatives for the purpose of simpli- 
 fying the rates of foreign postage, and to expedite the foreign 
 mails. This proposition, equally important to our adopted citizens, 
 and to the commercial interests of this country, has been favor- 
 ably entertained, and agreed to, by all the governments from 
 whom replies have been received. 
 
 I ask the attention of Congress to the suggestions of the Post- 
 master General in his report respecting the further legislation re- 
 quired, in his opinion, for the benefit of the postal service. 
 
 The Secretary of the Interior reports as follows in regard to 
 the public lands: 
 
 "The public lands have ceased to be a source of revenue. 
 From the 1st July, 1861, to the 30th September, 1862, the entire 
 cash receipts from the sale of lands were $137,476.26 — a sum 
 much less than the expenses of our land system during the same 
 period. The homestead law, which will take effect on the 1st of 
 January next, offers such inducements to settlers, that sales for 
 cash cannot be expected, to an extent sufficient to meet the ex- 
 penses of the General Land Office, and the cost of surveying and 
 bringing the land into market." 
 
 The discrepancy between the sum here stated as arising from 
 the sales of the public lands, and the sum derived from the same 
 source as reported from the Treasury Department, arises, as I 
 
674 ABRAHAM LINCOLN: 
 
 understand, from the fact that the periods of time, though appar- 
 ently, were not really, coincident at the beginning point — the 
 Treasury report including a considerable sum now, which had 
 previously been reported from the Interior — sufficiently large to 
 greatly overreach the sum derived from the three months now 
 reported upon by the Interior, and not by the Treasury. 
 
 The Indian tribes upon our frontiers have, during the past 
 year, manifested a spirit of insubordination, and, at several points, 
 have engaged in open hostilities against the white settlements in 
 their vicinity. The tribes occupying the Indian country south of 
 Kansas, renounced their allegiance to the United States, and 
 entered into treaties with the insurgents. Those who remained 
 loyal to the United States were driven from the country. The 
 chief of the Cherokees has visited this city for the purpose of 
 restoring the former relations of the tribe with the United States. 
 He alleges that they were constrained, by superior force, to enter 
 into treaties with the insurgents, and that the United States neg- 
 lected to furnish the protection which their treaty stipulations 
 required. 
 
 In the month of August last the Sioux Indians, in Minnesota, 
 attacked the settlements in their vicinity with extreme ferocity, 
 killing, indiscriminately, men, women, and children. This attack 
 was wholly unexpected, and, therefore, no means of defence had 
 been provided. It is estimated that not less than eight hundred 
 persons were killed by the Indians, and a large amount of property 
 was destroyed. How this outbreak was induced is not definitely 
 known, and suspicions, which may be unjust, need not to be 
 stated. Information was received by the Indian bureau, from 
 different sources, about the time hostilities were commenced, 
 that a simultaneous attack was to be made upon the white settle- 
 ments by all the tribes between the Mississippi River and the 
 Rocky mountains. The State of Minnesota has suffered great injury 
 from this Indian war. A large portion of her territory has been 
 depopulated, and a severe loss has been sustained by the destruc- 
 tion of property. The people of that State manifest much anxiety 
 for the removal of the tribes beyond the limits of the State as a 
 guarantee against future hostilities. The Commissioner of Indian 
 Affairs will furnish full details. I submit for your especial consid- 
 
HIS SPEECHES AND WRITINGS 675 
 
 eration whether our Indian system shall not be remodelled. Many 
 wise and good men have impressed me with the belief that this 
 can be profitably done. 
 
 I submit a statement of the proceedings of commissioners, 
 which shows the progress that has been made in the enterprise of 
 constructing the Pacific railroad. And this suggests the earliest 
 completion of this road, and also the favorable action of Congress 
 upon the projects now pending before them for enlarging the 
 capacities of the great canals in New York and Illinois, as being 
 of vital and rapidly increasing importance to the whole nation, 
 and especially to the vast interior region hereinafter to be noticed 
 at some greater length. I propose having prepared and laid before 
 you at an early day some interesting and valuable statistical 
 information upon this subject. The military and commercial 
 importance of enlarging the Illinois and Michigan canal, and 
 improving the Illinois River, is presented in the report of Colonel 
 Webster to the Secretary of War, and now transmitted to Con- 
 gress. I respectfully ask attention to it? 
 
 To carry out the provisions of the act of Congress of the 15th 
 of May last, I have caused the Department of Agriculture of the 
 United States to be organized. 
 
 The commissioner informs me that within the period of a 
 few months this department has established an extensive system 
 of correspondence and exchanges, both at home and abroad, which 
 promises to effect highly beneficial results in the development of 
 a correct knowledge of recent improvements in agriculture, in the 
 introduction of new products, and in the collection of the agri- 
 cultural statistics of the different States. 
 
 Also, that it will soon be prepared to distribute largely seeds, 
 cereals, plants and cuttings, and has already published, and lib- 
 erally diffused, much valuable information in anticipation of a 
 more elaborate report, which will in due time be furnished, em- 
 bracing some valuable tests in chemical science now in progress 
 in the laboratory. 
 
 The creation of this department was for the more immediate 
 benefit of a large class of our most valuable citizens; and I trust 
 that the liberal basis upon which it has been organized will not 
 only meet your approbation, but that it will realize, at no distant 
 
676 ABRAHAM LINCOLN: 
 
 day, all the fondest anticipations of its most sanguine friends, 
 and become the fruitful source of advantage to all our people. 
 
 On the twenty-second day 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 emancipation. " 
 
 A nation may be said to consist of its territory, its people, and 
 its laws. The territory is the only part which is of certain dura- 
 bility. "One generation passeth away, and another generation 
 corneth, 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. Steam, telegraphs, and intelligence, have 
 brought these, to be an advantageous combination for one united 
 people. 
 
 In the inaugural address I briefly pointed out the total in- 
 adequacy of disunion, as a remedy for the differences between 
 the people of the two sections. I did so in language which I can- 
 not improve, and which, therefore, I beg to repeat: 
 
 "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 per- 
 fectly cured; and it would be worse in both cases after the sepa- 
 ration of the sections, than before. The foreign slave trade, now 
 imperfectly suppressed, would be ultimately revived without 
 
HIS SPEECHES AND WRITINGS 677 
 
 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 country cannot do this. They cannot 
 but remain face to face; and intercourse, either amicable or hos- 
 tile, must continue between them. Is it possible, then, to make 
 that intercourse more advantageous, or more satisfactory, after 
 separation than before? Can aliens make treaties, easier than 
 friends can make laws? Can treaties be more faithfully enforced 
 between aliens, than laws can among friends? Suppose 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 intercourse, are again upon you." 
 
 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 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 remaining length are merely 
 surveyor's 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 sepa- 
 ration, 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 Alleghanies, north by the British dominions, 
 west by the Rocky Mountains, and south by the line along which 
 the culture of corn and cotton meets, and which includes part of 
 Virginia, part of Tennessee, all of Kentucky, Ohio, Indiana, 
 Michigan, Wisconsin, Illinois, Missouri, Kansas, Iowa, Minnesota, 
 and the Territories of Dakota, Nebraska, and part of Colorado, 
 
678 ABRAHAM LINCOLN: 
 
 already 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 Massachusetts already is, it would 
 have more than seventy-five millions 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 products, 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 off 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 to 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 
 
HIS SPEECHES AND WRITINGS 679 
 
 regions 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 homestead. There 
 is no possible severing of this, but would multiply, and not miti- 
 gate, evils among us. In all its adaptations and aptitudes, it de- 
 mands 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 generations 
 of men; and it can, without convulsion, be hushed forever with 
 the passing of one generation. 
 
 In this view, I recommend the adoption of the following 
 resolution and articles amendatory to the Constitution of the 
 United States: 
 
 "Resolved by the Senate and House of Representatives of the 
 United States of America in Congress assembled, (two-thirds of 
 both Houses concurring,) That the following articles be proposed 
 to the legislatures (or conventions) of the several States as amend- 
 ments to the Constitution of the United States, all or any of 
 which articles when ratified by three fourths of the said legis- 
 latures (or conventions) to be valid as part or parts of the said 
 Constitution, viz: 
 
 "Article — . 
 
 "Every State, wherein slavery now exists, which shall abolish 
 the same therein, at any time, or times, before the first day of 
 January, in the year of our Lord one thousand and nine hundred, 
 shall receive compensation from the United States, as follows, 
 to wit: 
 
 "The President of the United States shall deliver to every 
 such State, bonds of the United States, bearing interest at the 
 
 rate of percent, per annum, to an amount equal to the 
 
 aggregate sum of for each slave shown to have been 
 
 therein, by the eighth census of the United States, said bonds to 
 be delivered to such State by instalments, or in one parcel, at the 
 
680 ABRAHAM LINCOLN: 
 
 completion of the abolishment, accordingly as the same shall have 
 been gradual, or at one time, within such State; and interest shall 
 begin to run upon any such bond, only from the proper time of 
 its delivery as aforesaid. Any State having received bonds as 
 aforesaid, and afterwards reintroducing or tolerating slavery 
 therein, shall refund to the United States the bonds so received, 
 or the value thereof, and all interest paid thereon. 
 
 "Article — . 
 
 , "All slaves who shall have enjoyed actual freedom by the 
 chances of the war, at any time before the end of the rebellion, 
 shall be forever free; but all owners of such, who shall not have 
 been disloyal, shall be compensated for them, at the same rates 
 as is provided for States adopting abolishment of slavery, but in 
 such way, that no slave shall be twice accounted for. 
 
 "Article — . 
 
 "Congress may appropriate money, and otherwise provide, 
 for colonizing free colored persons, with their own consent, at 
 any place or places without the United States." 
 
 I beg indulgence to discuss these proposed articles at some 
 length. Without slavery the rebellion could never have existed; 
 without slavery it could not continue. 
 
 Among the friends of the Union there is great diversity of 
 sentiment, and of policy, in regard to slavery, and the African 
 race amongst us. Some would perpetuate slavery; some would 
 abolish it suddenly, and without compensation; some would 
 abolish it gradually, and with compensation; some would remove 
 the freed people from us, and some would retain them with us; 
 and there are yet other minor diversities. Because of these diver- 
 sities, we waste much strength in struggles among ourselves. By 
 mutual concession we should harmonize, and act together. This 
 would be compromise; but it would be compromise among the 
 friends, and not with the enemies of the Union. These articles 
 are intended to embody a plan of such mutual concessions. If the 
 plan shall be adopted, it is assumed that emancipation will fol- 
 low, at least, in several of the States. 
 
 As to the first article, the main points are: first, the emanci- 
 
HIS SPEECHES AND WRITINGS 681 
 
 pation; secondly, the length of time for consummating it — thirty- 
 seven years; and thirdly, the compensation. 
 
 The emancipation will be unsatisfactory to the advocates of 
 perpetual slavery; but the length of time should greatly mitigate 
 their dissatisfaction. The time spares both races from the evils 
 of sudden derangement — in fact, from the necessity of any de- 
 rangement — while most of those whose habitual course of thought 
 will be disturbed by the measure will have passed away before 
 its consummation. They will never see it. Another class will hail 
 the prospect of emancipation, but will deprecate the length of 
 time. They will feel that it gives too little to the now living slaves. 
 But it really gives them much. It saves them from the vagrant 
 destitution which must largely attend immediate emancipation in 
 localities where their numbers are very great; and it gives the 
 inspiring assurance that their posterity shall be free forever. The 
 plan leaves to each State, choosing to act under it, to abolish 
 slavery now, or at the end of the century, or at any intermediate 
 time, or by degrees, extending over the whole or any part of the 
 period; and it obliges no two States to proceed alike. It also pro- 
 vides for compensation, and generally the mode of making it. 
 This, it would seem, must further mitigate the dissatisfaction of 
 those who favor perpetual slavery, and especially of those who 
 are to receive the compensation. Doubtless some of those who are 
 to pay, and not to receive will object. Yet the measure is both 
 just and economical. In a certain sense the liberation of slaves is 
 the destruction of property — property acquired by descent, or by 
 purchase, the same as any other property. It is no less true for 
 having been often said, that the people of the South are not more 
 responsible for the original introduction of this property, than are 
 the people of the North; and when it is remembered how un- 
 hesitatingly we all use cotton and sugar, and share the profits of 
 dealing in them, it may not be quite safe to say, that the South 
 has been more responsible than the North for its continuance. 
 If then, for a common object, this property is to be sacrificed is 
 it not just that it be done at a common charge? 
 
 And if, with less money, or money more easily paid, we can 
 preserve the benefits of the Union by this means, than we can by 
 the war alone, is it not also economical to do it? Let us consider 
 
682 ABRAHAM LINCOLN: 
 
 it then. Let us ascertain the sum we have expended in the war 
 since compensated emancipation was proposed last March, and 
 consider whether, if that measure had been promptly accepted, 
 by even some of the slave States, the same sum would not have 
 done more to close the war, than has been otherwise done. If so 
 the measure would save money, and in that view, would be a 
 prudent and economical measure. Certainly it is not so easy to 
 pay something as it is to pay nothing; but it is easier to pay a large 
 sum than it is to pay a larger one. And it is easier to pay any sum 
 when we are able, than it is to pay it before we are able. The war 
 requires large sums, and requires them at once. The aggregate 
 sum necessary for compensated emancipation, of course, would 
 be large. But it would require no ready cash; nor the bonds even, 
 any faster than the emancipation progresses. This might not, and 
 probably would not, close before the end of the thirty-seven 
 years. At that time we shall probably have a hundred millions of 
 people to share the burden, instead of thirty-one millions, as now. 
 And not only so, but the increase of our population may be 
 expected to continue for a long time after that period, as rapidly 
 as before; because our territory will not have become full. I do 
 not state this inconsiderately. At the same ratio of increase which 
 we have maintained, on an average, from our first national census, 
 in 1790, until that of 1860, we should, in 1900, have a population 
 of 103,208,415. And why may we not continue that ratio far 
 beyond that period? Our abundant room — our broad national 
 homestead — is our ample resource. Were our territory as limited 
 as are the British Isles, very certainly our population could not 
 expand as stated. Instead of receiving the foreign born, as now, 
 we should be compelled to send part of the native born away. 
 But such is not our condition. We have two millions nine hundred 
 and sixty-three thousand square miles. Europe has three millions 
 and eight hundred thousand, with a population averaging 
 seventy-three and one-third persons to the square mile. Why 
 may not our country, at some time, average as many? Is it less 
 fertile? Has it more waste surface, by mountains, rivers, lakes, 
 deserts, or other causes? Is it inferior to Europe in any natural 
 advantage? If, then, we are, at some time, to be as populous as 
 Europe, how soon? As to when this may be, we can judge by the 
 
HIS SPEECHES AND WRITINGS 683 
 
 past and the present; as to when it will be, if ever, depends much 
 on whether we maintain the Union. Several of our States are 
 already above the average of Europe — seventy three and a third 
 to the square mile. Massachusetts has 157; Rhode Island, 133; 
 Connecticut, 99; New York and New Jersey, each, 80; Also two 
 other great States, Pennsylvania and Ohio, are not far below, the 
 former having 63, and the latter 59. The States already above the 
 European average, except New York, have increased in as rapid 
 a ratio, since passing that point, as ever before; while no one of 
 them is equal to some other parts of our country in natural 
 capacity for sustaining a dense population. 
 
 Taking the nation in the aggregate, and we find its popula- 
 tion and ratio of increase, for the several decennial periods, to be 
 as follows: — 
 
 1790 
 
 3,929,827 
 
 
 
 
 
 1800 
 
 5,305,937 
 
 35.02 
 
 per 
 
 cent. 
 
 ratio of increase. 
 
 1810 
 
 7,239,814 
 
 36.45 
 
 yy 
 
 
 » » » 
 
 1820 
 
 9,638,131 
 
 33.13 
 
 yy 
 
 
 » yy » 
 
 1830 
 
 12,866,020 
 
 33.49 
 
 99 
 
 
 » yy »» 
 
 1840 
 
 17,069,453 
 
 32.67 
 
 99 
 
 
 » » » 
 
 1850 
 
 23,191,876 
 
 35.87 
 
 99 
 
 
 yy yy » 
 
 1860 
 
 31,443,790 
 
 35.58 
 
 99 
 
 
 » » » 
 
 This shows an average decennial increase of 34.60 per cent, 
 in population through the seventy years from our first, to our last 
 census yet taken. It is seen that the ratio of increase, at no one of 
 these seven periods, is either two per cent, below, or two per cent, 
 above, the average; thus showing how inflexible, and, conse- 
 quently, how reliable, the law of increase, in our case, is. Assum- 
 ing that it will continue, gives the following results: — 
 
 1870 
 
 42,323,341 
 
 1880 
 
 56,967,216 
 
 1890 
 
 76,677,872 
 
 1900 
 
 103,208,415 
 
 1910 
 
 138,918,526 
 
 1920 
 
 186,984,335 
 
 1930 
 
 251,680,914 
 
684 ABRAHAM LINCOLN: 
 
 These figures show that our country may be as populous as 
 Europe now is, at some point between 1920 and 1930 — say about 
 1925 — our territory, at seventy-three and a third persons to the 
 square mile, being of capacity to contain 217,186,000. 
 
 And we will reach this, too, if we do not ourselves relinquish 
 the chance, by the folly and evils of disunion, or by long, and 
 exhausting war springing from the only great element of national 
 discord among us. While it cannot be foreseen exactly how much 
 one huge example of secession, breeding lesser ones indefinitely, 
 would retard population, civilization, and prosperity, no one can 
 doubt that the extent of it would be very great and injurious. 
 
 The proposed emancipation would shorten the war, per- 
 petuate peace, insure this increase of population, and propor- 
 tionately the wealth of the country. With these, we should pay 
 all the emancipation would cost, together with our other debt, 
 easier than we should pay our other debt, without it. If we had 
 allowed our old national debt to run at six per cent, per annum, 
 simple interest, from the end of our revolutionary struggle until 
 today, without paying anything on either principal or interest, 
 each man of us would owe less upon that debt now, than each 
 owed upon it then; and this because our increase of men, through 
 the whole period, has been greater than six per cent.; has run 
 faster than the interest upon the debt. Thus, time alone relieves 
 a debtor nation, so long as its population increases faster than 
 unpaid interest accumulates on its debt. 
 
 This fact would be no excuse for delaying payment of what 
 is justly due; but it shows the great importance of time in this 
 connexion — the great advantage of a policy by which we shall 
 not have to pay until we number a hundred millions, what, by a 
 different policy, we would have to pay now, when we number 
 but thirty one millions. In a word, it shows that a dollar will be 
 much harder to pay for the war, than will be a dollar for emanci- 
 pation on the proposed plan. And then the latter will cost no 
 blood, no precious life. It will be a saving of both. 
 
 As to the second article, I think it would be impracticable to 
 return to bondage the class of persons therein contemplated. 
 Some of them, doubtless, in the property sense, belong to loyal 
 
HIS SPEECHES AND WRITINGS 685 
 
 owners; and hence, provision is made in this article for compen- 
 sating such. 
 
 The third article relates to the future of the freed people. It 
 does not oblige, but merely authorizes, Congress to aid in coloniz- 
 ing such as may consent. This ought not to be regarded as objec- 
 tionable, on the one hand, or on the other, in so much as it comes 
 to nothing, unless by the mutual consent of the people to be 
 deported, and the American voters, through their representatives 
 in Congress. 
 
 I cannot make it better known than it already is, that I 
 strongly favor colonization. And yet I wish to say there is an ob- 
 jection urged against free colored persons remaining in the 
 country, which is largely imaginary, if not sometimes malicious. 
 
 It is insisted that their presence would injure, and displace 
 white labor and white laborers. If there ever could be a proper 
 time for mere catch arguments, that time surely is not now. In 
 times like the present, men should utter nothing for which they 
 would not willingly be responsible through time and in eternity. 
 Is it true, then, that colored people can displace any more white 
 labor, by being free, than by remaining slaves? If they stay in 
 their old places, they jostle no white laborers; if they leave their 
 old places, they leave them open to white laborers. Logically, 
 there is neither more nor less of it. Emancipation, even without 
 deportation, would probably enhance the wages of white labor, 
 and, very surely, would not reduce them. Thus, the customary 
 amount of labor would still have to be performed; the freed peo- 
 ple would surely not do more than their old proportion of it, and 
 very probably, for a time, would do less, leaving an increased 
 part to white laborers, bringing their labor into greater demand, 
 and, consequently, enhancing the wages of it. With deportation, 
 even to a limited extent, enhanced wages to white labor is math- 
 ematically certain. Labor is like any other commodity in the mar- 
 ket — increase the demand for it, and you increase the price of it. 
 Reduce the supply of black labor, by colonizing the black laborer 
 out of the country, and, by precisely so much, you increase the 
 demand for, and wages of, white labor. 
 
 But it is dreaded that the freed people will swarm forth, and 
 
686 ABRAHAM LINCOLN: 
 
 cover the whole land? Are they not already in the land? Will 
 liberation make them any more numerous? Equally distributed 
 among the whites of the whole country, and there would be but 
 one colored to seven whites. Could the one, in any way, greatly 
 disturb the seven? There are many communities now, having 
 more than one free colored person, to seven whites; and this, 
 without any apparent consciousness of evil from it. The District 
 of Columbia, and the States of Maryland and Delaware, are all 
 in this condition. The district has more than one free colored to 
 six whites; and yet, in its frequent petitions to Congress, I believe 
 it has never presented the presence of free colored persons as 
 one of its grievances. But why should emancipation south, send 
 the freed people north? People, of any color, seldom run, unless 
 there be something to run from. Heretofore colored people, to 
 some extent, have fled north from bondage; and now, perhaps, 
 from both bondage and destitution. But if gradual emancipation 
 and deportation be adopted, they will have neither to flee from. 
 Their old masters will give them wages at least until new laborers 
 can be procured; and the freed men, in turn, will gladly give their 
 labor for the wages, till new homes can be found for them, in 
 congenial climes, and with people of their own blood and race. 
 This proposition can be trusted on the mutual interests involved. 
 And, in any event, cannot the north decide for itself, whether to 
 receive them? 
 
 Again, as practice proves more than theory, in any case, has 
 there been any irruption of colored people northward, because 
 of the abolishment of slavery in this District last spring? 
 
 What I have said of the proportion of free colored persons 
 to the whites, in the District, is from the census of 1860, having 
 no reference to persons called contrabands, nor to those made free 
 by the act of Congress abolishing slavery here. 
 
 The plan consisting of these articles is recommended, not but 
 that a restoration of the national authority would be accepted 
 without its adoption. 
 
 Nor will the war, nor proceedings under the proclamation of 
 September 22, 1862, be stayed because of the recommendation of 
 this plan. Its timely adoption, I doubt not, would bring restoration 
 and thereby stay both. 
 
HIS SPEECHES AND WRITINGS 687 
 
 And, notwithstanding this plan, the recommendation that 
 Congress provide by law for compensating any State which may 
 adopt emancipation, before this plan shall have been acted upon, 
 is hereby earnestly renewed. Such would be only an advance part 
 of the plan, and the same arguments apply to both. 
 
 This plan is recommended as a means, not in exclusion of, 
 but additional to, all others for restoring and preserving the na- 
 tional authority throughout the Union. The subject is presented 
 exclusively in its economical aspect. The plan would, I am con- 
 fident, secure peace more speedily, and maintain it more per- 
 manently, than can be done by force alone; while all it would 
 cost, considering amounts, and manner of payment, and times 
 of payment, would be easier paid than will be the additipnal cost 
 of the war, if we rely solely upon force. It is much — very much — 
 that it would cost no blood at all. 
 
 The plan is proposed as permanent constitutional law. It 
 cannot become such without the concurrence of, first, two thirds 
 of Congress, and, afterwards, three-fourths of the States. The 
 requisite three-fourths of the States will necessarily include seven 
 of the Slave States. Their concurrence, if obtained, will give as- 
 surance of their severally adopting emancipation, at no very dis- 
 tant day, upon the new constitutional terms. This assurance would 
 end the struggle now, and save the Union forever. 
 
 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 con- 
 duct of public affairs. Yet I trust that in view of the great re- 
 sponsibility resting upon me, you will perceive no want of respect 
 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 
 
688 ABRAHAM LINCOLN: 
 
 succeed only by concert. It is not "can any of us imagine better?" 
 but, "can we all do better?" Object whatsoever is possible, still 
 the question recurs, "can we do better?" The dogmas of the quiet 
 past, are inadequate to the stormy present. The occasion is piled 
 high with difficulty, and we must rise — with the occasion. 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 Con- 
 gress and this administration, will be remembered in spite of our- 
 selves. 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. 
 
 Abraham Lincoln. 
 
 December 1, 1862. 
 
 LETTER TO MISS FANNY McCULLOUGH 
 DECEMBER 23, 1862 
 
 Executive Mansion, 
 Washington, December 23., 1862. 
 Dear Fanny 
 
 It is with deep grief 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 bit- 
 
HIS SPEECHES AND WRITINGS 689 
 
 teres t agony, because it takes them unawares. The older have 
 learned to ever expect it. I am anxious to afford some alleviation 
 of your present distress. Perfect relief is not possible, except with 
 time. You can not 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. 
 
 Miss. Fanny McCullough. 
 
 Your sincere friend, 
 
 A. Lincoln. 
 
 Fanny was the daughter of Colonel William McCul- 
 lough of the 4th Illinois Cavalry. A resident of Blooming- 
 ton, Illinois, and a long-time friend of Lincoln's, McCul- 
 lough had seen military service in the Black Hawk War 
 and early in the Civil War helped to organize the 4th 
 Illinois Cavalry. For an account of his gallant death, see 
 Carl Sandburg, Abraham Lincoln: The War Years, Vol. 
 I, p. 617. 
 
 FINAL EMANCIPATION PROCLAMATION 
 JANUARY 1, 1863 
 
 A PROCLAMATION. 
 
 Whereas, on the twenty second day of September, in the 
 year of our Lord one thousand eight hundred and sixty two a 
 
690 ABRAHAM LINCOLN: 
 
 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 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 rebel- 
 lion 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 participated, shall, in the absence of strong counter- 
 vailing 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 Commander-in- 
 Chief, of the Army and Navy of the United States in time of 
 actual armed rebellion against authority and government of the 
 United States, and as a fit and necessary war measure for sup- 
 pressing 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 men- 
 tioned, 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. Ber- 
 nard, Plaquemine, Jefferson, St. Johns, St. Charles, St. James, 
 
HIS SPEECHES AND WRITINGS 691 
 
 Ascension, Assumption, Terrebonne, Lafourche, St. Mary, St. 
 Martin, and Orleans, including the City of New-Orleans) Missis- 
 sippi, 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, Northamp- 
 ton, Elizabeth City, York, Princess-Ann, and Norfolk, including the 
 cities of Norfolk & 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 henceforward shall 
 be free; and that the Executive government of the United States, 
 including the military and naval authorities thereof, will recog- 
 nize 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 Janu- 
 [L. S.] ary, in the year of our Lord one thousand eight hundred 
 and sixty three, and of the Independence of the United 
 States of America the eighty-seventh. 
 
 By the President: Abraham Lincoln 
 
 William H. Seward, 
 Secretary of State 
 
692 ABRAHAM LINCOLN: 
 
 The original draft of the "Emancipation Proclama- 
 tion' was prepared by Lincoln and submitted to the 
 Cabinet on July 22, 1862. A number of changes were 
 made, and the preliminary proclamation was issued on 
 September 22, 1862, stipulating January 1, 1863, as the 
 date on which emancipation would go into effect. The 
 final version which appears in the text contains only 
 minor changes in wording. 
 
 LETTER TO GENERAL J. A. McCLERNAND 
 JANUARY 22, 1863 
 
 Executive Mansion, 
 Washington, January 22, 1863. 
 Major Gen. McClernand 
 My dear Sir: 
 
 Yours of the 7th. was received yesterday. I need not recite, 
 because you remember the contents. The charges, in their nature, 
 are such that I must know as much about the facts involved, as 
 you can. I have too many family controversies, ( so to speak ) al- 
 ready on my hands, to voluntarily, or so long as I can avoid it, 
 take up another. You are now doing well — well for the country, 
 and well for yourself — much better than you could possibly be, 
 if engaged in open war with Gen. Halleck. Allow me to beg, that 
 for your sake, for my sake, & for the country's sake, you give your 
 whole attention to the better work. 
 
 Your success upon the Arkansas, was both brilliant and valu- 
 able, and is fully appreciated by the country and government. 
 
 Yours truly 
 
 A. Lincoln 
 
HIS SPEECHES AND WRITINGS 693 
 
 McClernand was another Black Hawk War veteran 
 and an Illinois Democrat whose support of the war effort 
 Lincoln cherished and whose advancement was not en- 
 tirely due to his military ability by any means. Lincoln 
 advanced him over Sherman under Grant's command, 
 and Sherman accepted with good grace, recognizing 
 the political motives involved. McClernand made a num- 
 ber of military mistakes and Grant was obliged to remove 
 him from command. 
 
 LETTER TO GENERAL JOSEPH HOOKER 
 JANUARY 26, 1863 
 
 Executive Mansion, 
 Washington, January 26, 1863. 
 Major-General Hooker: 
 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 skilful soldier, which, of course, 
 I like. I also believe you do not mix politics with your profession, 
 in which you are right. You have confidence in yourself, which 
 is a valuable, if not an indispensable quality. You are ambitious, 
 which, within reasonable bounds, does good rather than harm. 
 But I think that during Gen. 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 honorable brother officer. I have 
 heard, in such a way as to believe it, of your recently saying that 
 both the Army and the Government needed a Dictator. Of course 
 
694 ABRAHAM LINCOLN: 
 
 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 it's 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 criticizing 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 GOVERNOR ANDREW JOHNSON 
 MARCH 26, 1863 
 
 Private 
 
 Executive Mansion, 
 Washington, March 26., 1863. 
 Hon. Andrew Johnson 
 My dear Sir: 
 
 I am told you have at least thought of raising a negro military 
 force. In my opinion the country now needs no specific thing so 
 much as some man of your ability, and position, to go to this 
 work. When I speak of your position, I mean that of an eminent 
 citizen of a slave-state, and himself a slave-holder. The colored 
 population is the great available and yet unavailed of, force for 
 restoring the Union. The bare sight of fifty thousand armed, and 
 drilled black soldiers on the banks of the Mississippi, would end 
 
HIS SPEECHES AND WRITINGS 695 
 
 the rebellion at once. And who doubts that we can present that 
 sight, if we but take hold in earnest? If you have been thinking 
 of it please do not dismiss the thought. 
 
 Yours truly 
 
 A. Lincoln 
 
 LETTER TO GENERAL JOSEPH HOOKER 
 
 MAY 7, 1863 
 
 Head-quarters, Army of the Potomac, 
 
 May. 7 1863. 
 Major General Hooker. 
 My dear Sir 
 
 The recent movement of your army is ended without effect- 
 ing it's object, except perhaps some important breakings of the 
 enemies [sic] communications. What next? If possible I would 
 be very glad of another movement early enough to give us some 
 benefit from the fact of the enemies [sic] communications being 
 broken. But neither for this reason or any other, do I wish any- 
 thing done in desperation or rashness. An early movement would 
 also help to supersede the bad moral effect of the recent one, 
 which is sure to be considerably injurious. Have you already in 
 your mind a plan wholly, or partially formed? If you have, pros- 
 secute [sic] it without interference from me. If you have not, 
 please inform me, so that I, incompetent as I may be, can try 
 [to?] assist in the formation of some plan for the Army. 
 
 Yours as ever 
 
 A Lincoln 
 
696 ABRAHAM LINCOLN 
 
 LETTER TO ISAAC N. ARNOLD 
 MAY 26, 1863 
 
 Private b- confidential 
 
 Executive Mansion, 
 Washington, May 26., 1863. 
 Hon. I. N. Arnold. 
 My dear Sir: 
 
 Your letter advising me to dismiss Gen. Halleck is received. 
 If the public believe, as you say, that he has driven Fremont, But- 
 ler, and Sigel from the service, they believe what I know to be 
 false; so that if I was to yield to it, it would only be to be instantly 
 beset by someother [sic] demand based on another falsehood 
 equally gross. You know yourself that Fremont was relieved at his 
 own request, before Halleck could have had anything to do with it 
 — went out near the end of June, while Halleck only came in near 
 the end of July. I know equally well that no wish of Halleck's 
 had any thing to do with the removal of Butler or Sigel. Sigel, 
 like Fremont, was relieved at his own request, pressed upon me 
 almost constantly for six months, and upon complaints that could 
 have been made as justly by almost any Corps commander in 
 the army, and more justly by some. So much for the way they 
 got out. Now a word as to their not getting back. In the early 
 Spring, Gen. Fremont sought active service again; and, as it 
 seemed to me, sought it in a very good and reasonable spirit. 
 But he holds the highest rank in the Army, except McClellan, so 
 that I could not well offer him a subordinate command. Was I 
 to displace Hooker, or Hunter, or Rosecrans, or Grant, or Banks? 
 If not, what was I to do? And similar to this, is the case of both 
 the others. One month after Gen. Butlers return, I offered him a 
 position in which I thought and still think, he could have done 
 himself the highest credit, and the country the greatest service, 
 but he declined it. When Gen. Sigel was relieved, at his own re- 
 quest as I have said, of course I had to put another in command 
 
HIS SPEECHES AND WRITINGS 697 
 
 of his corps. Can I instantly thrust that other out to put him in 
 again? 
 
 And now my good friend, let me turn your eyes upon another 
 point. Whether Gen. Grant shall or shall not consummate the cap- 
 ture of Vicksburg, his campaign from the beginning of this month 
 up to the twenty second day of it, is one of the most brilliant in 
 the world. His corps commanders & Division commanders, in 
 part, are McClernand, McPherson, Sherman, Steele, Hovey, Blair, 
 & Logan. And yet taking Gen. Grant and these seven of his gen- 
 erals, and you can scarcely name one of them that has not been 
 constantly denounced and opposed by the same men who are 
 now so anxious to get Halleck out, and Fremont & Butler & Sigel 
 in. I believe no one of them went through the Senate easily, and 
 certainly one failed to get through at all. I am compelled to take 
 a more impartial and unprejudiced view of things. Without claim- 
 ing to be your superior, which I do not, my position enables me 
 to understand my duty in all these matters better than you pos- 
 sibly can, and I hope you do not yet doubt my integrity. 
 
 Your friend, as ever 
 
 A. Lincoln 
 
 Arnold was a member of Congress from Illinois and 
 a trusted friend to whom Lincoln felt a confidential ex- 
 planation was due when he could not follow Arnold's 
 advice. 
 
698 ABRAHAM LINCOLN 
 
 TELEGRAM TO GENERAL JOSEPH HOOKER 
 JUNE 5, 1863 
 
 Washington, D. C, June 5. 1863 
 Major General Hooker 
 
 Yours of to-day was received an hour ago. So much of pro- 
 fessional military skill is requisite to answer it, that I have turned 
 the task over to Gen. Halleck. He promises to perform it with his 
 utmost care. I have but one idea which I think worth suggesting to 
 you, and that is in case you find Lee coming to the North of the 
 Rappahannock, I would by no means cross to the South of it. If 
 he should leave a rear force at Fredericksburg, tempting you to 
 fall upon it, it would fight in intrenchments, and have you at dis- 
 advantage, and so, man for man, worst you at that point, while 
 his main force would in some way be getting an advantage 
 of you Northward. In one word, I would not take any risk of 
 being entangled upon the river, like an ox jumped half over a 
 fence, and liable to be torn by dogs, front and rear, without a fair 
 chance to gore one way or kick the other. If Lee would come to 
 my side of the river, I would keep on the same side & fight him, 
 or act on the defence, according as might be my estimate of his 
 strength relatively [sic] to my own. But these are mere sugges- 
 tions which I desire to be controlled by the judgment of yourself 
 and Gen. Halleck. 
 
 A. Lincoln 
 
HIS SPEECHES AND WRITINGS 699 
 
 LETTER TO ERASTUS CORNING AND OTHERS 
 JUNE 12, 1863 
 
 Executive Mansion, 
 Washington, June 12, 1863. 
 Hon. Erastus Corning and Others. 
 Gentlemen: 
 
 Your letter of May 19, inclosing the resolutions of a public 
 meeting held at Albany, New York, on the 16th of the same month, 
 was received several days ago. 
 
 The resolutions, as I understand them, are resolvable into 
 two propositions — first, the expression of a purpose to sustain the 
 cause of the Union, to secure peace through victory, and to sup- 
 port the administration in every constitutional and lawful meas- 
 ure to suppress the rebellion; and, secondly, a declaration of 
 censure upon the administration for supposed unconstitutional 
 action, such as the making of military arrests. And from the two 
 propositions a third is deduced, which is that the gentlemen com- 
 posing the meeting are resolved on doing their part to maintain 
 our common government and country, despite the folly or wicked- 
 ness, as they may conceive, of any administration. This position 
 is eminently patriotic, and as such I thank the meeting, and con- 
 gratulate the nation for it. My own purpose is the same; so that 
 the meeting and myself have a common object, and can have no 
 difference, except in the choice of means or measures for effect- 
 ing that object. 
 
 And here I ought to close this paper, and would close it, if 
 there were no apprehension that more injurious consequences 
 than any merely personal to myself might follow the censures 
 systematically cast upon me for doing what, in my view of duty, 
 I could not forbear. The resolutions promise to support me in 
 every constitutional and lawful measure to suppress the rebellion; 
 and I have not knowingly employed, nor shall knowingly employ, 
 any other. But the meeting, by their resolutions, assert and argue 
 
700 ABRAHAM LINCOLN: 
 
 that certain military arrests, and proceedings following them, for 
 which I am ultimately responsible, are unconstitutional. I think 
 they are not. The resolutions quote from the Constitution the defi- 
 nition of treason, and also the limiting safeguards and guarantees 
 therein provided for the citizen on trials for treason, and on his 
 being held to answer for capital or otherwise infamous crimes, and 
 in criminal prosecutions his right to a speedy and public trial 
 by an impartial jury. They proceed to resolve "that these safe- 
 guards of the rights of the citizen against the pretensions of 
 arbitrary power were intended more especially for his protection 
 in times of civil commotion/' And, apparently to demonstrate the 
 proposition, the resolutions proceed: "They were secured sub- 
 stantially to the English people after years of protracted civil war, 
 and were adopted into our Constitution at the close of the revolu- 
 tion." Would not the demonstration have been better if it could 
 have been truly said that these safeguards had been adopted and 
 applied during the civil wars and during our revolution, instead 
 of after the one and at the close of the other? I, too, am devotedly 
 for them after civil war, and before civil war, and at all times, 
 "except when, in cases of rebellion or invasion, the public safety 
 may require" their suspension. The resolutions proceed to tell us 
 that these safeguards "have stood the test of seventy-six years 
 of trial under our republican system, under circumstances which 
 show that while they constitute the foundation of all free govern- 
 ment, they are the elements of the enduring stability of the re- 
 public." No one denies that they have so stood the test up to 
 the beginning of the present rebellion, if we except a certain occur- 
 rence at New Orleans hereafter to be mentioned; nor does any 
 one question that they will stand the same test much longer 
 after the rebellion closes. But these provisions of the Constitution 
 have no application to the case we have in hand, because the 
 arrests complained of were not made for treason — that is, not for 
 the treason defined in the Constitution, and upon the conviction 
 of which the punishment is death — nor yet were they made to 
 hold persons to answer for any capital or otherwise infamous 
 crimes; nor were the proceedings following, in any constitutional 
 or legal sense, "criminal prosecutions." The arrests were made on 
 totally different grounds, and the proceedings following accorded 
 
HIS SPEECHES AND WRITINGS 701 
 
 with the grounds of the arrests. Let us consider the real case with 
 which we are dealing, and apply to it the parts of the Constitution 
 plainly made for such cases. 
 
 Prior to my installation here it had been inculcated that any 
 State had a lawful right to secede from the national Union, and 
 that it would be expedient to exercise the right whenever the 
 devotees of the doctrine should fail to elect a president to their 
 own liking. I was elected contrary to their liking; and, accord- 
 ingly, so far as it was legally possible, they had taken seven States 
 out of the Union, had seized many of the United States forts, 
 and had fired upon the United States flag, all before I was in- 
 augurated, and, of course, before I had done any official act what- 
 ever. The rebellion thus begun soon ran into the present civil war; 
 and, in certain respects, it began on very unequal terms between 
 the parties. The insurgents had been preparing for it more than 
 thirty years, while the government had taken no steps to resist 
 them. The former had carefully considered all the means which 
 could be turned to their account. It undoubtedly was a well- 
 pondered reliance with them that in their own unrestricted effort 
 to destroy Union, Constitution and law, all together, the govern- 
 ment would, in great degree, be restrained by the same Constitu- 
 tion and law from arresting their progress. Their sympathizers 
 pervaded all departments of the government and nearly all com- 
 munities of the people. From this material, under cover of "liberty 
 of speech," "liberty of the press," and "habeas corpus," they hoped 
 to keep on foot amongst us a most efficient corps of spies, in- 
 formers, suppliers, and aiders and abettors of their cause in a 
 thousand ways. They knew that in times such as they were in- 
 augurating, by the Constitution itself the "habeas corpus" might 
 be suspended; but they also knew they had friends who would 
 make a question as to who was to suspend it; meanwhile their 
 spies and others might remain at large to help on their cause. 
 Or if, as has happened, the Executive should suspend the writ 
 without ruinous waste of time, instances of arresting innocent 
 persons might occur, as are always likely to occur in such cases; 
 and then a clamor could be raised in regard to this, which might 
 be at least of some service to the insurgent cause. It needed no 
 very keen perception to discover this part of the enemy's pro- 
 
702 ABRAHAM LINCOLN: 
 
 gramme, so soon as by open hostilities their machinery was fairly 
 put in motion. Yet, thoroughly imbued with a reverence for the 
 guaranteed rights of individuals, I was slow to adopt the strong 
 measures which by degrees I have been forced to regard as being 
 within the exceptions of the Constitution, and as indispensable 
 to the public safety. Nothing is better known to history than 
 that courts of justice are utterly incompetent to such cases. Civil 
 courts are organized chiefly for trials of individuals, or, at most, a 
 few individuals acting in concert — and this in quiet times, and on 
 charges of crimes well defined in the law. Even in times of peace 
 bands of horse-thieves and robbers frequently grow too numerous 
 and powerful for the ordinary courts of justice. But what com- 
 parison, in numbers, have such bands ever borne to the insurgent 
 sympathizers even in many of the loyal States? Again, a jury too 
 frequently has at least one member more ready to hang the panel 
 than to hang the traitor. And yet again, he who dissuades one 
 man from volunteering, or induces one soldier to desert, weakens 
 the Union cause as much as he who kills a Union soldier in battle. 
 Yet this dissuasion or inducement may be so conducted as to be 
 no defined crime of which any civil court would take cognizance. 
 
 Ours is a case of rebellion — so called by the resolutions before 
 me — in fact, a clear, flagrant, and gigantic case of rebellion; 
 and the provision of the Constitution that "the privilege of the 
 writ of habeas corpus shall not be suspended unless when, in cases 
 of rebellion or invasion, the public safety may require it," is the 
 provision which specially applies to our present case. This pro- 
 vision plainly attests the understanding of those who made the 
 Constitution that ordinary courts of justice are inadequate to 
 "cases of rebellion" — attests their purpose that, in such cases, men 
 may be held in custody whom the courts, acting on ordinary rules, 
 would discharge. Habeas corpus does not discharge men who are 
 proved to be guilty of defined crime; and its suspension is allowed 
 by the Constitution on purpose that men may be arrested and 
 held who cannot be proved to be guilty of defined crime, "when, 
 in cases of rebellion or invasion, the public safety may require it." 
 
 This is precisely our present case — a case of rebellion wherein 
 the public safety does require the suspension. Indeed, arrests by 
 process of courts and arrests in cases of rebellion do not proceed 
 
Meserve No. 100. A photograph made by Alexander Gard- 
 ner on Monday, April 10, 1865. Mr. Truman H. Bartlett, 
 the author and sculptor, acquired it from Mr. Gardner in 
 1874, who then stated that only one print was made from 
 the large broken negative before it was considered value- 
 less and destroyed, and that it was the last photograph 
 made on that day. No later photographs were made of the 
 President in life. This single print is in the Meserve Col- 
 lection. 
 
HIS SPEECHES AND WRITINGS 703 
 
 altogether upon the same basis. The former is directed at the small 
 percentage of ordinary and continuous perpetration of crime, 
 while the latter is directed at sudden and extensive uprisings 
 against the government, which, at most, will succeed or fail in 
 no great length of time. In the latter case arrests are made not so 
 much for what has been done, as for what probably would be 
 done. The latter is more for the preventive and less for the vindic- 
 tive than the former. In such cases the purposes of men are much 
 more easily understood than in cases of ordinary crime. The man 
 who stands by and says nothing when the peril of his government 
 is discussed, cannot be misunderstood. If not hindered, he is sure 
 to help the enemy; much more if he talks ambiguously — talks 
 for his country with "buts," and "ifs" and ' ands." Of how little 
 value the constitutional provision I have quoted will be rendered 
 if arrests shall never be made until defined crimes shall have been 
 committed, may be illustrated by a few notable examples: General 
 John C. Breckinridge, General Robert E. Lee, General Joseph E. 
 Johnston, General John B. Magruder, General William B. Preston, 
 General Simon B. Buckner, and Commodore Franklin Buchanan, 
 now occupying the very highest places in the rebel war service, 
 were all within the power of the government since the rebellion 
 began, and were nearly as well known to be traitors then as now. 
 Unquestionably if we had seized and held them, the insurgent 
 cause would be much weaker. But no one of them had then com- 
 mitted any crime defined in the law. Every one of them, if 
 arrested, would have been discharged on habeas corpus were the 
 writ allowed to operate. In view of these and similar cases, I think 
 the time not unlikely to come when I shall be blamed for having 
 made too few arrests rather than too many. 
 
 By the third resolution the meeting indicate their opinion 
 that military arrests may be constitutional in localities where re- 
 bellion actually exists, but that such arrests are unconstitutional 
 in localities where rebellion or insurrection does not actually exist. 
 They insist that such arrests shall not be made "outside of the 
 lines of necessary military occupation and the scenes of insurrec- 
 tion." Inasmuch, however, as the Constitution itself makes no such 
 distinction, I am unable to believe that there is any such constitu- 
 tional distinction. I concede that the class of arrests complained of 
 
704 ABRAHAM LINCOLN: 
 
 can be constitutional only when, in cases of rebellion or invasion, 
 the public safety may require them; and I insist that in such cases 
 they are constitutional wherever the public safety does require 
 them, as well in places to which they may prevent the rebellion 
 extending, as in those where it may be already prevailing; as well 
 where they may restrain mischievous interference with the raising 
 and supplying of armies to suppress the rebellion, as where the 
 rebellion may actually be; as well where they may restrain the 
 enticing men out of the army, as where they would prevent mutiny 
 in the army; equally constitutional at all places where they will 
 conduce to the public safety, as against the dangers of rebellion or 
 invasion. Take the particular case mentioned by the meeting. It is 
 asserted in substance, that Mr. Vallandigham was, by a military 
 commander, seized and tried "for no other reason than words 
 addressed to a public meeting in criticism of the course of the ad- 
 ministration, and in condemnation of the military orders of the 
 general." Now, if there be no mistake about this, if this assertion 
 is the truth and the whole truth, if there was no other reason 
 for the arrest, then I concede that the arrest was wrong. But the 
 arrest, as I understand, was made for a very different reason. 
 Mr. Vallandigham avows his hostility to the war on the part of the 
 Union; and his arrest was made because he was laboring, with 
 some effect, to prevent the raising of troops, to encourage deser- 
 tions from the army, and to leave the rebellion without an ade- 
 quate military force to suppress it. He was not arrested because 
 he was damaging the political prospects of the administration or 
 the personal interests of the commanding general, but because he 
 was damaging the army, upon the existence and vigor of which 
 the life of the nation depends. He was warring upon the military, 
 and this gave the military constitutional jurisdiction to lay hands 
 upon him. If Mr. Vallandigham was not damaging the military 
 power of the country, then his arrest was made on mistake of fact, 
 which I would be glad to correct on reasonably satisfactory 
 evidence. 
 
 I understand the meeting whose resolutions I am considering 
 to be in favor of suppressing the rebellion by military force — 
 by armies. Long experience has shown that armies cannot be 
 maintained unless desertion shall be punished by the severe 
 
HIS SPEECHES AND WRITINGS 705 
 
 penalty of death. The case requires, and the law and the Consti- 
 tution sanction, this punishment. Must I shoot a simple-minded 
 soldier boy who deserts, while I must not touch a hair of a wily 
 agitator who induces him to desert? This is none the less injurious 
 when effected by getting a father, or brother, or friend into a 
 public meeting, and there working upon his feelings till he is 
 persuaded to write the soldier boy that he is fighting in a bad 
 cause, for a wicked administration of a contemptible government, 
 too weak to arrest and punish him if he shall desert. I think that, 
 in such a case, to silence the agitator and save the boy is not 
 only constitutional, but withal a great mercy. 
 
 If I be wrong on this question of constitutional power, my 
 error lies in believing that certain proceedings are constitutional 
 when, in cases of rebellion or invasion, the public safety requires 
 them, which would not be constitutional when, in absence of rebel- 
 lion or invasion, the public safety does not require them: in other 
 words, that the Constitution is not in its application in all respects 
 the same in cases of rebellion or invasion involving the public 
 safety, as it is in times of profound peace and public security. 
 The Constitution itself makes the distinction, and I can no more 
 be persuaded that the government can constitutionally take no 
 strong measures in time of rebellion, because it can be shown that 
 the same could not be lawfully taken in time of peace, than I 
 can be persuaded that a particular drug is not good medicine 
 for a sick man because it can be shown to not be good food for 
 a well one. Nor am I able to appreciate the danger apprehended 
 by the meeting, that the American people will by means of 
 military arrests during the rebellion lose the right of public discus- 
 sion, the liberty of speech and the press, the law of evidence, 
 trial by jury, and habeas corpus throughout the indefinite peace- 
 ful future which I trust lies before them, any more than I am 
 able to believe that a man could contract so strong an appetite 
 for emetics during temporary illness as to persist in feeding upon 
 them during the remainder of his healthful life. 
 
 In giving the resolutions that earnest consideration which you 
 request of me, I cannot overlook the fact that the meeting speak 
 as "Democrats." Nor can I, with full respect for their known in- 
 telligence, and the fairly presumed deliberation with which they 
 
706 ABRAHAM LINCOLN: 
 
 prepared their resolutions, be permitted to suppose that this 
 occurred by accident, or in any way other than that they preferred 
 to designate themselves "Democrats" rather than "American citi- 
 zens." In this time of national peril I would have preferred to 
 meet you upon a level one step higher than any party platform, 
 because I am sure that from such more elevated position we could 
 do better battle for the country we all love than we possibly can 
 from those lower ones where, from the force of habit, the prej- 
 udices of the past, and selfish hopes of the future, we are sure 
 to expend much of our ingenuity and strength in finding fault 
 with and aiming blows at each other. But since you have denied 
 me this, I will yet be thankful for the country's sake that not all 
 Democrats have done so. He on whose discretionary judgment 
 Mr. Vallandigham was arrested and tried is a Democrat, having 
 no old party affinity with me, and the judge who rejected the 
 constitutional view expressed in these resolutions, by refusing to 
 discharge Mr. Vallandigham on habeas corpus, is a Democrat of 
 better days than these, having received his judicial mantle at the 
 hands of President Jackson. And still more, of all those Democrats 
 who are nobly exposing their lives and shedding their blood on 
 the battle-field, I have learned that many approve the course taken 
 with Mr. Vallandigham, while I have not heard of a single one 
 condemning it. I cannot assert that there are none such. And the 
 name of President Jackson recalls an instance of pertinent history. 
 After the battle of New Orleans, and while the fact that the 
 treaty of peace had been concluded was well known in the city, 
 but before official knowledge of it had arrived, General Jackson 
 still maintained martial or military law. Now that it could be said 
 the war was over, the clamor against martial law, which had ex- 
 isted from the first, grew more furious. Among other things, a Mr. 
 Louaillier published a denunciatory newspaper article. General 
 Jackson arrested him. A lawyer by the name of Morel procured the 
 United States Judge Hall to order a writ of habeas corpus to re- 
 lease Mr. Louaillier. General Jackson arrested both the lawyer 
 and the judge. A Mr. Hollander ventured to say of some part of 
 the matter that "it was a dirty trick/' General Jackson arrested 
 him. When the officer undertook to serve the writ of habeas 
 
HIS SPEECHES AND WRITINGS 707 
 
 corpus, General Jackson took it from him, and sent him away 
 with a copy. Holding the judge in custody a few days, the general 
 sent him beyond the limits of his encampment, and set him at 
 liberty with an order to remain till the ratification of peace should 
 be regularly announced, or until the British should have left the 
 southern coast. A day or two more elapsed, the ratification of the 
 treaty of peace was regularly announced, and the judge and 
 others w r ere fully liberated. A few days more, and the judge called 
 General Jackson into court and fined him $1000 for having 
 arrested him and the others named. The general paid the fine, 
 and then the matter rested for nearly thirty years, when Congress 
 refunded principal and interest. The late Senator Douglas, then 
 in the House of Representatives, took a leading part in the debates 
 in which the constitutional question was much discussed. I am 
 not prepared to say whom the journals would show to have voted 
 for the measure. 
 
 It may be remarked — first, that we had the same Constitution 
 then as now; secondly, that we then had a case of invasion, and 
 now we have a case of rebellion; and, thirdly, that the permanent 
 right of the people to public discussion, the liberty of speech and 
 of the press, the trial by jury, the law of evidence, and the habeas 
 corpus, suffered no detriment whatever by that conduct of General 
 Jackson, or its subsequent approval by the American Congress. 
 
 And yet, let me say that, in my own discretion, I do not 
 know whether I would have ordered the arrest of Mr. Vallandig- 
 ham. While I cannot shift the responsibility from myself, I hold 
 that, as a general rule, the commander in the field is the better 
 judge of the necessity in any particular case. Of course I must 
 practise a general directory and revisory power in the matter. 
 
 One of the resolutions expresses the opinion of the meeting 
 that arbitraiy arrests will have the effect to divide and distract 
 those who should be united in suppressing the rebellion, and I 
 am specifically called on to discharge Mr. Vallandigham. I regard 
 this as, at least, a fair appeal to me on the expediency of exercising 
 a constitutional power which I think exists. In response to such 
 appeal I have to say, it gave me pain when I learned that Mr. 
 Vallandigham had been arrested (that is, I was pained that there 
 
708 ABRAHAM LINCOLN: 
 
 should have seemed to be a necessity for arresting him ) , and that 
 it will afford me great pleasure to discharge him so soon as I can 
 by any means believe the public safety will not suffer by it. 
 
 I further say that, as the war progresses, it appears to me, 
 opinion and action, which were in great confusion at first, take 
 shape and fall into more regular channels, so that the necessity 
 for strong dealing with them gradually decreases. I have every 
 reason to desire that it should cease altogether, and far from 
 the least is my regard for the opinions and wishes of those who, 
 like the meeting at Albany, declare their purpose to sustain the 
 government in every constitutional and lawful measure to sup- 
 press the rebellion. Still, I must continue to do so much as may 
 seem to be required by the public safety. 
 
 A. Lincoln. 
 
 Corning was an influential, wealthy Democrat of 
 New York. The resolutions passed by the Albany Demo- 
 cratic Convention had equivocated to an extent in main- 
 taining absolute loyalty to the Union while at the same 
 time criticizing Lincoln for permitting the arrest of the 
 notorious Copperhead, Clement L. Vallandigham, mem- 
 ber of Congress from Ohio. 
 
 TELEGRAM TO GENERAL JOSEPH HOOKER 
 JUNE 14, 1863 
 
 Washington, June 14. 1863. 5.50 p. m. 
 Major General Hooker. 
 
 So far as we can make out here the enemy have Milroy sur- 
 rounded at Winchester, and Tyler at Martinsburg. If they could 
 hold out a few days, could you help them? If the head of Lee's 
 
HIS SPEECHES AND WRITINGS 709 
 
 army is at Martinsburg, and the tail of it on the Plank road be- 
 tween Fredericksburg & Chancellorsville, the animal must be very 
 slim somewhere. Could you not break him? 
 
 A. Lincoln. 
 
 RESPONSE TO A SERENADE 
 JULY 7, 1863 
 
 Fellow-citizens: 
 
 I am very glad indeed to see you to-night, and yet I will not 
 say I thank you for this call, but I do most sincerely thank 
 Almighty God for the occasion on which you have called. How 
 long ago is it — eighty odd years — since on the Fourth of July for 
 the first time in the history of the world a nation by its repre- 
 sentatives, assembled and declared as a self-evident truth that 
 "all men are created equal." That was the birthday of the United 
 States of America. Since then the Fourth of July has had several 
 peculiar recognitions. The two most distinguished men in the 
 framing and support of the Declaration were Thomas Jefferson 
 and John Adams — the one having penned it and the other sus- 
 tained it the most forcibly in debate — the only two of the fifty- 
 five who sustained it being elected President of the United States. 
 Precisely fifty years after they put their hands to the paper it 
 pleased Almighty God to take both from the stage of action. This 
 was indeed an extraordinary and remarkable event in our history. 
 Another President, five years after, was called from this stage 
 of existence on the same day and month of the year; and now, 
 on this last Fourth of July just passed, when we have a gigantic 
 Rebellion, at the bottom of which is an effort to overthrow the 
 principle that all men are created equal, we have the surrender 
 of a most powerful position and army on that very day, and not 
 only so, but in a succession of battles in Pennsylvania, near to us, 
 through three days, so rapidly fought that they might be called one 
 
710 ABRAHAM LINCOLN: 
 
 great battle on the 1st, 2d, and 3d of the month of July; and on 
 the 4th the cohorts of those who opposed the declaration that 
 all men are created equal, "turned tail" and ran. Gentlemen, this 
 is a glorious theme, and the occasion for a speech, but I am 
 not prepared to make one worthy of the occasion. I would like 
 to speak in terms of praise due to the many brave officers and 
 soldiers who have fought in the cause of the Union and liberties 
 of the country from the beginning of the war. There are trying 
 occasions, not only in success, but for the want of success. I dis- 
 like to mention the name of one single officer, lest I might do 
 wrong to those I might forget. Recent events bring up glorious 
 names, and particularly prominent ones, but these I will not 
 mention. Having said this much, I will now take the music. 
 
 The germ idea which Lincoln rounded out to full 
 figure in the "Gettysburg Address," may be observed in 
 this speech in an undeveloped, casual statement, made 
 only a few days after the battle. It is of interest to observe 
 that the significance of the date and event were begin- 
 ning this early to assume the symbolism in Lincoln s 
 mind which he poetically expanded four months later 
 in his metaphor of birth and death. 
 
 LETTER TO GENERAL U. S. GRANT 
 JULY 13, 1863 
 
 Executive Mansion, 
 Washington, July 13, 1863. 
 
 Major General Grant 
 
 My dear General 
 
 I do not remember that you and I ever met personally. I write 
 
 this now as a grateful acknowledgment for the almost inestimable 
 
HIS SPEECHES AND WRITINGS 711 
 
 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 you knew better 
 than I, that the Yazoo Pass expedition, and the like, could suc- 
 ceed. When you got below, and took Port-Gibson, Grand Gulf, 
 and vicinity, I thought you should go down the river and join 
 Gen. 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 
 
 DRAFT OF LETTER TO GENERAL G. G. MEADE 
 JULY 14, 1863 
 
 Executive Mansion, 
 Washington, July 14, 1863. 
 Major-General Meade: 
 
 I have just seen your despatch to General Halleck, asking to 
 be relieved of your command because of a supposed censure of 
 mine. I am very, very grateful to you for the magnificent success 
 you gave the cause of the country at Gettysburg; and I am sorry 
 now to be the author of the slightest pain to you. But I was in 
 such deep distress myself that I could not restrain some expression 
 of it. I have been oppressed nearly ever since the battles at 
 Gettysburg by what appeared to be evidences that yourself and 
 General Couch and General Smith were not seeking a collision 
 with the enemy, but were trying to get him across the river with- 
 out another battle. What these evidences were, if you please, I 
 hope to tell you at some time when we shall both feel better. The 
 case, summarily stated, is this: You fought and beat the enemy at 
 
712 ABRAHAM LINCOLN: 
 
 Gettysburg, and, of course, to say the least, his loss was as great 
 as yours. He retreated, and you did not, as it seemed to me, press- 
 ingly pursue him; but a flood in the river detained him till, by slow 
 degrees, you were again upon him. You had at least twenty thou- 
 sand veteran troops directly with you, and as many more raw 
 ones within supporting distance, all in addition to those who 
 fought with you at Gettysburg, while it was not possible that he 
 had received a single recruit, and yet you stood and let the flood 
 run down, bridges be built, and the enemy move away at his 
 leisure without attacking him. And Couch and Smith! The latter 
 left Carlisle in time, upon all ordinary calculation, to have aided 
 you in the last battle at Gettysburg, but he did not arrive. At the 
 end of more than ten days, I believe twelve, under constant urging, 
 he reached Hagerstown from Carlisle, which is not an inch over 
 fifty-five miles, if so much, and Couch's movement was very little 
 different. 
 
 Again, my dear general, I do not believe you appreciate the 
 magnitude of the misfortune involved in Lee's escape. He was 
 within your easy grasp, and to have closed upon him would, in 
 connection with our other late successes, have ended the war. 
 As it is, the war will be prolonged indefinitely. If you could not 
 safely attack Lee last Monday, how can you possibly do so south 
 of the river, when you can take with you very few more than two 
 thirds of the force you then had in hand? It would be unreason- 
 able to expect, and Ido not expect [that], you can now effect 
 much. Your golden opportunity is gone, and I am distressed im- 
 measurably because of it. 
 
 I beg you will not consider this a prosecution or persecution 
 of yourself. As you had learned that I was dissatisfied, I have 
 thought it best to kindly tell you why. 
 
 [Indorsement on the Envelop] 
 To General Meade, never sent or signed. 
 
 As printed in the Complete Works of Abraham 
 Lincoln, this letter contains the indorsement on the 
 
HIS SPEECHES AND WRITINGS 713 
 
 envelope as indicated at the end of the letter. The 
 original manuscript has not been available to the editor. 
 
 LETTER TO GENERAL H. W. HALLECK 
 JULY 29, 1863 
 
 Executive Mansion, 
 Washington, July 29, 1863. 
 Major General Halleck 
 
 Seeing General Meade's despatch of yesterday to yourself, 
 causes me to fear that he supposes the government here is demand- 
 ing of him to bring on a general engagement with Lee as soon as 
 possible. I am claiming no such thing of him. In fact, my judge- 
 ment is against it; which judgement, of course, I will yield if 
 yours and his are the contrary. If he could not safely engage Lee 
 at Williamsport, it seems absurd to suppose he can safely engage 
 him now, when he has scarcely more than two-thirds of the force 
 he had at Williamsport, while it must be that Lee has been rein- 
 forced. True, I desired Gen. Meade to pursue Lee across the 
 Potomac, hoping, as has proved true, that he would thereby clear 
 the Baltimore and Ohio Rail Road, and get some advantage by 
 harrassing [sic] him on his retreat. These being past I am un- 
 willing he should now get into a general engagement on the 
 impression that we here are pressing him; and I shall be glad for 
 you to so inform him, unless your own judgement is against it. 
 
 Yours truly 
 
 A. Lincoln. 
 
 The manuscript of this letter is in John Hays hand- 
 writing, emended and signed by Lincoln s hand. The 
 probability that Lincoln dictated the contents is indi- 
 cated by the fact that the word "caused? is emended in 
 
714 ABRAHAM LINCOLN: 
 
 Lincoln's hand to "causes." The failure to keep tenses 
 parallel would have been a natural error in dictating. 
 Hay's Diary makes this probability seem a certainty with 
 the following comment under July 29, 1863: "The Presi- 
 dent today wrote a letter to General Halleck . . ." The 
 entire entry summarizes the letter. It seems improbable 
 that so short a letter would have been written out by 
 Lincoln, then recopied by Hay and revised and signed 
 by Lincoln. The importance of these facts to the whole 
 picture of Hay's function as secretary to Lincoln is that 
 they seem to establish fairly well that some of the letters 
 in Hay's handwriting were dictated by Lincoln. Hay's 
 later testimony concerning his function as secretary to 
 Lincoln did not mention the fact that many of the letters 
 which he or one of the other White House secretaries 
 penned were dictated by Lincoln, particularly in the 
 very busy summer and fall of 1863. 
 
 LETTER TO GENERAL N. P. BANKS 
 AUGUST 5, 1863 
 
 Executive Mansion, 
 Washington, August 5, 1863. 
 My dear General Banks 
 
 Being a poor correspondent is the only apology I offer for 
 not having sooner tendered my thanks for your very successful, 
 and very valuable military operations this year. The final stroke 
 in opening the Mississippi never should, and I think never will, be 
 forgotten. 
 
 Recent events in Mexico, I think, render early action in Texas 
 more important than ever. I expect, however, the General-in- 
 Chief, will address you more fully upon this subject. 
 
HIS SPEECHES AND WRITINGS 715 
 
 Governor Boutwell read me to-day that part of your letter to 
 him, which relates to Louisiana affairs. While I very well know 
 what I would be glad for Louisiana to do, it is quite a different 
 thing for me to assume direction of the matter. I would be glad for 
 her to make a new constitution recognizing the emancipation 
 proclamation, and adopting emancipation in those parts of the 
 state to which the proclamation does not apply. And while she is at 
 it, I think it would not be objectionable for her to adopt some 
 practical system by which the two races could gradually live 
 themselves out of their old relation to each other, and both come 
 out better prepared for the new. Education for young blacks 
 should be included in the plan. After all, the power, or element, 
 of "contract" may be sufficient for this probationary period; and, 
 by it's simplicity, and flexibility, may be the better. 
 
 As an anti-slavery man I have a motive to desire emancipa- 
 tion, which pro-slavery men do not have; but even they have 
 strong enough reason to thus place themselves again under the 
 shield of the Union, and to thus perpetually hedge against the 
 recurrence of the scenes through which we are now passing. 
 
 Gov. Shepley has informed me that Mr. Durant is now taking 
 a registry, with a view to the election of a Constitutional Con- 
 vention in Louisiana. This, to me, appears proper. If such con- 
 vention were to ask my views, I could present little else than what 
 I now say to you. I think the thing should be pushed forward, so 
 that if possible, it's mature work may reach here by the meeting 
 of Congress. 
 
 For my own part I think I shall not, in any event, retract the 
 emancipation proclamation; nor, as executive, ever return to 
 slavery any person who is free by the terms of that proclamation, 
 or by any of the acts of Congress. 
 
 If Louisiana shall send members to Congress, then admission 
 to seats will depend, as you know, upon the respective Houses, 
 and not upon the President. 
 
 If these views can be of any advantage in giving shape, 
 and impetus, to action there, I shall be glad for you to use them 
 prudently for that object. Of course you will confer with intelli- 
 gent and trusty citizens of the State, among whom I would sug- 
 
716 ABRAHAM LINCOLN: 
 
 gest Messrs. Flanders, Harm, and Durant; and to each of whom 
 I now think I may send copies of this letter. Still it is perhaps 
 better to not make the letter generally public. 
 
 Yours very truly 
 
 A. Lincoln. 
 
 Banks's military operations in Louisiana were heart- 
 ily condemned by regular army men as incompetent, and 
 he was referred to as a "political general." Lincoln's 
 opinion of him was high for the very reason that Banks 
 recognized his function in restoring political life in the 
 area of his command as equal to his military function. 
 He once commented on his relative failure and success 
 by observing that "the President gave me too much to 
 do — more than any other major-general in the army." 
 This letter confirms his comment to a large degree. 
 
 LETTER TO MARY TODD LINCOLN 
 AUGUST 8, 1863 
 
 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 con- 
 cluded to bring her down to the White House. This was done, and 
 
HIS SPEECHES AND WRITINGS 717 
 
 the second day she had disappeared and has not been heard of 
 since. This is the last we know of poor "Nanny." 
 
 The weather continues dry and excessively warm here. Noth- 
 ing very important occurring. The election in Kentucky has gone 
 very strongly right. Old Mr. Wickliffe got ugly, as you know: 
 ran for governor, and is terribly beaten. Upon Mr. Crittenden's 
 death, Brutus Clay, Cassius's brother, was put on the track for 
 Congress, and is largely elected. Mr. Menzies, who, as we thought, 
 behaved very badly last session of Congress, is largely beaten in 
 the district opposite Cincinnati, by Green Clay Smith, Cassius 
 Clay's nephew. But enough. 
 
 Affectionately, 
 
 A. Lincoln. 
 
 LETTER TO GENERAL J. A. McCLERNAND 
 AUGUST 12, 1863 
 
 Executive Mansion, 
 Washington, August 12, 1863. 
 Major General McClernand: 
 My dear Sir: 
 
 Our friend, William G. Greene, has just presented a kind 
 letter in regard to yourself, addressed to me by our other friends, 
 Yates, Hatch, and Dubois. I doubt whether your present position 
 is more painful to you than to myself. Grateful for the patriotic 
 stand so early taken by you in the life-and-death struggle of 
 the nation, I have done whatever has appeared practicable to 
 advance you and the public interest together. No charges, with 
 a view to a trial, have been preferred against you by any one; nor 
 do I suppose any will be. All there is, so far as I have heard, is 
 Gen. Grant's statement of his reason for relieving you. And even 
 this I have not seen or sought to see; because it is a case, as appears 
 to me, in which I could do nothing without doing harm. Gen. 
 
718 ABRAHAM LINCOLN: 
 
 Grant and yourself have been conspicuous in our most important 
 successes; and for me to interfere, and thus magnify a breach be- 
 tween you, could not but be of evil effect. Better leave it where 
 the law of the case has placed it. For me to force you back upon 
 Gen. Grant, would be forcing him to resign. I can not give you a 
 new command, because we have no forces except such as already 
 have commanders; I am constantly pressed by those who scold 
 before they think, or without thinking at all, to give commands 
 respectively to Fremont, McClellan, Butler, Sigel, Curtis, Hunter, 
 Hooker, and perhaps others; when, all else out of the way, I have 
 no commands to give them. This is now your case, which, as I have 
 before said, pains me, not less than it does you. 
 
 My belief is that the permanent estimate of what a general 
 does in the field, is fixed by the "cloud of witnesses" who have been 
 with him in the field; and that relying on them, he who has the 
 right needs not to fear. 
 
 Your friend as ever 
 
 A. Lincoln 
 
 LETTER TO J. H. HACKETT 
 AUGUST 17, 1863 
 
 Executive Mansion, 
 Washington, August 17, 1863. 
 My dear Sir: 
 
 Months ago I should have acknowledged 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 little of the Drama. The 
 first presentation of Falstaff I ever saw was yours here last winter 
 or spring. Perhaps the best compliment 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, whilst others I have gone over perhaps 
 
HIS SPEECHES AND WRITINGS 719 
 
 as frequently as any unprofessional reader. Among the latter are 
 Lear, Richard Third, Henry Eighth, Hamlet, and especially Mac- 
 beth. I think nothing equals Macbeth. It is wonderful. Unlike you 
 gentlemen of the profession, I think the soliloquy in Hamlet com- 
 mencing "O, my offense is rank," surpasses that commencing "To 
 be or not to be." But pardon this small attempt at criticism. I 
 should like to hear you pronounce the opening speech of Richard 
 the Third. 
 
 Will you not soon visit Washington again? If you do, please 
 call and let me make your personal acquaintance. 
 
 Yours truly, 
 
 A. Lincoln. 
 James H. Hackett, Esq. 
 
 Hackett was a well-known Shakespearean actor of 
 the era, whose appearances in Washington gave Lincoln 
 much pleasure. Upon receiving this letter from the Presi- 
 dent, he published it in a broadside which carried the 
 notation, "Printed not for publication but for private dis- 
 tribution only, and its convenient perusal by personal 
 friends." Subsequently it came to the attention of the 
 unfriendly press, and Lincoln's venture into Shake- 
 spearean criticism became the object of ridicule; where- 
 upon Hackett apologized to the President and received 
 the letter dated November 2, 186S, in reply. Lincoln's 
 preference for the King's soliloquy in Hamlet was possi- 
 bly due to its theme of conscience and moral conflict. 
 
720 ABRAHAM LINCOLN 
 
 LETTER TO JAMES C. CONKLING 
 AUGUST 26, 1863 
 
 Executive Mansion, 
 Washington, August 26, 1863. 
 Hon. James C. Conkling 
 My Dear Sir. 
 
 Your letter inviting me to attend a mass-meeting of uncon- 
 ditional Union-men, to be held at the Capitol of Illinois, on the 
 3d 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 can not, just now, be absent from 
 here, so long as a visit there, would require. 
 
 The meeting is to be of all those who maintain unconditional 
 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 
 other noble men, whom no partizan malice, or partizan 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? 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, em- 
 bracing the maintenance of the Union, is now possible. All I 
 learn, leads to a directly opposite belief. The strength of the rebel- 
 lion, is its military — its army. That army dominates all the coun- 
 try, 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 
 
HIS SPEECHES AND WRITINGS 721 
 
 were made with them. To illustrate. Suppose refugees from the 
 South, and peace 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 
 army 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 com- 
 promise, 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, accord- 
 ing 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 my- 
 self 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 consistent with even your 
 view, 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 exclusively 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 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 
 
722 ABRAHAM LINCOLN: 
 
 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 enemie's property when they can not 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 vanquished foes, and non- 
 combatants, 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 can not 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 the 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 the 
 Republican party policies but who held 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 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, exclu- 
 sively to save the Union. I issued the proclamation 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, 
 
HIS SPEECHES AND WRITINGS 723 
 
 it will be an apt time, then, for you to declare you will not fight 
 to free negroes. 
 
 I thought that in your struggle 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 can 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 any thing 
 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 un- 
 vexed to the sea. Thanks to the great Northwest for it. Nor yet 
 wholly to them. Three hundred miles up, they met New England, 
 Empire, Key-stone, 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 for- 
 gotten. 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 wherever the ground was a little 
 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 keep- 
 ing in all future time. It will then have been proved that, among 
 free men, 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, 
 
724 ABRAHAM LINCOLN: 
 
 and steady eye, and well-poised bayonet, they have helped man- 
 kind on to this great consummation; 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. 
 
 Yours very truly 
 
 A. Lincoln. 
 
 The manuscript of this letter appears to have been 
 copied from Lincoln's first draft by one of the official 
 secretaries who did a good deal of copy work at the 
 White House, and whose hand appears in certain pages 
 of the official manuscripts of the Messages to Congress. 
 A number of emendations, as well as the close and signa- 
 ture, are in Lincoln s hand. The style and content declare 
 Lincoln s composition beyond any doubt. The last three 
 sentences of the seventh paragraph were added by means 
 of a telegram. Hays Diary records on August 23, 1863, 
 that Lincoln "went into the Library to write a letter to 
 Conkling." In a letter to Nicolay dated September 11, 
 1868, Hay refers to the letter again, calling it "a great 
 thing' but disparaging its "hideously bad rhetoric." 
 
 There is some slight appearance that the secretary, 
 either consciously or unconsciously, imitated Lincoln's 
 handwriting in superficial matters such as capital letters. 
 If he were copying from Lincoln's first draft, this would 
 be readily understandable. The fact is worth notice 
 chiefly because of the allegation that lohn Hay often 
 imitated Lincoln's handwriting in official letters. Such 
 superficial similarities to Lincoln's handwriting as are 
 found in this letter and the "Letter to General H. W. 
 Halleck," September 19, 1863, may have been the basis 
 for assumptions that Hay indulged in imitating Lin- 
 coln's handwriting; but close study of the manuscripts 
 
HIS SPEECHES AND WRITINGS 725 
 
 does not anywhere indicate deliberate imitation, and 
 eliminates in the editors opinion the 'possibility that John 
 Hay was the secretary who penned them. For further 
 discussion of this problem, see the note on "Letter to 
 Mrs. Bixby," November 21, 1864. 
 
 LETTER TO JAMES C. CONKLING 
 AUGUST 27, 1863 
 
 Private 
 
 War Department, 
 
 Washington City, D. C. Aug. 27 1863. 
 My dear Conkling 
 
 I can not leave here now. Herewith is a letter instead. 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. 
 
 Yours as ever 
 
 A. Lincoln 
 
 Lincoln could not leave Washington to make a 
 speech, but he could write a letter embodying all he 
 wished to say, and his good friend Conkling could read it 
 to the rally of Union supporters which was to be held in 
 Springfield, Illinois. This short note refers, of course, to 
 the preceding letter of August 26, and was inclosed 
 with it. 
 
726 ABRAHAM LINCOLN 
 
 LETTER TO GENERAL H. W. HALLECK 
 SEPTEMBER 19, 1863 
 
 Executive Mansion, 
 Washington, Sepbr. 19, 1863. 
 Major General Halleck: 
 
 By Gen Meade's despatch to you of yesterday, it appears that 
 he desires your views, and those of the Government, as to whether 
 he shall advance upon the enemy. I am not prepared to order, or 
 even advise an advance in this case, wherein I know so little of 
 particulars, and wherein he, in the field, thinks the risk is so great 
 and the promise of advantage so small. And yet the case presents 
 matter for very serious consideration in another aspect. These 
 two armies confront each other across a small river, substantially 
 midway between the two Capitals, each defending its own Capital, 
 and menacing the other. Gen. Meade estimates the enemy's 
 infantry in front of him at not less than forty thousand. Suppose 
 we add fifty per cent, to this for cavalry, artillery, and extra-duty 
 men stretching as far as Richmond, making the whole force of the 
 enemy sixty thousand, Gen. Meade, as shown by the returns, has 
 with him, and between him and Washington, of the same classes 
 of well men, over ninety thousand. Neither can bring the whole of 
 his men into a battle, but each can bring as large a per centage in 
 as the other. For a battle, then, Gen Meade has three men to Gen. 
 Lee's two. Yet, it having been determined that choosing ground 
 and standing on the defensive gives so great advantage that the 
 three cannot safely attack the two, the three are left simply stand- 
 ing on the defensive also. If the enemy's sixty thousand are suf- 
 ficient to keep our ninety thousand away from Richmond, why, by 
 the same rule, may not forty thousand of ours keep their sixty 
 thousand away from Washington, leaving us fifty thousand to put 
 to some other use? Having practically come to the mere defensive, 
 it seems to be no economy at all to employ twice as many men for 
 that object as are needed. With no object, certainly, to mislead 
 
HIS SPEECHES AND WRITINGS 727 
 
 myself, I can perceive no fault in this statement, unless we admit 
 we are not the equal of the enemy, man for man. I hope you will 
 consider it. 
 
 To avoid misunderstanding, let me say that to attempt to fight 
 the enemy slowly back into his entrenchments at Richmond, and 
 there to capture him, is an idea I have been trying to repudiate 
 for quite a year. My judgment is so clear against it, that I would 
 scarcely allow the attempt to be made, if the General in command 
 should desire to make it. My last attempt upon Richmond was to 
 get McClellan, when he was nearer there than the enemy was, to 
 run in ahead of him. Since then I have constantly desired the 
 Army of the Potomac to make Lee's army, and not Richmond, its 
 objective point. If our army cannot fall upon the enemy and hurt 
 him where he is, it is plain to me it can gain nothing by attempt- 
 ing to follow him over a succession of intrenched lines into a 
 fortified city. 
 
 Yours truly, 
 
 A. Lincoln 
 
 PROCLAMATION FOR THANKSGIVING 
 OCTOBER 3, 1863 
 
 By the President of the United States of America. 
 
 A PROCLAMATION. 
 
 The year that is drawing toward its close, has been filled with 
 the blessings of fruitful fields and healthful skies. To these boun- 
 ties, which are so constantly enjoyed that we are prone to forget 
 the source from which they come, others have been added, which 
 are of so extraordinary a nature, that they cannot fail to penetrate 
 and soften even the heart which is habitually insensible to the 
 ever watchful providence of Almighty God. In the midst of a 
 civil war of unequaled magnitude and severity, which has some- 
 
728 ABRAHAM LINCOLN: 
 
 times seemed to foreign States to invite and provoke their aggres- 
 sion, peace has been preserved with all nations, order has been 
 maintained, the laws have been respected and obeyed, and 
 harmony has prevailed everywhere except in the theatre of military 
 conflict; while that theatre has been greatly contracted by the 
 advancing armies and navies of the Union. Needful diversions of 
 wealth and of strength from the fields of peaceful industry to the 
 national defence, have not arrested the plough, the shuttle or the 
 ship; the axe has enlarged the borders of our settlements, and 
 the mines, as well of iron and coal as of the precious metals, have 
 yielded even more abundantly than heretofore. Population has 
 steadily increased, notwithstanding the waste that has been made 
 in the camp, the siege and the battle-field; and the country, 
 rejoicing in the consciousness of augmented strength and vigor, 
 is permitted to expect continuance of years with large increase of 
 freedom. No human counsel hath devised nor hath any mortal hand 
 worked out these great things. They are the gracious gifts of the 
 Most High God, who, while dealing with us in anger for our sins, 
 hath nevertheless remembered mercy. It has seemed to me fit 
 and proper that they should be solemnly, reverently, and grate- 
 fully acknowledged as with one heart and one voice by the whole 
 American People. I do therefore invite my fellow citizens in every 
 part of the United States, and also those who are at sea and those 
 who are sojourning in foreign lands, to set apart and observe the 
 last Thursday of November next, as a day of Thanksgiving and 
 Praise to our beneficent Father who dwelleth in the Heavens. And 
 I recommend to them that while offering up the ascriptions justly 
 due to Him for such singular deliverances and blessings, they do 
 also, with humble penitence for our national perverseness and 
 disobedience, commend to His tender care all those who have 
 become widows, orphans, mourners, or sufferers in the lamentable 
 civil strife in which we are unavoidably engaged, and fervently 
 implore the interposition of the Almighty Hand to heal the wounds 
 of the nation and to restore it as soon as may be consistent with 
 the Divine purposes to the full enjoyment of peace, harmony, 
 tranquillity, and Union. 
 
 In testimony whereof, I have hereunto set my hand and 
 caused the Seal of the United States to be affixed. 
 
HIS SPEECHES AND WRITINGS 729 
 
 Done at the City of Washington, this Third day of 
 [L. S.] October, in the year of our Lord one thousand eight hun- 
 dred and sixty-three, and of the Independence of the 
 United States the Eighty-eighth. 
 
 By the President: Abraham Lincoln 
 
 William H. Seward, 
 Secretary of State. 
 
 Although Lincoln had issued an earlier "Proclama- 
 tion for Thanksgiving," July 15, 1863, designating August 
 6 as the day of observance, this is the proclamation which 
 set the precedent for our national holiday. The second 
 observance of the last Thursday in November was pro- 
 claimed by Lincoln in the proclamation dated October 
 20, 1864. In the following year, President Andrew John- 
 son, perhaps at Secretary Seward's suggestion, designated 
 the third observance of the day. Seward wrote President 
 Johnsons proclamation, and in view of the supposition of 
 Daniel Kilham Dodge in Abraham Lincoln: Master of 
 Words, that Seward had a hand in the composition of 
 Lincoln's proclamations, an interesting comparison can 
 be made between them. Most notable is the absence 
 from Seward's proclamation of the very characteristics 
 which Dodge cites as evidence of Seward's possible 
 authorship of Lincoln's proclamations. Where Lincoln's 
 proclamations (see also those of August 12, 1861, and 
 October 20, 1864) employ doubling of words and phrases 
 quite liberally, Seward's (Johnson's) proclamation em- 
 ploys it but sparsely. Other characteristics of Lincoln's 
 proclamations are likewise notably absent from Seward's 
 composition. The numerous characteristic Lincoln 
 phrases — "In the midst of a Civil War," "peace has been 
 preserved with all nations," "large increase of freedom," 
 "fit and proper," — in this proclamation of October 8, 1863, 
 as well as in the others, leave little ground for supposing 
 
730 ABRAHAM LINCOLN: 
 
 Seward's authorship when they are compared with an 
 indubitable bit of Seward's writing. 
 
 The Proclamation of November, 1865, as preserved 
 in the manuscript of the first draft, entirely in Seward's 
 handwriting, is as follows: 
 
 "By the P. of the U.S. 
 
 "A PROCLAMATION. 
 
 "Almighty God our Heavenly Father has been 
 pleased to vouchsafe to us as a people another year of 
 that national life which is an indispensable condition of 
 peace security and progress. That year has moreover 
 been crowned with many peculiar blessings. The civil 
 war that so recently closed among us has not been any- 
 where reopened. Domestic tranquility has improved, 
 sentiments of conciliation have largely prevailed, and 
 affections of loyalty and fraternity have been widely 
 revived. Our fields have yielded quite abundently jfsicj 
 and our mining industry has been richly rewarded while 
 our commerce has resumed its customary activity in 
 foreign seas. These great national blessings demand a 
 national acknowledgement. Now Therefore I Andrew 
 Johnson President of the U.S. do hereby set apart and 
 
 appoint Thursday the _ day of November next to be 
 
 observed everywhere in the several states and territories 
 of the United States by the people thereof as a day of 
 Thanksgiving and Praise [Prayer?] to Almigjhty God 
 with due remembrance that in his temple doth every 
 man speak of His Honor. I recommend also that on the 
 same solemn occasion they do humbly and devoutly im- 
 plore him to grant to our national councils and to our 
 whole people that divine wisdom which alone can lead 
 us [or?] any nation into the ways of all good. In offering 
 this national thanksgiving and supplication let us re- 
 member that we have the divine assurance that the Lord 
 remarks a Kings praise. The Lord shall give strength to 
 
HIS SPEECHES AND WRITINGS 731 
 
 his People and the Lord shall give to his People the 
 blessings of peace." 
 
 (From the original owned by The Abraham Lincoln 
 Book Shop, Chicago, by courtesy of Mr. Ralph G. 
 Newman.) 
 
 TELEGRAM TO GENERAL G. G. MEADE 
 OCTOBER 8, 1863 
 
 Washington, D. C., Oct. 8. 1863 
 Major General Meade 
 Army of Potomac 
 
 I am appealed to in behalf of August Blittersdorf , at Mitchells 
 Station, Va. to be shot to-morrow, as a deserter. I am unwilling 
 for any boy under eighteen to be shot; and his father affirms that 
 he is yet under sixteen. Please answer. His Regt. or Co. not given 
 me. 
 
 A Lincoln 
 
 LETTER TO GENERAL H. W. HALLECK 
 OCTOBER 16, 1863 
 
 Executive Mansion, 
 Washington, Oct. 16., 1863. 
 Major General Halleck 
 
 I do not believe Lee can have over sixty thousand effective 
 men. Longstreet's corps would not be sent away, to bring an equal 
 force back upon the same road; and there is no other direction for 
 
732 ABRAHAM LINCOLN: 
 
 them to have come from. Doubtless, in making the present move- 
 ment Lee gathered in all available scraps, and added them to 
 Hills & E well's corps; but that is all. And he made the movement 
 in the belief that four corps had left Gen. Meade; and Gen. 
 Meade's apparently avoiding a collision with him has con- 
 firmed him in that belief. If Gen. Meade can now attack him on 
 a field no worse than equal for us, and will do so with all the skill 
 and courage, which he, his officers and men possess, the honor will 
 be his if he succeeds, and the blame may be mine if he fails. 
 
 Yours truly, 
 
 A. Lincoln 
 
 LETTER TO J. H. HACKETT 
 NOVEMBER 2, 1863 
 
 (Private.) 
 
 Executive Mansion, 
 Washington, November 2, 1863. 
 James H. Hackett. 
 My dear Sir: 
 
 Yours of October 22 is received, as also was in due course 
 that of October 3. I look forward with pleasure to the fulfilment 
 of the promise made in the former. 
 
 Give yourself no uneasiness on the subject mentioned in that 
 of the 22d. 
 
 My note to you I certainly did not expect to see in print; 
 yet I have not been much shocked by the newspaper comments 
 upon it. Those comments constitute a fair specimen of what has 
 occurred to me through life. I have endured a great deal of ridicule 
 without much malice; and have received a great deal of kindness, 
 not quite free from ridicule. I am used to it. 
 
 Yours truly, 
 
 A. Lincoln. 
 
HIS SPEECHES AND WRITINGS 733 
 
 LETTER TO E. M. STANTON, SECRETARY OF WAR 
 NOVEMBER 11, 1863 
 
 Executive Mansion, 
 Washington, Nov. 11, 1863. 
 Hon. Secretary of War. 
 My dear Sir: 
 
 I personally wish Jacob R. Freese, of New-Jersey, to be 
 appointed a Colonel for a colored regiment — and this regardless 
 of whether he can tell the exact shade of Julius Caesars hair. 
 
 Yours truly 
 
 A. Lincoln 
 
 Freese was a former resident of Illinois of whom 
 Lincoln later wrote, "I have enjoyed much of his friend- 
 ship" but whose attachment for Lincoln was something 
 less than constant. (For details see Carl Sandburg, Abra- 
 ham Lincoln: The War Years, Vol. Ill, p. 452.) Lincoln's 
 relationship with Secretary Stanton, as suggested by this 
 as well as other notes of similar humor, seems to have 
 been far more informal, if not more agreeable, than that 
 enjoyed by other members of the Cabinet. 
 
734 ABRAHAM LINCOLN: 
 
 ADDRESS DELIVERED AT THE DEDICATION 
 OF THE CEMETERY AT GETTYSBURG 
 NOVEMBER 19, 1863 
 
 Four score and seven years ago our fathers brought forth on 
 this continent, a new nation, conceived in Liberty, and dedicated 
 to the proposition that all men are created equal. 
 
 Now we are engaged in a great civil war, testing whether 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 can not dedicate — we can not con- 
 secrate — we can not 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 remaining before us — that from these honored dead we 
 take increased 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 government of 
 the people, by the people, for the people, shall not perish from 
 the earth. 
 
 Abraham Lincoln. 
 
 November 19, 1863. 
 
 The text is that of the final manuscript, known as 
 'the Bliss copy," which Lincoln prepared for Colonel 
 
HIS SPEECHES AND WRITINGS 735 
 
 Alexander Bliss, for publication as a lithograph facsimile 
 in Autographed Leaves of Our Country's Authors (1864). 
 In all, there are five extant manuscripts of this address. 
 Two of them have the honor of being considered the 
 "original" draft, authorities being divided as to which of 
 the two was penned first. For purposes of comparison, 
 both of these are given below. W. E. Barton in Lincoln at 
 Gettysburg holds the twenty-nine line manuscript (the 
 first of the two printed below) to have been the "original" 
 and the thirty-three line manuscript (the second printed 
 below) to have been the second draft. Dr. Louis A. War- 
 ren in Lincoln Lore, No. 182, holds the opposite opinion. 
 Except for the corrections, there are only minor dif- 
 ferences between the two, and it seems likely that one 
 was copied from the other. Assuming this, however, one 
 becomes involved in difficulties as to which was copied. 
 In either case, Lincoln was apparently dissatisfied enough 
 to consider further changes, and the changes seem to 
 the editor not to present conclusive evidence of priority of 
 composition. Other evidence presented by Barton seems 
 to make probable the order in which they are here 
 given. Reproduced with Lincoln s emendations, they are 
 as follows: 
 
 FIRST (?) DRAFT 
 
 Executive Mansion, 
 Washington, , 186 
 
 "Four score and seven years ago our fathers brought 
 forth, upon this continent, a new nation, conceived 
 in liberty, and dedicated to the proposition that 'all men 
 are created equal 
 
 "Now we are engaged in a great civil war, testing 
 whether 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 
 it, as a final resting place for those who died here, that 
 
736 ABRAHAM LINCOLN: 
 
 the nation might live. This we may, in all propriety do. 
 But, in a larger sense, we can not dedicate — we can not 
 consecrate — we can not hallow, this ground — The brave 
 men, living and dead, who struggled here, have hallowed 
 it, jar above our poor power to add or detract. The world 
 will little note, nor long remember what we say here; 
 while it can never forget what they did here. 
 
 we here be dedicated 
 "It is rather for us, the living, to stand here , to the 
 great task remaining before us — that, from these honored 
 dead we take increased devotion to that cause for 
 which they here, gave the last full measure of devotion 
 — that we here highly resolve these dead shall not have 
 died in vain; that the nation, shall have a new birth of 
 freedom, and that government of the people by the 
 people for the people, shall not perish from the earth!' 
 
 SECOND (?) DRAFT 
 
 "Four score and seven years ago our fathers brought 
 forth, upon this continent, a new nation, conceived in 
 Liberty, and dedicated to the proposition that all men 
 are created equal. 
 
 "Now we are engaged in a great civil war, testing 
 whether that nation, or any nation, so conceived, and so 
 dedicated, can long endure. We are met here on a great 
 
 have come 
 battle-field of that war. We are met to dedicate a portion 
 
 a for 
 
 of it as 4h& final resting place *ef 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 can not dedicate— we can 
 not consecrate — we can not hallow this ground. The 
 brave men, living and dead, who struggled here, have 
 
 poor 
 consecrated it far above our power to add or detract. 
 The world will little note, nor long remember, what we 
 
HIS SPEECHES AND WRITINGS 737 
 
 say here, but can never forget what they did here. It 
 is for us, the living, rather to be dedicated here to 
 
 work 
 the unfinished y^which they have, thus far, so nobly 
 carried on. It is rather for us to be here dedicated to the 
 
 us 
 great task remaining before;-— that from these honored 
 dead we take increased devotion to that cause for which 
 they here gave gave the last full measure of devotion — 
 that we here highly resolve that these dead shall not 
 have died in vain; that this nation shall have a new birth 
 of freedom; and that this government of the people, by 
 the people, for the people, shall not perish from the 
 earth." 
 
 LETTER TO EDWARD EVERETT 
 NOVEMBER 20, 1863 
 
 Executive Mansion, 
 Washington, Nov. 20, 1863. 
 Hon. Edward Everett. 
 My dear Sir: 
 
 Your kind note of to-day is received. 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 entirely a failure. Of course 
 I knew Mr. Everett would not fail; and yet, while the whole 
 discourse was eminently satisfactory, and will be of great value, 
 there were passages in it which trancended [sic] my expectation. 
 The point made against the theory of the general government 
 being only an agency, whose principals are the States, was new 
 to me, and, as I think, is one of the best arguments for the national 
 supremacy. The tribute to our noble women for their angel- 
 ministering to the suffering soldiers, surpasses, in its way, as do the 
 subjects of it, whatever has gone before. 
 
738 ABRAHAM LINCOLN: 
 
 Our sick boy, for whom you kindly enquire, we hope is past 
 the worst. 
 
 Your Obt. Servt. 
 
 A. Lincoln 
 
 In the letter to which Lincoln was replying, Everett 
 had written, "I should be glad if I could flatter myself 
 that I came as near the central idea of the occasion in 
 two hours as you did in two minutes." The central 
 theme of Everett's address is, in fact, almost identical 
 with Lincoln's theme, and the parallel may in part have 
 been the result of the fact that Everett had sent Lincoln 
 a copy of his address printed in advance of the occa- 
 sion. But, as has been pointed out in the note on the 
 "Response to a Serenade," July 7, 1863, Lincoln had 
 anticipated the theme at the very time of the victory at 
 Gettysburg. 
 
 PROCLAMATION OF AMNESTY 
 
 AND RECONSTRUCTION. DECEMBER 8, 1863 
 
 By The President of the United States of America: 
 A PROCLAMATION. 
 
 Whereas, in and by the Constitution of the United States, it is 
 provided that the President "shall have power to grant reprieves 
 and pardons for offences against the United States, except in cases 
 of impeachment;" and 
 
 Whereas a rebellion now exists whereby the loyal State gov- 
 ernments of several States have for a long time been subverted, 
 and many persons have committed and are now guilty of treason 
 against the United States; and 
 
HIS SPEECHES AND WRITINGS 739 
 
 Whereas, with reference to said rebellion and treason, laws 
 have been enacted by Congress, declaring forfeitures and con- 
 fiscation of property and liberation of slaves, all upon terms and 
 conditions therein stated, and also declaring that the President 
 was thereby authorized at any time thereafter, by proclamation, 
 to extend to persons who may have participated in the existing 
 rebellion, in any State or part thereof, pardon and amnesty, with 
 such exceptions and at such times and on such conditions as he 
 may deem expedient for the public welfare; and 
 
 Whereas the congressional declaration for limited and condi- 
 tional pardon accords with well-established judicial exposition of 
 the pardoning power; and 
 
 Whereas, with reference to said rebellion, the President of the 
 United States has issued several proclamations, with provisions 
 in regard to the liberation of slaves; and 
 
 Whereas it is now desired by some persons heretofore en- 
 gaged in said rebellion to resume their allegiance to the United 
 States, and to reinaugurate loyal State governments within and 
 for their respective States; therefore, 
 
 I, Abraham Lincoln, President of the United States, do pro- 
 claim, declare, and make known to all persons who have, directly 
 or by implication, participated in the existing rebellion, except as 
 hereinafter excepted, that a full pardon is hereby granted to them 
 and each of them, with restoration of all rights of property, except 
 as to slaves, and in property cases where rights of third parties 
 shall have intervened, and upon the condition that every such per- 
 son shall take and subscribe an oath, and thenceforward keep 
 and maintain said oath inviolate; and which oath shall be regis- 
 tered for permanent preservation, and shall be of the tenor and 
 effect following, to wit: 
 
 "I, _, do solemnly swear, in presence of Almighty 
 
 God, that I will henceforth faithfully support, protect and defend 
 the Constitution of the United States, and the union of the States 
 thereunder; and that I will, in like manner, abide by and faith- 
 fully support all acts of Congress passed during the existing rebel- 
 lion with reference to slaves, so long and so far as not repealed, 
 modified or held void by Congress, or by decision of the Supreme 
 Court; and that I will, in like manner, abide by and faithfully 
 
740 ABRAHAM LINCOLN: 
 
 support all proclamations of the President made during the ex- 
 isting rebellion having reference to slaves, so long and so far as 
 not modified or declared void by decision of the Supreme Court. 
 So help me God." 
 
 The persons excepted from the benefits of the foregoing pro- 
 visions are all who are, or shall have been, civil or diplomatic 
 officers or agents of the so-called confederate government; all who 
 have left judicial stations under the United States to aid the re- 
 bellion; all who are, or shall have been, military or naval officers 
 of said so-called confederate government above the rank of 
 colonel in the army, or of lieutenant in the navy; all who left seats 
 in the United States Congress to aid the rebellion; all who re- 
 signed commissions in the army or navy of the United States, and 
 afterwards aided the rebellion; and all who have engaged in any 
 way in treating colored persons or white persons, in charge of 
 such, otherwise than lawfully as prisoners of war, and which per- 
 sons may have been found in the United States service, as soldiers, 
 seamen, or in any other capacity. 
 
 And I do further proclaim, declare, and make known that 
 whenever, in any of the States of Arkansas, Texas, Louisiana, 
 Mississippi, Tennessee, Alabama, Georgia, Florida, South Caro- 
 lina, and North Carolina, a number of persons, not less than one- 
 tenth in number of the votes cast in such State at the Presidential 
 election of the year of our Lord one thousand eight hundred and 
 sixty, each having taken the oath aforesaid and not having since 
 violated it, and being a qualified voter by the election law of the 
 State existing immediately before the so-called act of secession, 
 and excluding all others, shall re-establish a State government 
 which shall be republican, and in no wise contravening said oath, 
 such shall be recognized as the true government of the State, and 
 the State shall receive thereunder the benefits of the constitutional 
 provision which declares that "The United States shall guaranty 
 to every State in this union a republican form of government, and 
 shall protect each of them against invasion; and, on application 
 of the legislature, or the executive, (when the legislature cannot 
 be convened,) against domestic violence/' 
 
 And I do further proclaim, declare, and make known that any 
 provision which may be adopted by such State government in 
 
HIS SPEECHES AND WRITINGS 741 
 
 relation to the freed people of such State, which shall recognize 
 and declare their permanent freedom, provide for their educa- 
 tion, and which may yet be consistent, as a temporary arrangement, 
 with their present condition as a laboring, landless, and home- 
 less class, will not be objected to by the national Executive. And 
 it is suggested as not improper, that, in constructing a loyal 
 State government in any State, the name of the State, the bound- 
 ary, the subdivisions, the constitution, and the general code of 
 laws, as before the rebellion, be maintained, subject only to the 
 modifications made necessary by the conditions hereinbefore 
 stated, and such others, if any, not contravening said conditions, 
 and which may be deemed expedient by those framing the new 
 State government. 
 
 To avoid misunderstanding, it may be proper to say that this 
 proclamation, so far as it relates to State governments, has no 
 reference to States wherein loyal State governments have all the 
 while been maintained. And for the same reason, it may be 
 proper to further say that whether members sent to Congress 
 from any State shall be admitted to seats, constitutionally rests 
 exclusively with the respective Houses, and not to any extent 
 with the Executive. And still further, that this proclamation is 
 intended to present the people of the States wherein the national 
 authority has been suspended, and loyal State governments have 
 been subverted, a mode in and by which the national authority 
 and loyal State governments may be re-established within said 
 States, or in any of them; and, while the mode presented is the 
 best the Executive can suggest, with his present impressions, it 
 must not be understood that no other possible mode would be 
 acceptable. 
 
 Given under my hand at the city of Washington, the 
 8th day of December, A. D. one thousand eight hun- 
 [L. S.] dred and sixty-three, and of the independence of the 
 United States of America the eighty-eighth. 
 
 By the President: Abraham Lincoln. 
 
 William H. Seward, 
 Secretary of State. 
 
742 ABRAHAM LINCOLN: 
 
 LETTER TO CRAFTS J. WRIGHT AND C. K. HAWKES 
 JANUARY 7, 1864 
 
 Executive Mansion, 
 Washington, Jany. 7, 1864. 
 Gentlemen: 
 
 You have presented me a plan for getting cotton and other 
 products, from within the rebel lines, from which you think the 
 United States will derive some advantage. Please carefully and 
 considerately, answer me the following questions. 
 
 1. If now, without any new order or rule, a rebel should come 
 into our lines with cotton, and offer to take the oath of Dec. 8th. 
 what do you understand would be done with him and his cotton? 
 
 2. How will the physical difficulty, and danger, of getting cot- 
 ton from within the rebel lines be lessened by your plan? or 
 how will the owners motive to surmount that difficulty and danger, 
 be heightened by it? 
 
 3. If your plan be adopted, where do you propose putting the 
 cotton &c. into market? how assure the government of your good 
 faith in the business? and how be compensated for your services? 
 
 Very Respectfully 
 
 A. Lincoln 
 Messrs. Crafts J. Wright & 
 C. K. Hawkes. 
 
 The editor has been unable to identify the indi- 
 viduals, or possibly the firm, to whom Lincoln wrote this 
 letter. Lincoln's interest in getting cotton, which was 
 badly needed by the North, was tempered by his suspi- 
 cion of the proposed plan. 
 
HIS SPEECHES AND WRITINGS 743 
 
 LETTER TO GENERAL N. P. BANKS 
 JANUARY 31, 1864 
 
 Executive Mansion, 
 Washington, January 31, 1864. 
 Major General Banks 
 
 Yours of the 22nd. Inst, is just received. In the proclamation 
 of Dec. 8, and which contains the oath that you say some loyal 
 people wish to avoid taking, I said: 
 
 "And still further, that this proclamation is intended to present 
 the people of the States wherein the national authority has been 
 suspended, and loyal State governments have been subverted, a 
 mode in and by which the national authority and loyal State gov- 
 ernments may be re-established within said States, or in any of 
 them; and, while the mode presented is the best the Executive 
 can suggest, with his present impressions, it must not be under- 
 stood that no other possible mode would be acceptable." 
 
 And Speaking of this in the message, I said: 
 
 "Saying that reconstruction will be accepted if presented in a 
 specified way, it is not said it will never be accepted in any other 
 way." 
 
 These things were put into these documents on purpose that 
 some conformity to circumstances should be admissable [sic]; and 
 when I have, more than once, said to you in my letters that avail- 
 able labor already done should not be thrown away, I had in mind 
 the very class of cases you now mention. So you see it is not even 
 a modification of anything I have heretofore said when I tell you 
 that you are at liberty to adopt any rule which shall admit to vote 
 any unquestionably loyal free-state men and none others. And yet 
 I do wish they would all take the oath 
 
 Yours truly, 
 
 A Lincoln 
 
744 ABRAHAM LINCOLN: 
 
 This letter is one of several ivritten to General Banks 
 during December, 1863, and January, 1864, conveying 
 advice and instructions for setting up the new govern- 
 ment in Louisiana. It illustrates perfectly Lincoln's atti- 
 tude toward the problem — giving Banks absolute free- 
 dom of action to effect the establishment of a government 
 of loyal Union men. The election which ensued on Febru- 
 ary 22 resulted in the election of Michael Hahn as 
 Governor, and the first step in restoring a key state to 
 the Union was achieved. 
 
 LETTER TO E. M. STANTON, SECRETARY OF WAR 
 MARCH 1, 1864 
 
 Executive Mansion, 
 Washington, March 1, 1864. 
 Hon. Sec. of War — 
 My dear Sir: 
 
 A poor widow, by the name of Baird, has a son in the Army, 
 that for some offence has been sentenced to serve a long time 
 without pay, or at most, with very little pay. I do not like this 
 punishment of withholding pay — it falls so very hard upon poor 
 families. After he has been serving in this way for several months, 
 at the tearful appeal of the poor mother, I made a direction that 
 he be allowed to enlist for a new term, on the same conditions as 
 others. She now comes, and says she can not get it acted upon. 
 Please do it. 
 
 Yours truly 
 
 A Lincoln 
 
HIS SPEECHES AND WRITINGS 745 
 
 LETTER TO GOVERNOR MICHAEL HAHN 
 MARCH 13, 1864 
 
 Private 
 
 Executive Mansion, 
 Washington, March 13., 1864. 
 Hon. Michael Hahn 
 My dear Sir: 
 
 I congratulate you on having fixed your name in history as the 
 first-free-state Governor of Louisiana Now you are about to have 
 a Convention which, among other things, will probably define the 
 elective franchise. I barely suggest for your private consideration, 
 whether some of the colored people may not be let in — as, for 
 instance, the very intelligent, and especially those who have fought 
 gallantly in our ranks They would probably help, in some trying 
 time to come, to keep the jewel of liberty within the family of 
 freedom. But this is only a suggestion, not to the public, but to 
 you alone 
 
 Yours truly 
 
 A. Lincoln 
 
 LETTER TO E. M. STANTON, SECRETARY OF WAR 
 MARCH 15, 1864 
 
 Executive Mansion, 
 Washington, March 15, 1864. 
 
 Hon. Sec. of War 
 
 My dear Sir 
 
 Please see the gallant Drummer-boy, Robert H. Hendershot, 
 
 whose history is briefly written on the fine drum presented him 
 
746 ABRAHAM LINCOLN: 
 
 which he now carries. He must have a chance, and if you can find 
 any situation suitable to him, I shall be obliged. 
 
 Yours truly 
 
 A. Lincoln 
 
 Robert Henry Hendershot, horn in Cambridge, 
 Michigan, December 11, 1850, was barely twelve years 
 old when he gained fame for his daring at the battle of 
 Fredericksburg on December 12, 1862. "When he (the 
 boy) found that the Captain would not permit him to 
 remain in the boat, he begged the privilege of pushing 
 the boat off, and the request was granted. Whereupon, 
 instead of remaining on shore, he clung to the stern of 
 the boat, and, submerged to the waist in water, he 
 crossed the Rappahannock. Soon as he landed, a frag- 
 ment of a shell struck his old drum and knocked it to 
 pieces. Picking up a musket, he went in search of rebel 
 relics, and obtained a secesh flag, a clock, a knife, and a 
 bone ring. On opening a back door in one of the rebel 
 houses, he found a rebel wounded in the hand, and 
 ordered him to surrender. He did so and was taken by 
 the boy soldier to the Seventh Michigan . . ." For a full 
 account of Hendershot 9 s action at Fredericksburg and 
 later at the battle of Murfreesboro, see Frank Moore, 
 The Civil War in Song and Story 1860-1865, pp. 245-6. 
 
HIS SPEECHES AND WRITINGS 747 
 
 MEMORANDUM FOR MRS. S. W. HUNT 
 APRIL 11, 1864 
 
 Executive Mansion, 
 Washington, April 11, 1864. 
 Whom it may concern 
 
 I know nothing on the subject of the attached letter, except as 
 therein stated. Neither do I personally know Mrs. Hunt. She has, 
 however, from the beginning of the war, been constantly repre- 
 sented to me as an open, and somewhat influential friend of the 
 Union. It has been said to me, ( I know not whether truly ) that 
 her husband is in the rebel army, that she avows her purpose to not 
 live with him again, and that she refused to see him when she 
 had an opportunity during one of John Morgan's raids into Ken- 
 tucky. I would not offer her, or any wife, a temptation to a per- 
 manent separation from her husband; but if she shall avow that her 
 mind is already, independently and fully made up to such separa- 
 tion, I shall be glad for the property sought by her letter, to be 
 delivered to her, upon her taking the oath of December 8, 1863 
 
 A. Lincoln 
 
 Mrs. Sallie Ward Hunt, an acquaintance of Mrs. 
 Lincoln's in Kentucky, who was separated from her hus- 
 band Daniel Hunt not merely by conditions of war but 
 by choice, had written to Mrs. Lincoln hoping through 
 her influence to get "valuable personal effects" being 
 held by Federal authorities in New Orleans. Lincoln sent 
 her letter together with this note to one of his "confiden- 
 tial advisers in Kentucky." (William H. Townsend, 
 Lincoln and His Wife's Home Town, p. 349.) 
 
748 ABRAHAM LINCOLN: 
 
 ADDRESS AT A SANITARY FAIR IN BALTIMORE 
 APRIL 18, 1864 
 
 Ladies and Gentlemen — 
 
 Calling to mind that we are in Baltimore, we can not fail 
 to note that the world moves. Looking upon these many people, 
 assembled here, to serve, as they best may, the soldiers of the 
 Union, it occurs at once that three years ago the same soldiers 
 could not so much as pass through Baltimore. The change from 
 then till now, is both great, and gratifying. Blessings on the brave 
 men who have wrought the change, and the fair women who 
 strive to reward them for it. 
 
 But Baltimore suggests more than could happen within Balti- 
 more. The change within Baltimore is part only of a far wider 
 change. When the war began, three years ago, neither party, nor 
 any man, expected it would last till now. Each looked for the 
 end, in some way, long ere to-day. Neither did any anticipate that 
 domestic slavery would be much affected by the war. But here 
 we are; the war has not ended, and slavery has been much affected 
 — how much needs not now to be recounted. So true is it that man 
 proposes, and God disposes. 
 
 But we can see the past, though we may not claim to have 
 directed it; and seeing it, in this case, we feel more hopeful and 
 confident for the future. 
 
 The world has never had a good definition of the word 
 liberty, and the American people, just now, are much in want of 
 one. We all declare for liberty; but in using the same word we do 
 not all mean the same thing. With some the word liberty may 
 mean for each man to do as he pleases with himself, and the prod- 
 uct of his labor; while with others the same word may mean for 
 some men to do as they please with other men, and the product 
 of other men's labor. Here are two, not only different, but in- 
 compatable [sic] things, called by the same name — liberty. And 
 it follows that each of the things is, by the respective parties, 
 
HIS SPEECHES AND WRITINGS 749 
 
 called by two different and incompatable [sic] names — liberty and 
 tyranny. 
 
 The shepherd drives the wolf from the sheep's throat, for 
 which the sheep thanks the shepherd as a liberator, while the wolf 
 denounces him for the same act as the destroyer of liberty, espe- 
 cially as the sheep was a black one. Plainly the sheep and the 
 wolf are not agreed upon a definition of the word liberty; and 
 precisely the same difference prevails to-day among us human 
 creatures, even in the North, and all professing to love liberty. 
 Hence we behold the processes by which thousands are daily 
 passing from under the yoke of bondage, hailed by some as the 
 advance of liberty, and bewailed by others as the destruction 
 of all liberty. Recently, as it seems, the people of Maryland have 
 been doing something to define liberty; and thanks to them that, 
 in what they have done, the wolf's dictionary, has been repudiated. 
 
 It is not very becoming for one in my position to make 
 speeches at great length; but there is another subject upon which 
 I feel that I ought to say a word. A painful rumor, true I fear, 
 has reached us of the massacre, by the rebel forces, at Fort 
 Pillow, in the West end of Tennessee, on the Mississippi river, of 
 some three hundred colored soldiers and white officers, who had 
 just been overpowered by their assailants. There seems to be some 
 anxiety in the public mind whether the government is doing it's 
 duty to the colored soldier, and to the service, at this point. At 
 the beginning of the war, and for some time, the use of colored 
 troops was not contemplated; and how the change of purpose 
 was wrought, I will not now take time to explain. Upon a clear 
 conviction of duty I resolved to turn that element of strength to 
 account; and I am responsible for it to the American people, 
 to the Christian world, to history, and on my final account, to 
 God. Having determined to use the negro as a soldier, there is no 
 way but to give him all the protection given to any other soldier. 
 The difficulty is not in stating the principle, but in practically 
 applying it. It is a mistake to suppose the government is indiffent 
 [sic] to this matter, or is not doing the best it can in regard to it. 
 We do not to-day know that a colored soldier, or white officer 
 commanding colored soldiers, has been massacred by the rebels 
 
750 ABRAHAM LINCOLN: 
 
 when made a prisoner. We fear it, believe it, I may say, but we do 
 not know it. To take the life of one of their prisoners, on the 
 assumption that they murder ours, when it is short of certainty 
 that they do murder ours, might be too serious, too cruel a mistake. 
 We are having the Fort-Pillow affair thoroughly investigated; and 
 such investigation will probably show conclusively how the truth 
 is. If, after all that has been said, it shall turn out that there has 
 been no massacre at Fort-Pillow, it will be almost safe to say 
 there has been none, and will be none elsewhere. If there has been 
 the massacre of three hundred there, or even the tenth part of 
 three hundred, it will be conclusively proved; and being so 
 proved, the retribution shall as surely come. It will be matter of 
 grave consideration in what exact course to apply the retribution; 
 but in the supposed case, it must come. 
 
 The Women s Central Association of Relief, a fore- 
 runner of our modern Red Cross organization, conducted 
 fairs to raise money for medical supplies and services to 
 the wounded and sick soldiers. Lincoln s address on this 
 occasion and later at Philadelphia was scheduled to pro- 
 mote attendance. Crowds were large, and much mer- 
 chandise donated by those who could not make a cash 
 contribution was sold. 
 
 LETTER TO GENERAL U. S. GRANT 
 APRIL 30, 1864 
 
 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 
 
HIS SPEECHES AND WRITINGS 751 
 
 what you have done up to this time, so far as I understand it. The 
 particulars of your plans I neither know or 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 any- 
 thing 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 AT A SANITARY FAIR IN PHILADELPHIA 
 JUNE 16, 1864 
 
 I suppose that this toast was intended to open the way for me 
 to say something. 
 
 War, at the best, is terrible, and this war of ours, in its magni- 
 tude and in its duration, is one of the most terrible. It has de- 
 ranged business, totally in many localities, and partially in all 
 localities. It has destroyed property and ruined homes; it has 
 produced a national debt and taxation unprecedented, at least in 
 this country; it has carried mourning to almost every home, until 
 it can almost be said that the "heavens are hung in black/' 
 
 Yet the war continues, and several relieving coincidents have 
 accompanied it from the very beginning which have not been 
 known, as I understand, or have any knowledge of, in any former 
 wars in the history of the world. The Sanitary Commission, with 
 all its benevolent labors; the Christian Commission, with all its 
 Christian and benevolent labors; and the various places, arrange- 
 ments, so to speak, and institutions, have contributed to the com- 
 
752 ABRAHAM LINCOLN: 
 
 fort and relief of the soldiers. You have two of these places in this 
 city — the Cooper Shop and Union Volunteer Refreshment Saloons. 
 And lastly, these fairs, which, I believe, began only last August, 
 if I mistake not, in Chicago, then at Boston, at Cincinnati, Brook- 
 lyn, New York, and Baltimore, and those at present held at St. 
 Louis, Pittsburgh, and Philadelphia. The motive and object that lie 
 at the bottom of all these are most worthy; for, say what you will, 
 after all, the most is due to the soldier who takes his life in his 
 hands and goes to fight the battles of his country. In what is con- 
 tributed to his comfort when he passes to and fro, and in what is 
 contributed to him when he is sick and wounded, in whatever 
 shape it comes, whether from the fair and tender hand of woman, 
 or from any other source, it is much, very much. But I think that 
 there is still that which is of as much value to him in the con- 
 tinual reminders he sees in the newspapers that while he is 
 absent he is yet remembered by the loved ones at home. Another 
 view of these various institutions, if I may so call them, is worthy 
 of consideration, I think. They are voluntary contributions, given 
 zealously and earnestly, on top of all the disturbances of business, 
 of all the disorders, of all the taxation, and of all the burdens that 
 the war has imposed upon us, giving proof that the national 
 resources are not at all exhausted, and that the national spirit of 
 patriotism is even firmer and stronger than at the commencement 
 of the w T ar. 
 
 It is a pertinent question, often asked in the mind privately, 
 and from one to the other, when is the war to end. Surely I feel 
 as deep an interest in this question as any other can; but I do not 
 wish to name a day, a month, or a year, when it is to end. I do not 
 wish to run any risk of seeing the time come without our being 
 ready for the end, for fear of disappointment because the time 
 had come and not the end. We accepted this war for an object, 
 a worthy object, and the war will end when that object is attained. 
 Under God, I hope it never will end until that time. Speaking of 
 the present campaign, General Grant is reported to have said, "I 
 am going through on this line if it takes all summer." This war has 
 taken three years; it was begun or accepted upon the line of restor- 
 ing the national authority over the whole national domain, and 
 for the American people, as far as my knowledge enables me to 
 
HIS SPEECHES AND WRITINGS 753 
 
 speak, I say we are going through on this line if it takes three 
 years more. 
 
 My friends, I did not know but that I might be called upon to 
 say a few words before I got away from here, but I did not know 
 it was coming just here. I have never been in the habit of making 
 predictions in regard to the war, but I am almost tempted to 
 make one. If I were to hazard it, it is this: That Grant is this 
 evening, with General Meade and General Hancock, and the 
 brave officers and soldiers with him, in a position from whence he 
 will never be dislodged until Richmond is taken; and I have but 
 one single proposition to put now, and perhaps I can best put it 
 in the form of an interrogative. If I shall discover that General 
 Grant and the noble officers and men under him can be greatly 
 facilitated in their work by a sudden pouring forward of men 
 and assistance, will you give them to me? Are you ready to march? 
 [Cries of "Yes".] Then I say, Stand ready, for I am watching for 
 the chance. I thank you, gentlemen. 
 
 LETTER TO WILLIAM DENNISON & OTHERS, 
 A COMMITTEE OF THE NATIONAL UNION 
 CONVENTION. JUNE 27, 1864 
 
 Executive Mansion, 
 Washington, June 27, 1864. 
 
 Hon. William Dennison & others, a 
 Committee of the National Union Convention. 
 Gentlemen: 
 
 Your letter of the 14th. Inst, formally notifying me that I have 
 been nominated by the convention you represent for the Presi- 
 dency of the United States for four years from the fourth of 
 March next has been received. The nomination is gratefully ac- 
 cepted, as the resolutions of the convention, called the platform, 
 are heartily approved. While the resolution in regard to the sup- 
 
754 ABRAHAM LINCOLN: 
 
 planting of republican government upon the Western continent 
 is fully concurred in, there might be misunderstanding were I 
 not to say that the position of the government, in relation to the 
 action of France in Mexico, as assumed through the State De- 
 partment, and approved and indorsed by the convention, among 
 the measures and acts of the Executive, will be faithfully main- 
 tained, so long as the state of facts shall leave that position 
 pertinent and applicable. I am especially gratified that the 
 soldier and the seaman were not forgotten by the convention, as 
 they forever must and will be remembered by the grateful country 
 for whose salvation they devote their lives. 
 
 Thanking you for the kind and complimentary terms in which 
 you have communicated the nomination and the proceedings of 
 the convention, I subscribe myself 
 
 Your Obt. Servt 
 Abraham Lincoln. 
 
 LETTER TO HORACE GREELEY 
 JULY 15, 1864 
 
 Executive Mansion, 
 Washington, July 15, 1864. 
 Hon. Horace Greeley 
 My dear Sir 
 
 Yours of the 13th is just received; and I am disappointed that 
 you have not already reached here with those Commissioners, if 
 they would consent to come, on being shown my letter to you 
 of the 9th Inst. Show that and this to them; and if they will 
 come on the terms stated in the former, bring them. I not only 
 intend a sincere effort for peace, but I intend that you shall be 
 a personal witness that it is made. 
 
 Yours truly 
 
 A. Lincoln 
 
HIS SPEECHES AND WRITINGS 755 
 
 The fiasco of Greeley's "peace mission" occupies a 
 full chapter in Nicolay and Hay, Abraham Lincoln: A 
 History. This letter was carried to Greeley by John Hay, 
 who acted as Lincoln's personal emissary, accompanying 
 Greeley to Niagara where Greeley had reported two 
 Confederate Commissioners to be waiting to negotiate 
 peace terms. Greeley had made much ado about the 
 administration's indifference to Confederate overtures 
 for peace, and Lincoln's action forced him to produce the 
 facts. Apparently suspicious that he had overstepped 
 his facts in insisting that the Confederacy was trying 
 to make peace, Greeley went with Hay reluctantly. The 
 "Confederate Commissioners" were found to be without 
 authority to negotiate, and the affair ended, as Lincoln 
 feared it would, in no achievement whatsoever. 
 
 ADDRESS TO THE 164th OHIO REGIMENT 
 AUGUST 18, 1864 
 
 Soldiers: 
 
 You are about to return to your homes and your friends, after 
 having, as I learn, performed in camp a comparatively short term 
 of duty in this great contest. I am greatly obliged to you, and to 
 all who have come forward at the call of their country. I wish it 
 might be more generally and universally understood what the 
 country is now engaged in. We have, as all will agree, a free Gov- 
 ernment, where every man has a right to be equal with every 
 other man. In this great struggle, this form of Government and 
 every form of human right is endangered if our enemies succeed. 
 There is more involved in this contest than is realized by every 
 one. There is involved in this struggle the question whether your 
 children and my children shall enjoy the privileges we have 
 
756 ABRAHAM LINCOLN: 
 
 enjoyed. I say this in order to impress upon you, if you are not 
 already so impressed, that no small matter should divert us from 
 our great purpose. There may be some inequalities in the practical 
 application of our system. It is fair that each man shall pay taxes 
 in exact proportion to the value of his property; but if we should 
 wait before collecting a tax to adjust the taxes upon each man in 
 exact proportion with every other man, we should never collect 
 any tax at all. There may be mistakes made sometimes; things 
 may be done wrong while the officers of the Government do all 
 they can to prevent mistakes. But I beg of you, as citizens of 
 this great Republic, not to let your minds be carried off from 
 the great work we have before us. This struggle is too large 
 for you to be diverted from it by any small matter. When you 
 return to your homes rise up to the height of a generation of 
 men worthy of a free Government, and we will carry out the 
 great work we have commenced. I return to you my sincere 
 thanks, soldiers, for the honor you have done me this afternoon. 
 
 ADDRESS TO THE 166th OHIO REGIMENT 
 AUGUST 22, 1864 
 
 I suppose you are going home to see your families and friends. 
 For the service you have done in this great struggle in which we 
 are engaged I present you sincere thanks for myself and the coun- 
 try. I almost always feel inclined, when I happen to say any- 
 thing 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 chil- 
 dren's children this 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 
 big White House. I am a living witness that any one of your chil- 
 dren may look to come here as my father's child has. It is in 
 
HIS SPEECHES AND WRITINGS 757 
 
 order that each one of you may have through this free govern- 
 ment 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 life, with all its desirable 
 human aspirations. It is for this the struggle should be main- 
 tained, 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. 
 
 LETTER TO MRS. ELIZA P. GURNEY 
 SEPTEMBER 4, 1864 
 
 Executive Mansion, 
 Washington, September 4., 1864. 
 Eliza P. Gurney. 
 My esteemed friend. 
 
 I have not forgotten — probably never shall forget — the very 
 impressive occasion when yourself and friends visited me on a 
 Sabbath forenoon two years ago. Nor has your kind letter, writ- 
 ten nearly a year later, ever been forgotten. In all, it has been 
 your purpose to strengthen my reliance on God. I am much in- 
 debted to the good Christian people of the country for their 
 constant prayers and consolations; and to no one of them, more 
 than to yourself. The purposes of the Almighty are perfect, and 
 must prevail, though we erring mortals may fail to accurately per- 
 ceive them in advance. We hoped for a happy termination of this 
 terrible war long before this; but God knows best, and has ruled 
 otherwise. We shall yet acknowledge His wisdom and our own 
 error therein. Meanwhile we must work earnestly in the best light 
 He gives us, trusting that so working still conduces to the great 
 ends He ordains. Surely He intends some great good to follow this 
 mighty convulsion, which no mortal could make, and no mortal 
 could stay. 
 
758 ABRAHAM LINCOLN: 
 
 Your people — the Friends — have had, and are having, a very 
 great trial. On principle, and faith, opposed to both war and 
 oppression, they can only practically oppose oppression by war. 
 In this hard dilemma, some have chosen one horn, and some the 
 other. For those appealing to me on conscientious grounds, I have 
 done, and shall do, the best I could and can, in my own conscience, 
 under my oath to the law. That you believe this I doubt not; 
 and believing it, I shall still receive, for our country and myself, 
 your earnest prayers to our Father in heaven. 
 
 Your sincere friend 
 
 A. Lincoln. 
 
 LETTER TO GENERAL U. S. GRANT 
 SEPTEMBER 22, 1864 
 
 Executive Mansion, 
 Washington, Sep. 22, 1864. 
 Lieut. General Grant 
 
 I send this as an explanation to you, and to do justice to the 
 Secretary of War. I was induced, upon pressing application, to 
 authorize agents of one of the Districts of Pennsylvania to recruit 
 in one of the prisoner depots in Illinois; and the thing went so far 
 before it came to the knowledge of the Secretary of War that in 
 my judgment it could not be abandoned without greater evil than 
 would follow it's going through. I did not know, at the time, that 
 you had protested against that class of thing being done; and I 
 now say that while this particular job must be completed, no other 
 of the sort, will be authorized, without an understanding with you, 
 if at all. The Secretary of War is wholly free of any part of this 
 blunder 
 
 Yours truly 
 
 A. Lincoln 
 
HIS SPEECHES AND WRITINGS 759 
 
 LETTER TO HENRY W. HOFFMAN 
 OCTOBER 10, 1864 
 
 Executive Mansion, 
 Washington, October 10, 1864. 
 Hon. Henry W Hoffman 
 My dear Sir: 
 
 A convention of Maryland has framed a new constitution for 
 the State; a public meeting is called for this evening, at Baltimore, 
 to aid in securing its ratification by the people; and you ask a 
 word from me, for the occasion. I presume the only feature of the 
 instrument, about which there is serious controversy, is that which 
 provides for the extinction of slavery. It needs not to be a secret, 
 and I presume it is no secret, that I wish success to this provision. 
 I desire it on every consideration. I wish all men to be free. I wish 
 the material prosperity of the already free which Lfeel sure the 
 extinction of slavery would bring. I wish to see, in process of dis- 
 appearing, that only thing which ever could bring this nation to 
 civil war. I attempt no argument. Argument upon the question 
 is already exhausted by the abler, better posted, and more immedi- 
 ately interested sons of Maryland herself. I only add that I shall 
 be gratified exceedingly if the good people of the State shall by 
 their votes, ratify the new constitution. 
 
 Yours truly 
 A. Lincoln 
 
 As John Hay records in his Diary, the manuscript 
 shows that Hay erased Lincoln's phrase "better posted" 
 and wrote in "better informed!' The text restores Lin- 
 coln s wording. 
 
760 ABRAHAM LINCOLN 
 
 RESPONSE TO A SERENADE 
 OCTOBER 19, 1864 
 
 I am notified that this is a compliment paid me by the loyal 
 Marylanders, resident in this District. I infer that the adoption of 
 the new Constitution for the State, furnishes the occasion; and 
 that, in your view, the extirpation of slavery constitutes the chief 
 merit of the new constitution. Most heartily do I congratulate 
 you, and Maryland, and the nation, and the world, upon this 
 event. I regret that it did not occur two years sooner, which I 
 am sure would have saved to the nation more money than would 
 have met all the private loss incident to the measure. But it has 
 come at last, and I sincerely hope it's friends may fully realize 
 all their anticipations of good from it; and that it's opponents may, 
 by it's effects, be agreeably and profitably disappointed. 
 
 A word upon another subject. Something said by the Secre- 
 tary of State, in his recent speech at Auburn, has been construed 
 by some into a threat that, if I shall be beaten at the election, I 
 will, between then and the end of my constitutional term, do 
 what I may be able to ruin the government. 
 
 Others regard the fact that the Chicago Convention ad- 
 journed, not sine die, but to meet again, if called to do so by a par- 
 ticular individual, as the intimation of a purpose that if their 
 nominee shall be elected, he will at once seize control of the gov- 
 ernment. I hope the good people will permit themselves to suffer 
 no uneasiness on either point. I am struggling to maintain the 
 government, not to overthrow it. I am struggling especially to 
 prevent others from overthrowing it. I therefore say, that if I 
 shall live, I shall remain President until the fourth of next march; 
 and that whoever shall be constitutionally elected therefor in 
 November, shall be duly installed as President on the fourth of 
 March; and that in the interval I shall do my utmost that whoever 
 is to hold the helm for the next voyage, shall start with the best 
 possible chance to save the ship. 
 
HIS SPEECHES AND WRITINGS 761 
 
 This is due to the people both on principle, and under the 
 Constitution. Their will, constitutionally expressed, is the ultimate 
 law for all. If they should deliberately resolve to have immediate 
 peace even at the loss of their country, and their liberty, I know 
 not the power or the right to resist them. It is their own business, 
 and they must do as they please with their own. I believe, how- 
 ever, they are still resolved to preserve their country and their 
 liberty; and in this, in office or out of it, I am resolved to stand 
 by them. 
 
 I may add that in this purpose to save the country and its 
 liberties, no classes of people seem so nearly unanimous as the 
 soldiers in the field and the sailors afloat. Do they not have the 
 hardest of it? Who should quail when they do not? God bless the 
 soldiers and seamen, with all their brave commanders. 
 
 PROCLAMATION OF THANKSGIVING 
 OCTOBER 20, 1864 
 
 By The President of the United States of America: 
 
 A PROCLAMATION. 
 
 It has pleased Almighty God to prolong our national life an- 
 other year, defending us with his guardian care against unfriendly 
 designs from abroad, and vouchsafing to us in His mercy many 
 and signal victories over the enemy, who is of our own household. 
 It has also pleased our Heavenly Father to favor as well our citi- 
 zens in their homes as our soldiers in their camps and our sailors 
 on the rivers and seas with unusual health. He has largely aug- 
 mented our free population by emancipation and by immigration, 
 while he has opened to us new sources of wealth, and has crowned 
 the labor of our working men in every department of industry 
 with abundant rewards. Moreover, he has been pleased to animate 
 and inspire our minds and hearts with fortitude, courage and reso- 
 
762 ABRAHAM LINCOLN: 
 
 lution sufficient for the great trial of civil war into which we have 
 been brought by our adherence as a nation to the cause of Free- 
 dom and Humanity, and to afford to us reasonable hopes of an 
 ultimate and happy deliverance from all our dangers and afflic- 
 tions. 
 
 Now, therefore, I, Abraham Lincoln, President of the United 
 States, do, hereby, appoint and set apart the last Thursday in 
 November next as a day which I desire to be observed by all my 
 fellow-citizens wherever they may then be as a day of Thanks- 
 giving and Praise to Almighty God the beneficent Creator and 
 Ruler of the Universe. And I do farther recommend to my fellow- 
 citizens aforesaid that on that occasion they do reverently humble 
 themselves in the dust, and from thence offer up penitent and 
 fervent prayers and supplications to the Great Disposer of events 
 for a return of the inestimable blessings of Peace, Union, and 
 Harmony throughout the land, which it has pleased him to assign 
 as a dwelling place for ourselves and for our posterity throughout 
 all generations. 
 
 In testimony 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 twentieth day of 
 r , October, in the year of our Lord one thousand eight hun- 
 L ,J dred and sixty four, and of the Independence of the 
 United States the eighty-ninth. 
 
 By the President: Abraham Lincoln 
 
 William H. Seward 
 Secretary of State 
 
HIS SPEECHES AND WRITINGS 763 
 
 TELEGRAM TO GENERAL P. H. SHERIDAN 
 OCTOBER 22, 1864 
 
 Executive Mansion 
 Washington, Oct. 22, 1864 
 Major General Sheridan. 
 
 With great pleasure I tender to you and your brave army, 
 the thanks of the Nation, and my own personal admiration and 
 gratitude, for the months operations in the Shenandoah Valley; 
 and especially for the splendid work of October 19, 1864. 
 
 Your Obt. Servt. 
 Abraham Lincoln. 
 
 RESPONSE TO A SERENADE 
 NOVEMBER 10, 1864 
 
 (Nov. 10 1864) 
 
 It has long been a grave question whether any governrnent, 
 not too strong for the liberties of its people, can be strong enough 
 to maintain its own existence in great emergencies. 
 
 On this point the present rebellion brought our republic to a 
 severe test; and a presidential election occurring in regular course 
 during the rebellion added not a little to the strain. If the loyal 
 people, unitedy were put to the utmost of their strength by the 
 rebellion, must they not fail when divided, and partially paralized 
 [sic], by a political war among themselves? 
 
 But the election was a necessity. 
 
 We can not have free government without elections; and if 
 the rebellion could force us to forego, or postpone a national 
 
764 ABRAHAM LINCOLN: 
 
 election, it might fairly claim to have already conquered and 
 ruined us. The strife of the election is but human-nature practically 
 applied to the facts of the case. What has occurred in this case, 
 must ever recur in similar cases. Human-nature will not change. 
 In any future great national trial, compared with the men of this, 
 we shall have as weak, and as strong; as silly and as wise; as bad 
 and good. Let us, therefore, study the incidents of this, as philos- 
 ophy to learn wisdom from, and none of them as wrongs to be 
 revenged. 
 
 But the election, along with its incidental, and undesirable 
 strife, has done good too. It has demonstrated that a people's 
 government can sustain a national election, in the midst of a 
 great civil war. Until now it has not been known to the world that 
 this was a possibility. It shows also how sound, and how strong 
 we still are. It shows that, even among candidates of the same 
 party, he who is most devoted to the Union, and most opposed to 
 treason, can receive most of the people's votes. It shows also, to 
 the extent yet known, that we have more men now, than we had 
 when the war began. Gold is good in its place; but living, brave, 
 patriotic men, are better than gold. 
 
 But the rebellion continues; and now that the election is over, 
 may not all, having a common interest, re-unite in a common 
 effort, to save our common country? For my own part L have 
 striven, and shall strive to avoid placing any obstacle in the way. 
 So long as I have been here I have not willingly planted a thorn 
 in any man's bosom. 
 
 While I am deeply sensible to the high compliment of a re- 
 election; and duly grateful, as I trust, to Almighty God for having 
 directed my countrymen to a right conclusion, as I think, for their 
 own good, it adds nothing to my satisfaction that any other man 
 may be disappointed or pained by the result. 
 
 May I ask those who have not differed with me, to join with 
 me, in this same spirit towards those who have? 
 
 And now, let me close by asking three hearty cheers for our 
 brave soldiers and seamen and their gallant and skilful com- 
 manders. 
 
HIS SPEECHES AND WRITINGS 765 
 
 LETTER TO GENERAL W. S. ROSECRANS 
 NOVEMBER 19, 1864 
 
 Executive Mansion, 
 Washington, Nov 19th, 1864 
 Major General Rosecrans. 
 
 A Major Wolf, as it seems was under sentence, in your De- 
 partment, to be executed in retaliation for the murder of a Major 
 Wilson; and I, without any particular knowledge of the facts, 
 was induced, by appeals for mercy, to order the suspension of 
 his execution until further order. Understanding that you so 
 desire, this letter places the case again within your control, with 
 the remark only that I wish you to do nothing merely for revenge, 
 but that what you may do, shall be solely done with reference to 
 the security of the future. 
 
 Yours truly, 
 
 A. Lincoln 
 
 The manuscript of this letter is not in the handwrit- 
 ing of Lincoln nor in that of one of his secretaries, but 
 is signed by Lincoln. From the endorsement on the back 
 and from circumstances indicated in the letter, it may 
 be concluded that a clerk from the War Department 
 brought Lincoln the papers relating to Major Wolf, 
 took down Lincoln's dictated reply, and secured his 
 signature before returning to the office. The letter is 
 not imposing at first gJLance, but is a splendid example, 
 especially in the adroit final sentence, of the care with 
 which Lincoln phrased a difficult idea, even in haste. 
 Apparently General Rosecrans did not wish to assume 
 responsibility for deciding that "the security of the future" 
 demanded Wolfs execution, for the Confederate officers 
 life was spared. 
 
766 ABRAHAM LINCOLN: 
 
 Major Wolf returned to his farm in Fulton County, 
 Arkansas, where he lived for many years proud in the 
 distinction of having been, as he phrased it, "recalled to 
 life." 
 
 LETTER TO MRS. BIXBY 
 NOVEMBER 21, 1864 
 
 Executive Mansion, 
 Washington, Nov. 21, 1864 
 Dear Madam, — 
 
 I have been shown in the files of the war Department a state- 
 ment of the Adjutant General of Massachusetts, 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 word of mine which 
 should attempt to beguile you from the grief of a loss so over- 
 whelming. But I cannot refrain from tendering to you the consola- 
 tion 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 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, 
 
 A. Lincoln 
 Mrs. Bixby. 
 
 (For more detailed discussion of the question of the 
 authorship of this letter, the reader may consult the 
 editors article, "Who Wrote the 'Letter to Mrs. Bixby?' 
 in the Lincoln Herald, February, 1943, and a forthcom- 
 ing book by F. Lauriston Bullard and Edward C. Stone 
 entitled Lincoln Wrote the Bixby Letter, a Detective 
 
HIS SPEECHES AND WRITINGS 767 
 
 Story, which the editor has been privileged to read in 
 manuscript and which will provide the most complete 
 account of all available evidence on the composition of 
 the letter.) 
 
 As is well known to most students of Lincoln, the 
 purported facsimiles of this letter have been judged to 
 be forgeries, and the original manuscript has never been 
 found. Furthermore, the opinion has been somewhat 
 widely held that Lincoln never wrote the letter at all. In 
 his book, Across the Busy Years, Nicholas Murray 
 Butler relates that "John Hay told [John] Morley that he 
 had himself written the Bixby letter and that this was 
 the reason why it could not be found among Lincoln's 
 papers and why no original copy of it had ever been 
 forthcoming." Dr. Butler goes even beyond this to main- 
 tain that: "As a matter of fact, Abraham Lincoln wrote 
 very few letters that bore his signature. John G. Nicolay 
 wrote almost all of those which were official, while John 
 Hay wrote almost all of those which were personal. Hay 
 was able to imitate Lincoln's handwriting and signature 
 in well-nigh perfect fashion!' 
 
 If one admits the possibility that John Hay told 
 Morley that he had written the letter, there is still the 
 question of what he may have meant when he used the 
 word wrote. Did he mean simply that he had penned the 
 letter, or that he had composed it? 
 
 In a letter written from Paris on September 5, 1866, 
 Hay answered Herndons specific inquiry concerning the 
 letters which Lincoln wrote as President, in the follow- 
 ing language: "He wrote very few letters. He did not read 
 one in fifty that he received. At first we tried to bring 
 them to his notice, but at last he gave the whole thing 
 over to me, and signed without reading them the letters 
 I wrote in his name. He wrote perhaps half-a-dozen a 
 week himself — not more." (From a photostatic copy in 
 possession of the editor. The complete letter is printed 
 in The Hidden Lincoln, edited by Emanuel Hertz.) 
 
 This statement may be considered generally true. 
 
768 ABRAHAM LINCOLN: 
 
 After 1861 Lincoln wrote as few letters as he could. Hay's 
 estimate of "half-a-dozen a week" amply covers the 
 really significant letters, of which there are rarely that 
 many in a single week. There are, however, several in- 
 adequacies and inaccuracies in the statement as a whole. 
 When Hay states that "he gave the whole thing over to 
 me," he hardly does justice to Nicolay or the other sec- 
 retaries, who, as numerous manuscripts show, penned 
 many of Lincoln's letters. Furthermore, when Hay states 
 that Lincoln "signed without reading them the letters 
 which I wrote in his name," he presumes quite a bit. If 
 he had looked over a number of such letters as he did 
 pen for Lincoln, he would have found some with correc- 
 tions and emendations written in by Lincoln before he 
 signed them. Then, too, Hay's statement implies that 
 all the letters thus signed by Lincoln were composed by 
 Hay himself. This is demonstrably not the case in the 
 "Letter to General H. W. Halle ck," July 29, 1863, which 
 is in phraseology and style distinctly Lincoln's, and is 
 emended and corrected as well as signed in Lincoln's 
 handwriting, though penned by Hay. Some letters Lin- 
 coln apparently dictated to Hay, others to Nicolay, and 
 still others to secretaries who relieved and assisted them 
 from time to time. And often Lincoln emended them 
 before signing his name. Finally, Hay's statement fails 
 to take into account the many letters he did write in 
 his own person (and in his own handwriting!) and signed 
 with his own name as the President's Secretary. 
 
 Another interesting example of how loosely Hay 
 used the word wrote is contained in two references in 
 his Diary to Lincoln's "Response to a Serenade," No- 
 vember 9, 1864. The first of these is as follows: "The 
 President answered from the window with rather un- 
 usual dignity and effect and we came home. [Added 
 later: 7 wrote the speech and sent it to Hanscum.']" 
 (Tyler Dennett, editor, Lincoln and the Civil War in the 
 Diaries and Letters of John Hay, p. 286). This statement 
 might readily be misinterpreted, if detached from its 
 
HIS SPEECHES AND WRITINGS 769 
 
 setting, to mean that Half had composed the "Response" 
 when as a matter of fact he merely penned what Lincoln 
 had said, perhaps polishing a bit according to his own 
 light. It is interesting that this speech as printed in the 
 Complete Works of Abraham Lincoln is far inferior to 
 the "Response" delivered the following evening, No- 
 vember 10, 1864, which Lincoln took the trouble to write 
 out himself. Hays second comment is as follows: "The 
 speeches of the President at the last two serenades are 
 very highly spoken of. The first I wrote after the fact, to 
 prevent the loyal Pennsylvanians' getting a swing at it 
 themselves" (Dennett, p. 239). 
 
 Furthermore, it is a curiously interesting fact con- 
 cerning the two letters which Hay states in his Diary 
 that he "wrote" (implying definitely composed), that one 
 is omitted from the first edition of the Complete Works of 
 Abraham Lincoln (1894) and the other is so utterly with- 
 out personal style and without significance as to be of 
 little worth. Of the first of these two letters Hay notes: 
 "Today I induced the President to sign a letter to Col. 
 Rowland approving his proposed National Rifle Corps. I 
 think Rowland himself rather a humbug but his idea is a 
 good one" (Dennett, p. 104). This "induced the President 
 to sign" sounds far different from the tone of Hay's 
 statement to Herndon and probably indicates far more 
 accurately the limit to which Hays authority and 
 function as Secretary extended. The second of these 
 letters is the "Letter to G. H. Boker," October 26, 1863, 
 which may be consulted in the Complete Works as an 
 example of the colorless and inconsequential style of 
 Hay's compositions as Secretary to the President, most 
 of which Hay signed in his own name with the notation 
 "A.P.S." appended. 
 
 In regard to the specific question of Hay's ability 
 to imitate Lincoln's handwriting "in well-nigh perfect 
 fashion," one must doubt Dr. Butler's belief. That there 
 can be no large number of letters in which this was done, 
 or even attempted, is certain. Hay could not have had the 
 
770 ABRAHAM LINCOLN: 
 
 time to imitate Lincoln s scrawl in any number of letters. 
 To attempt such a task would have entailed an enormous 
 amount of labor beyond his required duties as secretary. 
 The business of imitating handwriting (forging is the 
 less polite word for it) is no easy task for an expert, and 
 Hay certainly had his hands full without undertaking 
 such an utterly useless task. Also, the editor has never 
 seen among the several hundred Lincoln manuscripts 
 which he has studied either in the original or in photo- 
 static copy any letter in which Lincoln's handwriting 
 is open to suspicion of being an imitation by Hay. 
 Furthermore, the editor has queried a number of au- 
 thorities who know more about Lincoln manuscripts 
 than he does, and not one of them has ever admitted 
 having seen such a letter. In only one instance known 
 to the editor is there even a bare possibility that Hay 
 may have been attempting to imitate Lincoln's hand- 
 writing, and the similarity is so slight that it would seem 
 most likely a matter of coincidence rather than imita- 
 tion — and that is the "Telegram to Mrs. Lincoln," De- 
 cember 21, 1862 (original in the Brown University 
 Library). The similarities do not extend beyond the like- 
 ness of a few capital letters and some slight likeness in 
 the signature. 
 
 In another instance Hay had an opportunity to 
 imitate Lincoln's handwriting when there might have 
 been real point to doing so. In the "Letter to Henry W. 
 Hoffman," October 10, 1864, as already noted, Lincoln 
 originally wrote the phrase "better posted." After Lin- 
 coln had finished the letter, Hay carefully "scraped out" 
 the word posted, as he records in his Diary, and wrote 
 in the word informed. The emendation is plainly in 
 Hay's hand with no appearance whatever of an attempt 
 to imitate. In short, if there is any evidence that Hay 
 ever attempted to imitate Lincoln's handwriting it has 
 not been discovered. 
 
 We may conclude concerning Hay's function as Sec- 
 retary to President Lincoln, therefore, that Dr. Butler is 
 
HIS SPEECHES AND WRITINGS 771 
 
 probably incorrect in stating that Hay could and did 
 imitate Lincoln's handwriting. Further, we may conclude 
 that Dr. Butler is correct in his belief that as one of 
 Lincoln's secretaries Hay wrote a good many letters, but 
 incorrect in believing that many of the better letters 
 were composed by Hay. Concerning Hays statement to 
 Herndon we may conclude that it is in certain particulars 
 inadequate, inaccurate, and incorrect. 
 
 When the manuscript of the Bixby letter is pro- 
 duced we may know what Hay had to do with it, if 
 anything, but since the original has been sought dili- 
 gently for more than half a century, one must doubt 
 that it is now in existence. In view of these circum- 
 stances, we can best rely on the circumstantial evidence 
 surrounding the composition of the letter and the in- 
 ternal evidence of style, both of which point conclusively 
 to Lincoln's authorship. In regard to the evidence of 
 style, it should be pointed out that until someone pro- 
 duces an example of Hay's writing that sounds suf- 
 ficiently like Lincoln to merit the comparison, there is 
 simply no ground for supposing that he could, or even 
 had any desire to, write so. The editor has yet to find in 
 Hay's letters any evidence that Hay imitated Lincoln or 
 any other writer as to style. Some of Hay's poetry is imita- 
 tive, but his letters are invariably in his own idiom. If any- 
 one will read aloud a few of the better known lyrical 
 passages which have been discussed in "Lincoln's Devel- 
 opment as a Writer" then procure a copy of W. R. 
 Thayer's Life and Letters of John Hay and read a few of 
 Hay's compositions, and finally read the "Letter to Mrs. 
 Bixby," his conclusion is very likely to be emphatic on 
 the ground of style alone. 
 
 In conclusion, however, if Hay's personal testimony 
 can be accepted (in spite of the fact that in 1885 he 
 wrote Richard Watson Gilder: "Can you remember 
 things? I have to rely exclusively on documents. I would 
 not trust my recollection in the slightest matter of his- 
 torical interest"), there is Hay's letter to William E. 
 
772 ABRAHAM LINCOLN: 
 
 Chandler, which has been called to the editors attention 
 by Messrs. F. Lauriston Bullard and Edward C. Stone. 
 In this letter written in 1904, Hay specifies as follows: 
 "The letter of Mr. Lincoln to Mrs. Bixby is genuine, is 
 printed in our edition of his Works, and has been fre- 
 quently re-published; but the engraved copy of Mr. Lin- 
 coln s alleged manuscript, which is so extensively sold, 
 is, in my opinion, a very ingenious forgery." 
 
 STORY WRITTEN FOR NOAH BROOKS 
 DECEMBER [6?] 1864 
 
 THE PRESIDENT S LAST, SHORTEST, AND BEST SPEECH. 
 
 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 till 
 friday, when they came again; and were again put off to Satur- 
 day. At each of the interviews one of the ladies urged that her 
 husband was a religious man. On Saturday the President or- 
 dered the release of the prisoners, and then said to this lady 
 "You say your husband is a religious 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 govern- 
 ment 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 — 
 
 Lincoln sent for Brooks, who was then corre- 
 spondent for a California paper, wrote out this news 
 story, headline and all, on a piece of white pasteboard, 
 
HIS SPEECHES AND WRITINGS 773 
 
 and asked Brooks to have it printed in the Washington 
 Daily Chronicle, with the comment: "Dont wait to send 
 it to California in your correspondence. I've a childish 
 desire to see it in print right away" It appeared on the 
 morning of December 7. 
 
 Three months later, in the "Second Inaugural Ad- 
 dress'' Lincoln was to reiterate, more mildly, this same 
 view. 
 
 ANNUAL MESSAGE TO CONGRESS 
 DECEMBER 6, 1864 
 
 Fellow-citizens of the Senate and House of Representatives: 
 
 Again the blessings of health and abundant harvests claim 
 our profoundest gratitude to Almighty God. 
 
 The condition of our foreign affairs is reasonably satisfac- 
 tory. 
 
 Mexico continues to be a theatre of civil war. While our 
 political relations with that country have undergone no change, 
 we have, at the same time, strictly maintained neutrality between 
 the belligerents. 
 
 At the request of the states of Costa Rica and Nicaragua, a 
 competent engineer has been authorized to make a survey of the 
 River San Juan and the port of San Juan. It is a source of much 
 satisfaction that the difficulties which for a moment excited some 
 political apprehensions, and caused a closing of the interoceanic 
 transit route, have been amicably adjusted, and that there is a 
 good prospect that the route will soon be reopened with an in- 
 crease of capacity and adaptation. We could not exaggerate 
 either the commercial or the political importance of that great 
 improvement. 
 
 It would be doing injustice to an important South American 
 state not to acknowledge the directness, frankness, and cordiality 
 
774 ABRAHAM LINCOLN: 
 
 with which the United States of Colombia have entered into 
 intimate relations with this government. A claims convention has 
 been constituted to complete the unfinished work of the one 
 which closed its session in 1861. 
 
 The new liberal constitution of Venezuela having gone into 
 effect with the universal acquiescence of the people, the gov- 
 ernment under it has been recognized, and diplomatic intercourse 
 with it has opened in a cordial and friendly spirit. The long- 
 deferred Aves Island claim has been satisfactorily paid and dis- 
 charged. 
 
 Mutual payments have been made of the claims awarded 
 by the late joint commission for the settlement of claims between 
 the United States and Peru. An earnest and cordial friendship 
 continues to exist between the two countries, and such efforts 
 as were in my power have been used to remove misunderstand- 
 ing and avert a threatened war between Peru and Spain. 
 
 Our relations are of the most friendly nature with Chile, 
 the Argentine Republic, Bolivia, Costa Rica, Paraguay, San Sal- 
 vador, and Hayti. 
 
 During the past year no differences of any kind have arisen 
 with any of those republics, and, on the other hand, their sym- 
 pathies with the United States are constantly expressed with 
 cordiality and earnestness. 
 
 The claim arising from the seizure of the cargo of the brig 
 Macedonian in 1821 has been paid in full by the government of 
 Chile. 
 
 Civil war continues in the Spanish part of San Domingo, 
 apparently without prospect of an early close. 
 
 Official correspondence has been freely opened with Liberia, 
 and it gives us a pleasing view of social and political progress in 
 that Republic. It may be expected to derive new vigor from 
 American influence, improved by the rapid disappearance of 
 slavery in the United States. 
 
 I solicit your authority to furnish to the republic a gunboat 
 at moderate cost, to be reimbursed to the United States by instal- 
 ments. Such a vessel is needed for the safety of that state against 
 the native African races; and in Liberian hands it would be more 
 effective in arresting the African slave trade than a squadron in 
 
HIS SPEECHES AND WRITINGS 775 
 
 our own hands. The possession of the least organized naval 
 force would stimulate a generous ambition in the republic, and 
 the confidence which we should manifest by furnishing it would 
 win forbearance and favor towards the colony from all civilized 
 nations. 
 
 The proposed overland telegraph between America and 
 Europe, by the way of Behring's Straits and Asiatic Russia, which 
 was sanctioned by Congress at the last session, has been under- 
 taken, under very favorable circumstances, by an association of 
 American citizens, with the cordial good-will and support as well 
 of this government as of those of Great Britain and Russia. As- 
 surances have been received from most of the South American 
 States of their high appreciation of the enterprise, and their 
 readiness to co-operate in constructing lines tributary to that 
 world-encircling communication. I learn, with much satisfaction, 
 that the noble design of a telegraphic communication between 
 the eastern coast of America and Great Britain has been renewed 
 with full expectation of its early accomplishment. 
 
 Thus it is hoped that with the return of domestic peace the 
 country will be able to resume with energy and advantage its 
 former high career of commerce and civilization. 
 
 Our very popular and estimable representative in Egypt 
 died in April last. An unpleasant altercation which arose be- 
 tween the temporary incumbent of the office and the government 
 of the Pacha resulted in a suspension of intercourse. The evil 
 was promptly corrected on the arrival of the successor in the con- 
 sulate, and our relations with Egypt, as well as our relations with 
 the Barbary powers, are entirely satisfactory. 
 
 The rebellion which has so long been flagrant in China, has 
 at last been suppressed, with the co-operating good offices of this 
 government, and of the other western commercial states. The 
 judicial consular establishment there has become very difficult 
 and onerous, and it will need legislative revision to adapt it to 
 the extension of our commerce, and to the more intimate inter- 
 course which has been instituted with the government and peo- 
 ple of that vast empire. China seems to be accepting with hearty 
 good-will the conventional laws which regulate commercial and 
 social intercourse among the western nations. 
 
776 ABRAHAM LINCOLN: 
 
 Owing to the peculiar situation of Japan, and the anomalous 
 form of its government, the action of that empire in performing 
 treaty stipulations is inconstant and capricious. Nevertheless, 
 good progress has been effected by the western powers, moving 
 with enlightened concert. Our own pecuniary claims have been 
 allowed, or put in course of settlement, and the inland sea has 
 been reopened to commerce. There is reason also to believe that 
 these proceedings have increased rather than diminished the 
 friendship of Japan towards the United States. 
 
 The ports of Norfolk, Fernandina, and Pensacola have been 
 opened by proclamation. It is hoped that foreign merchants will 
 now consider whether it is not safer and more profitable to them- 
 selves, as well as just to the United States, to resort to these and 
 other open ports, than it is to pursue, through many hazards, and 
 at vast cost, a contraband trade with other ports which are closed, 
 if not by actual military occupation, at least by a lawful and 
 effective blockade. 
 
 For myself, I have no doubt of the power and duty of the 
 Executive, under the law of nations, to exclude enemies of the 
 human race from an asylum in the United States. If Congress 
 should think that proceedings in such cases lack the authority of 
 law, or ought to be further regulated by it, I recommend that 
 provision be made for effectually preventing foreign slave trad- 
 ers from acquiring domicile and facilities for their criminal oc- 
 cupation in our country. 
 
 It is possible that, if it were a new and open question, the 
 maritime powers, with the lights they now enjoy, would not con- 
 cede the privileges of a naval belligerent to the insurgents of 
 the United States, destitute, as they are, and always have been, 
 equally of ships-of-war and of ports and harbors. Disloyal emis- 
 saries have been neither less assiduous nor more successful dur- 
 ing the last year than they were before that time in their efforts, 
 under favor of that privilege, to embroil our country in foreign 
 wars. The desire and determination of the governments of the 
 maritime states to defeat that design are believed to be as sin- 
 cere as, and cannot be more earnest than our own. Nevertheless, 
 unforeseen political difficulties have arisen, especially in Bra- 
 zilian and British ports, and on the northern boundary of the 
 
HIS SPEECHES AND WRITINGS 777 
 
 United States, which have required, and are likely to continue 
 to require, the practice of constant vigilance, and a just and con- 
 ciliatory spirit on the part of the United States as well as of the 
 nations concerned and their governments. 
 
 Commissioners have been appointed under the treaty with 
 Great Britain on the adjustment of the claims of the Hudson's 
 Bay and Puget's Sound Agricultural Companies, in Oregon, and 
 are now proceeding to the execution of the trust assigned to 
 them. 
 
 In view of the insecurity of life and property in the region 
 adjacent to the Canadian border, by reason of recent assaults 
 and depredations committed by inimical and desperate persons, 
 who are harbored there, it has been thought proper to give 
 notice that after the expiration of six months, the period condi- 
 tionally stipulated in the existing arrangement with Great Britain, 
 the United States must hold themselves at liberty to increase 
 their naval armament upon the lakes, if they shall find that pro- 
 ceeding necessary. The condition of the border will necessarily 
 come into consideration in connection with the question of con- 
 tinuing or modifying the rights of transit from Canada through 
 the United States, as well as the regulation of imposts, which 
 were temporarily established by the reciprocity treaty of the 5th 
 of June, 1854. 
 
 I desire, however, to be understood, while making this state- 
 ment, that the Colonial authorities of Canada are not deemed 
 to be intentionally unjust or unfriendly towards the United 
 States; but, on the contrary, there is every reason to expect that, 
 with the approval of the imperial government, they will take the 
 necessary measures to prevent new incursions across the border. 
 
 The act passed at the last session for the encouragement of 
 emigration has, so far as was possible, been put into operation. 
 It seems to need amendment which will enable the officers of 
 the government to prevent the practice of frauds against the im- 
 migrants while on their way and on their arrival in the ports, 
 so as to secure them here a free choice of avocations and places 
 of settlement. A liberal disposition towards this great national 
 policy is manifested by most of the European States, and ought 
 to be reciprocated on our part by giving the immigrants effective 
 
778 ABRAHAM LINCOLN: 
 
 national protection. I regard our emigrants as one of the principal 
 replenishing streams which are appointed by Providence to re- 
 pair the ravages of internal war, and its wastes of national 
 strength and health. All that is necessary is to secure the flow of 
 that stream in its present fullness, and to that end the govern- 
 ment must, in every way, make it manifest that it neither needs 
 nor designs to impose involuntary military service upon those 
 who come from other lands to cast their lot in our country. 
 
 The financial affairs of the government have been success- 
 fully administered during the last year. The legislation of the 
 last session of Congress has beneficially affected the revenues, 
 although sufficient time has not yet elapsed to experience the 
 full effect of several of the provisions of the acts of Congress 
 imposing increased taxation. 
 
 The receipts during the year, from all sources, upon the basis 
 of warrants signed by the Secretary of the Treasury, including 
 loans and the balance in the treasury on the first day of July, 
 1863, were $1,394,796,007.62; and the aggregate disbursements, 
 upon the same basis, were $1,298,056,101.89, leaving a balance 
 in the treasury, as shown by warrants, of $96,739,905.73. 
 
 Deduct from these amounts the amount of the principal of 
 the public debt redeemed, and the amount of issues in substitu- 
 tion therefor, and the actual cash operations of the treasury were: 
 receipts, $884,076,646.57; disbursements, $865,234,087.86; which 
 leaves a cash balance in the treasury of $18,842,558.71. 
 
 Of the receipts, there were derived from customs, 
 $102,316,152.99; from lands, $588,333.29; from direct taxes, 
 $475,648.96; from internal revenue, $109,741,134.10; from miscel- 
 laneous sources, $47,511,448.10; and from loans applied to actual 
 expenditures, including former balances, $623,443,929.13. 
 
 There were disbursed, for the civil service, $27,505,599.46; 
 for pensions and Indians, $7,517,930.97; for the War Department, 
 $690,791,842.97; for the Navy Department, $85,733,292.77; for 
 interest of the public debt, $53,685,421.69; — making an aggregate 
 of $865,234,087.86, and leaving a balance in the treasury of 
 $18,842,558.71, as before stated. 
 
 For the actual receipts and disbursements for the first quar- 
 
HIS SPEECHES AND WRITINGS 779 
 
 ter, and the estimated receipts and disbursements for the three 
 remaining quarters of the current fiscal year, and the general 
 operations of the treasury in detail, I refer you, to the report of 
 the Secretary of the Treasury. I concur with him in the opinion 
 that the proportion of moneys required to meet the expenses 
 consequent upon the war derived from taxation should be still 
 further increased; and I earnestly invite your attention to this 
 subject, to the end that there may be such additional legislation 
 as shall be required to meet the just expectations of the Sec- 
 retary. 
 
 The public debt on the first day of July last, as appears by 
 the books of the treasury, amounted to $1,740,690,489.49. Prob- 
 ably, should the war continue for another year, that amount may 
 be increased by not far from five hundred millions. Held as it 
 is, for the most part, by our own people, it has become a sub- 
 stantial branch of national though private, property. For ob- 
 vious reasons, the more nearly this property can be distributed 
 among all the people the better. To favor such general distribu- 
 tion, greater inducements to become owners might, perhaps, 
 with good effect, and without injury, be presented to persons of 
 limited means. With this view, I suggest whether it might not be 
 both competent and expedient for Congress to provide that a 
 limited amount of some future issue of public securities might be 
 held by any bona-fide purchaser exempt from taxation, and from 
 seizure for debt, under such restrictions and limitations as might 
 be necessary to guard against abuse of so important a privilege. 
 This would enable every prudent person to set aside a small an- 
 nuity against a possible day of want. 
 
 Privileges like these would render the possession of such 
 securities, to the amount limited, most desirable to every person 
 of small means who might be able to save enough for the pur- 
 pose. The great advantage of citizens being creditors as well as 
 debtors, with relation to the public debt, is obvious. Men readily 
 perceive that they cannot be much oppressed by a debt which 
 they owe to themselves. 
 
 The public debt on the first day of July last, although some- 
 what exceeding the estimate of the Secretary of the Treasury 
 
780 ABRAHAM LINCOLN: 
 
 made to Congress at the commencement of the last session, falls 
 short of the estimate of that officer made in the preceding Decem- 
 ber, as to its probable amount at the beginning of this year, by 
 the sum of $3,995,097.31. This fact exhibits a satisfactory condi- 
 tion and conduct of the operations of the treasury. 
 
 The national banking system is proving to be acceptable 
 to capitalists and to the people. On the twenty-fifth day of No- 
 vember five hundred and eighty-four national banks had been 
 organized, a considerable number of which were conversions 
 from State banks. Changes from State systems to the national 
 system are rapidly taking place, and it is hoped that, very soon, 
 there will be in the United States, no banks of issue not author- 
 ized by Congress, and no bank-note circulation not secured by 
 the government. That the government and the people will de- 
 rive great benefit from this change in the banking systems of the 
 country can hardly be questioned. The national system will create 
 a reliable and permanent influence in support of the national 
 credit, and protect the people against losses in the use of paper 
 money. Whether or not any further legislation is advisable for 
 the suppression of State bank issues, it will be for Congress to 
 determine. It seems quite clear that the treasury cannot be satis- 
 factorily conducted unless the government can exercise a restrain- 
 ing power over the bank-note circulation of the country. 
 
 The report of the Secretary of War and the accompanying 
 documents will detail the campaigns of the armies in the field 
 since the date of the last annual message, and also the opera- 
 tions of the several administrative bureaus of the War Depart- 
 ment during the last year. It will also specify the measures 
 deemed essential for the national defence, and to keep up and 
 supply the requisite military force. 
 
 The report of the Secretary of the Navy presents a compre- 
 hensive and satisfactory exhibit of the affairs of that Department 
 and of the naval service. It is a subject of congratulation and 
 laudable pride to our countrymen that a navy of such vast pro- 
 portions has been organized in so brief a period, and conducted 
 with so much efficiency and success. 
 
 The general exhibit of the navy, including vessels under 
 construction on the 1st of December, 1864, shows a total of 671 
 
HIS SPEECHES AND WRITINGS 781 
 
 vessels, carrying 4,610 guns, and 510,396 tons, being an actual 
 increase during the year, over and above all losses by shipwreck 
 or in battle, of 83 vessels, 167 guns, and 42,427 tons. 
 
 The total number of men at this time in the naval service, 
 including officers, is about 51,000. 
 
 There have been captured by the navy during the year 324 
 vessels, and the whole number of naval captures since hostilities 
 commenced is 1,379, of which 267 are steamers. 
 
 The gross proceeds arising from the sale of condemned prize 
 property, thus far reported, amount to $14,396,250.51. A large 
 amount of such proceeds is still under adjudication and yet to 
 be reported. 
 
 The total expenditures of the Navy Department of every de- 
 scription, including the cost of the immense squadrons that have 
 been called into existence from the 4th of March, 1861, to the 
 1st of November, 1864, are $238,647,262.35. 
 
 Your favorable consideration is invited to the various recom- 
 mendations of the Secretary of the Navy, especially in regard to 
 a navy yard and suitable establishment for the construction and 
 repair of iron vessels, and the machinery and armature for 
 our ships, to which reference was made in my last annual 
 message. 
 
 Your attention is also invited to the views expressed in the 
 report in relation to the legislation of Congress at its last session 
 in respect to prize on our inland waters. 
 
 I cordially concur in the recommendation of the Secretary 
 as to the propriety of creating the new rank of vice-admiral in 
 our naval service. 
 
 Your attention is invited to the report of the Postmaster 
 General for a detailed account of the operations and financial 
 condition of the Post Office Department. 
 
 The postal revenues for the year ending June 30, 1864, a- 
 mounted to $12,438,253.78 and the expenditures to $12,664,786.20; 
 the excess of expenditures over receipts being $206,652.42. 
 
 The views presented by the Postmaster-General on the sub- 
 ject of special grants by the government in aid of the establish- 
 ment of new lines of ocean mail steamships, and the policy he 
 recommends for the development of increased commercial in- 
 
782 ABRAHAM LINCOLN: 
 
 tercourse with adjacent and neighboring countries, should receive 
 the careful consideration of Congress. 
 
 It is of noteworthy interest that the steady expansion of 
 population, improvement and governmental institutions over 
 the new and unoccupied portions of our country have scarcely 
 been checked, much less impeded or destroyed, by our great 
 civil war, which at first glance would seem to have absorbed al- 
 most the entire energies of the nation. 
 
 The organization and admission of the State of Nevada has 
 been completed in conformity with law, and thus our excellent 
 system is firmly established in the mountains, which once seemed 
 a barren and uninhabitable waste between the Atlantic States 
 and those which have grown up on the coast of the Pacific Ocean. 
 
 The territories of the Union are generally in a condition of 
 prosperity and rapid growth. Idaho and Montana, by reason of 
 their great distance and the interruption of communication with 
 them by Indian hostilities, have been only partially organized; 
 but it is understood that these difficulties are about to disappear, 
 which will permit their governments, like those of the others, to 
 go into speedy and full operation. 
 
 As intimately connected with, and promotive of, this material 
 growth of the nation, I ask the attention of Congress to the valu- 
 able information and important recommendations relating to the 
 public lands, Indian affairs, the Pacific railroad, and mineral dis- 
 coveries contained in the report of the Secretary of the Interior, 
 which is herewith transmitted, and which report also embraces 
 the subjects of patents, pensions and other topics of public in- 
 terest pertaining to his department. 
 
 The quantity of public land disposed of during the five 
 quarters ending on the 30th of September last was 4,221,342 
 acres, of which 1,538,614 acres were entered under the home- 
 stead law. The remainder was located with military land war- 
 rants, agricultural scrip certified to States for railroads, and sold 
 for cash. The cash received from sales and location fees was 
 $1,019,446. 
 
 The income from sales during the fiscal year, ending June 
 30, 1864, was $678,007.21, against $136,077.95 received during 
 the preceding year. The aggregate number of acres surveyed dur- 
 
HIS SPEECHES AND WRITINGS 783 
 
 ing the year has been equal to the quantity disposed of; and there 
 is open to settlement about 133,000,000 acres of surveyed land. 
 
 The great enterprise of connecting the Atlantic with the 
 Pacific States by railways and telegraph lines has been entered 
 upon with a vigor that gives assurance of success, notwithstand- 
 ing the embarrassments arising from the prevailing high prices 
 of materials and labor. The route of the main line of the road 
 has been definitely located for one hundred miles westward from 
 the initial point at Omaha City, Nebraska, and a preliminary 
 location of the Pacific railroad of California has been made from 
 Sacramento eastward to the great bend of the Truckee River, in 
 Nevada. 
 
 Numerous discoveries of gold, silver and cinnabar mines 
 have been added to the many heretofore known and the country 
 occupied by the Sierra Nevada and Rocky Mountains, and the 
 subordinate ranges, now teems with enterprising labor, which 
 is richly remunerative. It is believed that the product of the mines 
 of precious metals in that region has, during the year, reached, 
 if not exceeded, one hundred millions in value. 
 
 It was recommended in my last annual message that our 
 Indian system be remodelled. Congress, at its last session, acting 
 upon the recommendation, did provide for reorganizing the sys- 
 tem in California, and it is believed that under the present or- 
 ganization the management of the Indians there will be attended 
 with reasonable success. Much yet remains to be done to provide 
 for the proper government of the Indians in other parts of the 
 country to render it secure for the advancing settler, and to pro- 
 vide for the welfare of the Indian. The Secretary reiterates his 
 recommendations, and to them the attention of Congress is in- 
 vited. 
 
 The liberal provisions made by Congress for paying pen- 
 sions to invalid soldiers and sailors of the republic, and to the 
 widows, orphans, and dependent mothers of those who have 
 fallen in battle, or died of disease contracted, or of wounds 
 received in the service of their country, have been diligently 
 administered. There have been added to the pension rolls, during 
 the year ending the 30th day of June last, the names of 16,770 
 invalid soldiers, and of 271 disabled seamen; making the present 
 
784 ABRAHAM LINCOLN: 
 
 number of army invalid pensioners 22,767, and of navy invalid 
 pensioners 712. 
 
 Of widows, orphans, and mothers, 22,198 have been placed 
 on the army pension rolls, and 248 on the navy rolls. The present 
 number of army pensioners of this class is 25,433, and of navy 
 pensioners, 793. At the beginning of the year the number of 
 Revolutionary pensioners was 1,430; only twelve of them were 
 soldiers, of whom seven have since died. The remainder are those 
 who, under the law, receive pensions because of relationship to 
 revolutionary soldiers. During the year ending the 30th of June, 
 1864, $4,504,616.92 have been paid to pensioners of all classes. 
 
 I cheerfully commend to your continued patronage the 
 benevolent institutions of the District of Columbia, which have 
 hitherto been established or fostered by Congress, and respect- 
 fully refer, for information concerning them, and in relation to 
 the Washington aqueduct, the Capitol, and other matters of local 
 interest, to the report of the Secretary. 
 
 The Agricultural Department, under the supervision of its 
 present energetic and faithful head, is rapidly commending itself 
 to the great and vital interest it was created to advance. It is 
 peculiarly the people's department, in which they feel more 
 directly concerned than in any other. I commend it to the con- 
 tinued attention and fostering care of Congress. 
 
 The war continues. Since the last annual message all the 
 important lines and positions then occupied by our forces have 
 been maintained, and our arms have steadily advanced, thus 
 liberating the regions left in rear; so that Missouri, Kentucky, 
 Tennessee, and parts of other States have again produced rea- 
 sonably fair crops. 
 
 The most remarkable feature in the military operations of 
 the year is General Sherman's attempted march of three hundred 
 miles, directly through the insurgent region. It tends to show a 
 great increase of our relative strength that our General-in-Chief 
 should feel able to confront and hold in check every active force 
 of the enemy, and yet to detach a well-appointed large army to 
 move on such an expedition. The result not yet being known, 
 conjecture in regard to it is not here indulged. 
 
 Important movements have also occurred during the year 
 
HIS SPEECHES AND WRITINGS 785 
 
 to the effect of moulding society for durability in the Union. Al- 
 though short of complete success, it is much in the right direc- 
 tion, that twelve thousand citizens in each of the States of 
 Arkansas and Louisiana have organized loyal State governments 
 with free constitutions, and are earnestly struggling to maintain 
 and administer them. The movements in the same direction, 
 more extensive, though less definite in Missouri, Kentucky and 
 Tennessee, should not be overlooked. But Maryland presents the 
 example of complete success. Maryland is secure to Liberty and 
 Union for all the future. The genius of rebellion will no more 
 claim Maryland. Like another foul spirit, being driven out, it 
 may seek to tear her, but it will woo her no more. 
 
 At the last session of Congress a proposed amendment of 
 the Constitution abolishing slavery throughout the United States, 
 passed the Senate, but failed for lack of the requisite two-thirds 
 vote in the House of Representatives. Although the present is 
 the same Congress, and nearly the same members, and without 
 questioning the wisdom or patriotism of those who stood in op- 
 position, I venture to recommend the reconsideration and pas- 
 sage of the measure at the present session. Of course the abstract 
 question is not changed; but an intervening election shows, al- 
 most certainly, that the next Congress will pass the measure if 
 this does not. Hence there is only a question of time as to when 
 the proposed amendment will go to the States for their action. 
 And as it is to so go, at all events, may we not agree that the 
 sooner the better? It is not claimed that the election has imposed 
 a duty on members to change their views or their votes, any fur- 
 ther than, as an additional element to be considered, their judg- 
 ment may be affected by it. It is the voice of the people now, for 
 the first time, heard upon the question. In a great national crisis, 
 like ours, unanimity of action among those seeking a common end 
 is very desirable — almost indispensable. And yet no approach 
 to such unanimity is attainable, unless some deference shall 
 be paid to the will of the majority, simply because it is the will 
 of the majority. In this case the common end is the maintenance 
 of the Union; and, among the means to secure that end, such 
 will, through the election, is most clearly declared in favor of 
 such constitutional amendment. 
 
786 ABRAHAM LINCOLN: 
 
 The most reliable indication of public purpose in this coun- 
 try is derived through our popular elections. Judging by the re- 
 cent canvass and its result, the purpose of the people, within the 
 loyal States, to maintain the integrity of the Union, was never 
 more firm, nor more nearly unanimous, than now. The ex- 
 traordinary calmness and good order with which the millions of 
 voters met and mingled at the polls, give strong assurance of 
 this. Not only all those who supported the Union ticket, so called, 
 but a great majority of the opposing party also, may be fairly 
 claimed to entertain, and to be actuated by, the same purpose. 
 It is an unanswerable argument to this effect, that no candidate 
 for any office whatever, high or low, has ventured to seek votes 
 on the avowal that he was for giving up the Union. There have 
 been much impugning of motives, and much heated controversy 
 as to the proper means and best mode of advancing the Union 
 cause; but on the distinct issue of Union or no Union, the poli- 
 ticians have shown their instinctive knowledge that there is no 
 diversity among the people. In affording the people the fair 
 opportunity of showing, one to another and to the world, this 
 firmness and unanimity of purpose, the election has been of vast 
 value to the national cause. 
 
 The election has exhibited another fact not less valuable to 
 be known — the fact that we do not approach exhaustion in the 
 most important branch of national resources — that of living men. 
 While it is melancholy to reflect that the war has filled so many 
 graves, and carried mourning to so many hearts, it is some relief 
 to know that, compared with the surviving, the fallen have been 
 so few. While corps, and divisions, and brigades, and regiments 
 have formed, and fought, and dwindled, and gone out of exist- 
 ence, a great majority of the men who composed them are still 
 living. The same is true of the naval service. The election re- 
 turns prove this. So many voters could not else be found. The 
 States regularly holding elections, both now and four years ago, 
 to wit, California, Connecticut, Delaware, Illinois, Indiana, Iowa, 
 Kentucky, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, Michigan, Minne- 
 sota, Missouri, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New York, Ohio, 
 Oregon, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, Vermont, West Virginia, 
 and Wisconsin cast 3,982,011 votes now, against 3,870,222 cast 
 
HIS SPEECHES AND WRITINGS 787 
 
 then; showing an aggregate now of 3,982,011. To this is to be 
 added 33,762 cast now in the new States of Kansas and Nevada, 
 which States did not vote in 1860, thus swelling the aggregate 
 to 4,015,773, and the net increase during the three years and a 
 half of war to 145,551. A table is appended showing particulars. 
 To this again should be added the number of all soldiers in the 
 field from Massachusetts, Rhode Island, New Jersey, Delaware, 
 Indiana, Illinois, and California, who, by the laws of those States, 
 could not vote away from their homes, and which number can- 
 not be less than 90,000. Nor yet is this all. The number in or- 
 ganized Territories is triple now what it was four years ago, 
 while thousands, white and black, join us as the national arms 
 press back the insurgent lines. So much is shown, affirmatively 
 and negatively, by the election. It is not material to inquire how 
 the increase has been produced, or to show that it would have 
 been greater but for the war, which is probably true. The im- 
 portant fact remains demonstrated, that we have more men now 
 than we had when the war began; that we are not exhausted, nor 
 in process of exhaustion; that we are gaining strength, and may, 
 if need be, maintain the contest indefinitely. This as to men. Ma- 
 terial resources are now more complete and abundant than ever. 
 The national resources, then, are unexhausted, and, as we be- 
 lieve, inexhaustible. The public purpose to re-establish and main- 
 tain the national authority is unchanged, and, as we believe, un- 
 changeable. The manner of continuing the effort remains to 
 choose. On careful consideration of all the evidence accessible 
 it seems to me that no attempt at negotiation with the insurgent 
 leader could result in any good. He would accept nothing short 
 of severance of the Union — precisely what we will not and can- 
 not give. His declarations to this effect are explicit and oft- 
 repeated. He does not attempt to deceive us. He affords us no 
 excuse to deceive ourselves. He cannot voluntarily reaccept the 
 Union; we cannot voluntarily yield it. Between him and us the 
 issue is distinct, simple, and inflexible. It is an issue which can 
 only be tried by war, and decided by victory. If we yield, we are 
 beaten; if the Southern people fail him, he is beaten. Either way, 
 it would be the victory and defeat following war. What is true, 
 however, of him who heads the insurgent cause, is not neces- 
 
788 ABRAHAM LINCOLN: 
 
 sarily true of those who follow. Although he cannot reaccept 
 the Union, they can. Some of them, we know, already desire 
 peace and reunion. The number of such may increase. They can, 
 at any moment, have peace simply by laying down their arms 
 and submitting to the national authority under the Constitution. 
 After so much, the government could not, if it would, maintain 
 war against them. The loyal people would not sustain or allow it. 
 If questions should remain, we would adjust them by the peace- 
 ful means of legislation, conference, courts, and votes, operating 
 only in constitutional and lawful channels. Some certain, and 
 other possible, questions are, and would be, beyond the Ex- 
 ecutive power to adjust; as, for instance, the admission of mem- 
 bers into Congress, and whatever might require the appropri- 
 ation of money. The Executive power itself would be greatly 
 diminished by the cessation of actual war. Pardons and remis- 
 sions of forfeitures, however, would still be within Executive 
 control. In what spirit and temper this control would be exer- 
 cised can be fairly judged of by the past. 
 
 A year ago general pardon and amnesty, upon specified 
 terms, were offered to all, except certain designated classes; and, 
 it was, at the same time, made known that the excepted classes 
 were still within contemplation of special clemency. During the 
 year many availed themselves of the general provision, and many 
 more would, only that the signs of bad faith in some led to such 
 precautionary measures as rendered the practical process less 
 easy and certain. During the same time also special pardons have 
 been granted to individuals of the excepted classes, and no vol- 
 untary application has been denied. Thus, practically, the door 
 has been, for a full year, open to all, except such as were not in 
 condition to make free choice — that is, such as were in custody 
 or under constraint. It is still so open to all. But the time may 
 come — probably will come — when public duty shall demand that 
 it be closed; and that, in lieu, more rigorous measures than here- 
 tofore shall be adopted. 
 
 In presenting the abandonment of armed resistance to the 
 national authority on the part of the insurgents, as the only 
 indispensable condition to ending the war on the part of the 
 
HIS SPEECHES AND WRITINGS 789 
 
 government, I retract nothing heretofore said as to slavery. I 
 repeat the declaration made a year ago, that "while I remain in 
 my present position I shall not attempt to retract or modify the 
 emancipation proclamation, nor shall I return to slavery any per- 
 son who is free by the terms of that proclamation, or by any of 
 the Acts of Congress." If the people should, by whatever mode 
 or means, make it an Executive duty to re-enslave such persons, 
 another, and not I, must be their instrument to perform it. 
 
 In stating a single condition of peace, I mean simply to say 
 that the war will cease on the part of the government, whenever 
 it shall have ceased on the part of those who began it. 
 
 Abraham Lincoln 
 
 December 6, 1864 
 
 LETTER TO GENERAL W. T. SHERMAN 
 DECEMBER 26, 1864 
 
 (Original sent by Gen. Logan) 
 
 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 being a suc- 
 cess, the honor is all yours; for I believe none of us went further 
 than to acquiesce. And taking the work of Gen. 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 advan- 
 
790 ABRAHAM LINCOLN: 
 
 tages; 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 Gen. Grant and yourself to decide. 
 
 Please make my grateful acknowledgments to your whole 
 army — officers and men. 
 
 Yours very truly 
 
 A. Lincoln 
 
 The superscription and the signature of this manu- 
 script are in Lincoln's handwriting. Presumably the orig- 
 inal went directly to General Sherman (as indicated in 
 the superscription) without the knowledge of Secretary 
 Stanton, and this certified copy was sent to the War 
 Department for the Secretary's files. 
 
 LETTER TO GENERAL U. S. GRANT 
 JANUARY 19, 1865 
 
 Executive Mansion, 
 Washington, Jan. 19, 1865. 
 Lieut. General Grant: 
 
 Please read and answer this letter as though I was not Pres- 
 ident, 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 qualified to hold. 
 Could he, without embarrassment to you, or detriment to the 
 service; go into your military family with some nominal rank, I, 
 
HIS SPEECHES AND WRITINGS 791 
 
 and not the public, furnishing his necessary means? 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 
 
 TERMS FOR GENERAL R. E. LEE'S CAPITULATION 
 MARCH 3, 1865 
 
 March 3, 1865 
 Lieutenant General Grant 
 
 The President directs me to say to you that he wishes you 
 to have no conference with General Lee unless it be for the 
 capitulation of Gen. Lee's army, or on some minor, and purely, 
 military matter. He instructs me to say that you are not to decide, 
 discuss, or confer upon any political question. Such questions 
 the President holds in his own hands; and will submit them to 
 no military conferences or conventions. Meantime you are to 
 press to the utmost, your military advantages. 
 
 Edwin M. Stanton 
 Secretary of War 
 
 The manuscript of this item is in Lincoln's hand- 
 writing, but bears Stanton's signature. Lincoln drew up 
 the terms to be forwarded through the proper channels 
 of the War Department. 
 
792 ABRAHAM LINCOLN 
 
 SECOND INAUGURAL ADDRESS 
 MARCH 4, 1865 
 
 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 depends, is as well known 
 to the public as to myself; and it is, I trust, reasonably satisfac- 
 tory 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 inaugeral [sic] ad- 
 dress was being delivered from this place, devoted altogether 
 to saving the Union without war, insurgent agents were in the 
 city seeking to destroy it without war — seeking to dissole [sic] 
 the Union, and divide effects, by negotiation. Both parties depre- 
 cated 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 the 
 Southern part of it. These slaves constituted a peculiar and pow- 
 erful interest. All knew that this interest was, somehow, the 
 cause of the war. To strengthen, perpetuate, and extend this in- 
 terest was the object for which the insurgents would rend the 
 Union, even by war; while the government claimed no right to 
 do more than to restrict the territorial enlargement of it. Neither 
 party expected for the war, the magnitude, or the duration, which 
 
HIS SPEECHES AND WRITINGS 793 
 
 it has already attained. Neither anticipated 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 funda- 
 mental and astounding. 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 
 assistance 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 offences! for it must needs be that offences come; 
 but woe to that man by whom the offence cometh!" If we shall 
 suppose that American Slavery is one of those offences 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 offence came, shall we discern 
 therein any departure from those divine attributes which the be- 
 lievers 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 bond-man'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 
 be said "the judgments of the Lord, are true and righteous al- 
 together" 
 
 With malice 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 nation'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. 
 
794 ABRAHAM LINCOLN 
 
 LETTER TO THURLOW WEED 
 MARCH 15, 1865 
 
 Executive Mansion, 
 Washington, March 15, 1865. 
 Thurlow Weed, Esq 
 My dear Sir. 
 
 Every one likes a compliment. Thank you for yours on my 
 little notification speech, and on the recent Inaugeral [sic] Ad- 
 dress. I expect the latter to wear as well as — perhaps better 
 than — anything I have produced; but I believe it is not immedi- 
 ately 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. 
 
 Yours truly 
 
 A. Lincoln 
 
 ADDRESS TO THE 140th INDIANA REGIMENT 
 MARCH 17, 1865 
 
 Fellow Citizens — 
 
 It will be but a very few words that I shall undertake to say. 
 I was born in Kentucky, raised in Indiana and lived in Illinois. 
 And now I am here, where it is my business to care equally for 
 
HIS SPEECHES AND WRITINGS 795 
 
 the good people of all the States. I am glad to see an Indiana 
 regiment on this day able to present the captured flag to the 
 Governor of Indiana. I am not disposed, in saying this, to make 
 a distinction between the States, for all have done equally well. 
 There are but few views or aspects of this great war upon which 
 I have not said- or written something whereby my own opinions 
 might be known. But there is one — the recent attempt of our 
 erring brethren, as they are sometimes called — to employ the 
 negro to fight for them. I have neither written nor made a 
 speech on that subject, because that was their business, not 
 mine; and if I had a wish upon the subject I had not the power 
 to introduce it, or make it effective. The great question with 
 them was, whether the negro, being put into the army, would 
 fight for them. I do not know, and therefore cannot decide. They 
 ought to know better than we. I have in my lifetime heard many 
 arguments why the negroes ought to be slaves; but if they fight 
 for those who would keep them in slavery it will be a better 
 argument than any I have yet heard. He who will fight for that 
 ought to be a slave. They have concluded at last to take one out 
 of four of the slaves, and put them in the army; and that one 
 out of the four who will fight to keep the others in slavery ought 
 to be a slave himself unless he is killed in a fight. While I have 
 often said that all men ought to be free, yet I would allow those 
 colored persons to be slaves who want to be; and next to them 
 those white persons who argue in favor of making other people 
 slaves. I am in favor of giving an opportunity to such white men 
 to try it on for themselves. I will say one thing in regard to the 
 negro being employed to fight for them. I do know he cannot 
 fight and stay at home and make bread too — and as one is about 
 as important as the other to them, I don't care which they do. 
 I am rather in favor of having them try them as soldiers. They 
 lack one vote of doing that, and I wish I could send my vote 
 over the river so that I might cast it in favor of allowing the 
 negro to fight. But they cannot fight and work both. We must 
 now see the bottom of the enemy's resources. They will stand 
 out as long as they can, and if the negro will fight for them, they 
 must allow him to fight. They have drawn upon their last branch 
 
796 ABRAHAM LINCOLN: 
 
 of resources. And we can now see the bottom. I am glad to see 
 the end so near at hand. I have said now more than I intended, 
 and will therefore bid you goodby. 
 
 TELEGRAM TO GENERAL U. S. GRANT 
 APRIL 2; 1865 
 
 Head Quarters Armies of the United States, 
 City-Point, April, 2, 8/15 p.m. 1865. 
 
 Lieut. General Grant. 
 
 Allow me to tender to you, and all with you, the nations 
 grateful thanks for this additional, and magnificent success. At 
 your kind suggestion, I think I will visit you to-morrow. 
 
 A. Lincoln 
 
 LAST PUBLIC ADDRESS 
 APRIL 11, 1865 
 
 We meet this evening, not in sorrow, but in gladness of 
 heart. The evacuation of Petersburg and Richmond, and the sur- 
 render of the principal insurgent army, give hope of a righteous 
 and speedy peace whose joyous expression can not 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 
 prepared, and will be duly promulgated. Nor must those whose 
 harder part gives us the cause of rejoicing, be overlooked. Their 
 honors must not be parcelled out with others. I myself was near 
 the front, and had the high pleasure of transmitting much of 
 
HIS SPEECHES AND WRITINGS 797 
 
 the good news to you; but no part of the honor, for plan or execu- 
 tion, is mine. To Gen. Grant, his skilful officers, and brave men, 
 all belongs. The gallant Navy stood ready, but was not in reach 
 to take active part. 
 
 By these recent successes the re-inauguration of the national 
 authority — reconstruction — which has had a large share of 
 thought from the first, is pressed much more closely upon our at- 
 tention. It is fraught with great difficulty. Unlike a case of a war 
 between independent nations, there is no authorized organ for 
 us to treat with. No one man has authority to give up the rebel- 
 lion for any other man. We simply must begin with, and mould 
 from, disorganized and discordant elements. Nor is it a small ad- 
 ditional embarrassment that we, the loyal people, differ among 
 ourselves as to the mode, manner, and means of reconstruction. 
 
 As a general rule, I abstain from reading the reports of at- 
 tacks upon myself, wishing not to be provoked by that to which 
 I can not properly offer an answer. In spite of this precaution, 
 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. In this I have done just 
 so much as, and no more than, the public knows. In the Annual 
 Message of Dec. 1863 and accompanying Proclamation, I pre- 
 sented a plan of re-construction (as the phrase goes) which, I 
 promised, if adopted by any State, should be acceptable to, and 
 sustained by, the Executive government of the nation. I dis- 
 tinctly stated that this was not the only plan which might pos- 
 sibly be acceptable; and I also distinctly protested that the Ex- 
 ecutive 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 ap- 
 proved by every member of it. One of them suggested that I 
 should then, and in that connection, apply the Emancipation 
 Proclamation to the theretofore excepted parts of Virginia and 
 Louisiana; that I should drop the suggestion about apprentice- 
 ship for freed-people, and that I should omit the protest against 
 my own power, in regard to the admission of members to Con- 
 gress; but even he approved every part and parcel of the plan 
 which has since been employed or touched by the action of 
 
798 ABRAHAM LINCOLN: 
 
 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 apprenticeship for 
 f reed-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 Cabinet fully approved the 
 plan. The message went to Congress, and I received many com- 
 mendations of the plan, written and verbal; and not a single objec- 
 tion to it, from any professed 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, 1 had corresponded with different persons, 
 supposed to be interested, seeking a reconstruction of a State gov- 
 ernment for Louisiana. When the message of 1863, with the plan 
 before mentioned, reached New-Orleans, Gen. Banks wrote me 
 that he was confident the people, with his military co-operation, 
 would reconstruct, substantially on that plan. I wrote him, and 
 some of them to try it; they tried it, and the result is known. Such 
 only has been my 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 keep- 
 ing it is adverse to the public 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 on 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 expres- 
 sion 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 abstraction. 
 
HIS SPEECHES AND WRITINGS 799 
 
 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 
 believe it is not only possible, but in fact, easier to do this, with- 
 out 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 immaterial whether they had 
 ever been abroad. Let us all join in doing the acts necessary 
 to restoring the proper practical 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 as- 
 sistance, 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 fifty, thirty, or even twenty thousand, instead of 
 only about twelve thousand, 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 government, as it 
 stands, is quite all that is desirable. The question 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 sustaining, 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 power of the State, held elections, organized 
 a State government, adopted a free-state constitution, giving the 
 benefit of public schools equally to black and white, and em- 
 powering 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 
 
800 ABRAHAM LINCOLN: 
 
 all the things the nation wants — and they ask the nations recogni- 
 tion and it's 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 men "You are 
 worthless, or worse — we will neither help you, nor be helped by 
 you." To the blacks we say "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 con- 
 tents 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 rela- 
 tions with the Union, I have, so far, been unable to perceive it. 
 If, on the contrary, we recognize, and sustain the new govern- 
 ment of Louisiana the converse of all this is made true. We en- 
 courage the hearts, and nerve the arms of the twelve thousand to 
 adhere to their work, and argue for it, and proselyte 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 in- 
 spired with vigilance, and energy, 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 backward over them? Concede that the new govern- 
 ment 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 
 Constitution. To meet this proposition, it has been argued that 
 no more than three fourths of those States which have not at- 
 tempted 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 per- 
 sistently 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 dis- 
 carding 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, 
 
HIS SPEECHES AND WRITINGS 801 
 
 and such important and sudden changes occur in the same state; 
 and, withal, so new and unprecedented is the whole case, that no 
 exclusive, and inflexible plan can safely be prescribed as to de- 
 tails and colatterals [sic]. Such exclusive, and inflexible plan, 
 would surely become a new entanglement. Important principles 
 may, and must, be inflexible. 
 
 In the present "situation* as the phrase goes, it may be my 
 duty to make some new announcement to the people of the South. 
 I am considering, and shall not fail to act, when satisfied that 
 action will be proper. 
 
 Upon returning to Washington after Appomattox, 
 Lincoln found the city in an uproar of celebration. On 
 the night of April 10, a crowd came to serenade, expect- 
 ing to he addressed as they had been many times be- 
 fore. Lincoln declined but promised to prepare a speech 
 for the following night if they would return. 
 
 One suspects that many were disappointed in that 
 audience on the next night, for Lincoln spoke not in the 
 vein of celebration but of heavy conviction. The problems 
 of reconstruction were vast and he was far ahead of his 
 audience in thinking of the future. Congress had not 
 approved of reconstruction as carried out under Lin- 
 coln's war powers in Louisiana. There was not enough 
 punishment in it to suit some of the more radical mem- 
 bers. It is clear from Lincoln's analysis of the problem 
 in this Address that he is beginning the attempt to edu- 
 cate the public to the task ahead, in order that he may 
 get support for his program in Congress, now that his 
 war powers are nearing their termination. 
 
802 ABRAHAM LINCOLN 
 
 TELEGRAM TO GENERAL GODFREY WEITZEL 
 APRIL 12, 1865 
 
 "Cypher" 
 
 Office U. S. Military Telegraph, 
 War Department, 
 Washington, D. C. April 12, 1865. 
 Major General Weitzel 
 Richmond, Va 
 
 I have just seen Judge Campbell's letter to you of the 7th. 
 He assumes as appears to me that I have called the insurgent 
 Legislature of Virginia together, as the rightful Legislature of the 
 State, to settle all differences with the United States. I have 
 done no such thing. I spoke of them not as a Legislature, but 
 as "the gentlemen who have acted as the Legislature of Virginia 
 in support of the rebellion/' I did this on purpose to exclude the 
 assumption that I was recognizing them as a rightful body. I 
 dealt with them as men having power de facto to do a specific 
 thing to wit, "to withdraw the Virginia troops, and other support 
 from resistance to the General Government," for which in the 
 paper handed Judge Campbell I promised a specific equivalent, 
 to wit, a remission to the people of the State, except in certain 
 cases, the confiscation of their property. I meant this and no 
 more. In as much however as Judge Campbell misconstrues this 
 and is still pressing for an armistice, contrary to the explicit 
 statement of the paper I gave him; and particularly as Gen. 
 Grant has since captured the Virginia troops, so that giving a 
 consideration for their withdrawal is no longer applicable, let 
 my letter to you, and the paper to Judge Campbell both be with- 
 drawn or countermanded and he be notified of it. Do not now 
 allow them to assemble; but if any have come allow them safe- 
 return to their homes. 
 
 A. Lincoln 
 
HIS SPEECHES AND WRITINGS 803 
 
 This is the last piece of writing of any consequence 
 which Lincoln did. Reconstruction was under way. Mis- 
 understandings were already beginning to complicate 
 the process. In his usual, calm way Lincoln analyzes 
 the circumstances and gets on with the job, to the prac- 
 tical end of restoring Virginia to the Union. To leave 
 him thus, rather than with his "Last Public Address," 
 seems appropriate. 
 
SOURCES AND BIBLIOGRAPHY 
 
SOURCES AND BIBLIOGRAPHY 
 
 SOURCES OF TEXT 
 
 TO THE PEOPLE OF SANGAMO COUNTY: POLITICAL ANNOUNCEMENT 
 
 March 9, 1832. Sangamo Journal, March 15, 1832 
 
 announcement of political views in Sangamo Journal — June 13, 
 1836. Sangamo Journal, June 18, 1836 
 
 letter to colonel Robert allen — June 21, 1836. Original, Illinois 
 State Historical Library 
 
 letter to miss mary owens — December 13, 1836. Photostat, Lincoln 
 Memorial University 
 
 speech in the Illinois legislature — January 11, 1837. Sangamo 
 Journal, January 28, 1837 
 
 letter to miss mary owens — May 7, 1837. Photostat, The Abraham 
 Lincoln Association 
 
 letter to miss mary owens — August 16, 1837. Photostat, The Abraham 
 Lincoln Association 
 
 the perpetuation of our political institutions: address delivered 
 before the young men's lyceum of springfield, illinois jan- 
 uary 27, 1838. Sangamo Journal, February 3, 1838 
 
 letter to mrs. o. h. browning — April 1, 1838. Photostat, Lincoln Me- 
 morial University 
 
 THE SUB-TREASURY: SPEECH AT A POLITICAL DISCUSSION IN THE HALL OF 
 THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES AT SPRINGFIELD, ILLINOIS Decem- 
 ber [26], 1839. Pamphlet, Fish 518 [February ? 1840]; Sangamo 
 Journal, March 6, 1840 
 
 letter to john t. stuart — January 20, 1841. Photostat, The Abraham 
 Lincoln Association 
 
 807 
 
808 ABRAHAM LINCOLN: 
 
 letter to john t. stuart — January 23, 1841. Photostat, The Abraham 
 
 Lincoln Association 
 letter to joshua f. speed — June 19, 1841. Original owned by Mr. 
 
 Oliver R. Barrett 
 letter to miss mary speed — September 27, 1841. Photostat, The 
 
 Abraham Lincoln Association 
 letter to joshua f. speed — January 3, 1842. Original owned by Mr. 
 
 Oliver R. Barrett 
 letter to joshua f. speed — February 3, 1842. Original owned by Mr. 
 
 Oliver R. Barrett 
 eulogy on benjamin Ferguson — February 8, 1842. Sangamo Journal, 
 
 February 11, 1842 
 letter to joshua f. speed — February 13, 1842. Original owned by 
 
 Mr. Oliver R. Barrett 
 
 TEMPERANCE ADDRESS DELIVERED BEFORE THE SPRINGFIELD WASHINGTON 
 
 temperance SOCD2TY — February 22, 1842. Sangamo Journal, March 
 
 26, 1842 
 letter to joshua f. speed — February 25, 1842. Original owned by Mr. 
 
 Oliver R. Barrett 
 letter to joshua f. speed — February 25, 1842. Original owned by Mr. 
 
 Oliver R. Barrett 
 letter to joshua f. speed — March 27, 1842. Original owned by Mr. 
 
 Oliver R. Barrett 
 letter to joshua f. speed — July 4, 1842. Original owned by Mr. Oliver 
 
 R. Barrett 
 a letter from the lost townships — August 27, 1842. Sangamo Jour- 
 nal, September 2, 1842 
 
 CORRESPONDENCE ABOUT THE LINCOLN-SHIELDS DUEL September 17, 
 
 1842. Sangamo Journal, October 14, 1842 
 
 MEMORANDUM OF INSTRUCTIONS TO E. H. MERRYMAN, LINCOLN^ SECOND 
 
 — September 19, 1842. Sangamo Journal, September 17, 1842 
 
 letter to joshua f. speed — October 5, 1842. Original owned by Mr. 
 Oliver R. Barrett 
 
 letter to james s. irwin — November 2, 1842. Original owned by Mr. 
 Oliver R. Barrett 
 
 letter to samuel d. Marshall — November 11, 1842. Original, Chi- 
 cago Historical Society 
 
 letter to joshua f. speed — March 24, 1843. Original, Illinois State 
 Historical Library 
 
 letter to joshua f. speed — May 18, 1843. Original owned by Mr. 
 Oliver R. Barrett 
 
HIS SPEECHES AND WRITINGS 809 
 
 letter to Williamson durley — October 3, 1845. Original, Illinois 
 State Historical Library 
 
 letter to henry E. dummer — November 18, 1845. Original, Chicago 
 Historical Society 
 
 letter to b. f. james — February 9, 1846. Photostat, The Abraham Lin- 
 coln Association 
 
 remarkable case of arrest for murder — April 15, 1846. Quincy Whig, 
 April 15, 1846 
 
 letter to andrew johnston — April 18, 1846. Nicolay and Hay, editors, 
 Complete Works of Abraham Lincoln, 1905 
 
 religious views: letter to the editor of the Illinois Gazette — 
 August 11, 1846. Illinois Gazette, Lacon, Illinois, August 15, 1846 
 
 letter to Andrew johnston — September 6, 1846. Original, Historical 
 Society of Pennsylvania 
 
 my childhood home i see again — 1846. Original, The Library of Con- 
 gress 
 
 the bear hunt — [1846]. Original, Pierpont Morgan Library 
 
 letter to joshua f. speed — October 22, 1846. Original owned by Mr. 
 Oliver R. Barrett 
 
 letter to wblliam h. herndon — December 12, 1847. Original, Illinois 
 State Historical Library 
 
 resolutions in the united states house of representatives — Decem- 
 ber 22, 1847. Congressional Globe, Thirtieth Congress, First Ses- 
 sion, 1848 
 
 THE WAR WITH MEXICO: SPEECH IN THE UNITED STATES HOUSE OF REPRE- 
 SENTATIVES — January 12, 1848. Congressional Globe, Appendix, 
 Thirtieth Congress, First Session, New Series, 1847-8 
 
 letter to william H. herndon — February 1, 1848. Nicolay and Hay, 
 editors, Complete Works of Abraham Lincoln, 1905 
 
 letter to william h. herndon — February 2, 1848. Original owned by 
 Mr. Oliver R. Barrett 
 
 letter to william h. herndon — February 15, 1848. Photostat, Har- 
 vard University Library 
 
 letter to usher f. linder — March 22, 1848. Original, Illinois State 
 Historical Library 
 
 letter to david Lincoln — March 24, 1848. Photostat, The Abraham 
 Lincoln Association 
 
 UETTER to david Lincoln — April 2, 1848. Photostat, The Abraham 
 Lincoln Association 
 
 letter to mary todd Lincoln — April 16, 1848. Original owned by Mr. 
 Oliver R. Barrett 
 
810 ABRAHAM LINCOLN: 
 
 letter to mary todd Lincoln — June 12, 1848. Photostat, The Abraham 
 
 Lincoln Association 
 letter to mary todd Lincoln — July 2, 1848. Photostat, The Abraham 
 
 Lincoln Association 
 letter to william h. herndon — July 11, 1848. Original owned by Mr. 
 
 Oliver R. Barrett 
 the presidential question: speech in the united states house of 
 
 representatives — July 27, 1848. Congressional Globe, Appendix, 
 
 Thirtieth Congress, First Session, New Series, 1847-8 
 
 LETTERS TO THOMAS LINCOLN AND JOHN D. JOHNSTON — December 24, 
 
 1848. Photostat, The Abraham Lincoln Association 
 letter to william h. herndon — January 5, 1849. Photostat, The 
 
 Abraham Lincoln Association 
 letter to c. u. SCHLATER — January 5, 1849. Photostat, The Abraham 
 
 Lincoln Association 
 letter to c. r. welles — February 20, 1849. Original, Illinois State 
 
 Historical Library 
 letter to joshua f. speed — February 20, 1849. Original, Maine His- 
 torical Society 
 letter to ABRAM bale — February 22, 1850. Original, Illinois State 
 
 Historical Library 
 letter to john d. johnston — Janury 12, 1851. Original owned by Mr. 
 
 Oliver R. Barrett 
 letter to Andrew mc callen — July 4, 1851. Original owned by Mr. 
 
 Oliver R. Barrett 
 letter to john d. johnston — November 4, 1851. Nicolay and Hay, 
 
 editors, Complete Works of Abraham Lincoln, 1905 
 letter to john d. johnston — November 9, 1851. Original, Maine 
 
 Historical Society 
 letter to john d. johnston — November 25, 1851. Photostat, The 
 
 Abraham Lincoln Association 
 
 EULOGY ON HENRY CLAY DELIVERED IN THE STATE HOUSE AT SPRINGFIELD, 
 
 Illinois — July 6, 1852. Illinois Journal, July 21, 1852 
 fragments: on slavery — [July 1, 1854?]. Originals owned by Mr. 
 
 Oliver R. Barrett 
 letter to j. m. palmer — September 7, 1854. Original owned by Mr. 
 
 Oliver R. Barrett 
 the 14th section: an editorial in the Illinois Journal — September 
 
 11, 1854. Illinois Journal, September 11, 1854 
 
 THE REPEAL OF THE MISSOURI COMPROMISE AND THE PROPRIETY OF ITS 
 RESTORATION: SPEECH AT PEORIA, ILLINOIS, IN REPLY TO SENATOR 
 
HIS SPEECHES AND WRITINGS 811 
 
 douglas — October 16, 1854. Illinois Journal, October 21, 23, 24, 
 
 25, 26, 27, 28, 1854 
 letter to E. b. washburne — December 14, 1854. Original, Illinois 
 
 State Historical Library 
 letter to E. b. washburne — February 9, 1855. Original, Illinois State 
 
 Historical Library 
 letter to owen lovejoy — August 11, 1855. Original, Henry E. Hunt- 
 ington Library 
 letter to george Robertson — August 15, 1855. Original, The Library 
 
 of Congress 
 letter to joshua f. speed — August 24, 1855. Photostat, The Abraham 
 
 Lincoln Association 
 letter to isham reavis — November 5, 1855. Photostat, The Abraham 
 
 Lincoln Association 
 letter to r. p. morgan — February 13, 1856. Facsimile, Buffalo, 
 
 Rochester and Pittsburg Rw. Employees' Magazine, February, 1916 
 
 FREMONT, BUCHANAN, AND THE EXTENSION OF SLAVERY: SPEECH DELIV- 
 ERED at kalamazoo, Michigan — August 27, 1856. Detroit Daily 
 Advertiser, August 29, 1856 
 
 letter to julian m. STURTEVANT — September 27, 1856. Photostat, 
 The Abraham Lincoln Association 
 
 sectionalism — [October 1?], 1856. Photostat, The Abraham Lincoln 
 Association 
 
 THE DRED SCOTT DECISION: SPEECH AT SPRINGFIELD, ILLINOIS — June 26, 
 
 1857. Illinois State Journal, June 29, 1857, and Pamphlet Reprint, 
 
 Oakleaf 818 
 letter to e. b. washburne — April 26, 1858. Original, Illinois State 
 
 Historical Library 
 letter to e. b. washburne — May 15, 1858. Original, Illinois State 
 
 Historical Library 
 letter to jediah f. Alexander — May 15, 1858. Photostat, The Abraham 
 
 Lincoln Association 
 letter to e. b. washburne — May 27, 1858. Original, Illinois State 
 
 Historical Library 
 letter to samuel Wilkinson — June 10, 1858. Original, Illinois State 
 
 Historical Library 
 
 A HOUSE DIVIDED: SPEECH DELIVERED AT SPRINGFIELD, ILLINOIS, AT THE 
 CLOSE OF THE REPUBLICAN STATE CONVENTION — June 16, 1858. 
 
 Illinois Journal, June 18, 1858; Political Debates, Columbus: 
 Follett, Foster and Company, 1860 
 
812 ABRAHAM LINCOLN: 
 
 letter to joseph MEDiLL — June 25, 1858. Photostat, The Abraham 
 
 Lincoln Association 
 letter to james w. somers — June 25, 1858. Photostat, The Abraham 
 
 Lincoln Association 
 speech in reply to douglas at Chicago, Illinois — July 10, 1858. 
 
 Chicago Daily Press and Tribune, July 12, 1858; Political Debates, 
 
 Columbus: Follett, Foster and Company, 1860 
 
 SPEECH IN REPLY TO DOUGLAS AT SPRINGFIELD, ILLINOIS July 17, 1858. 
 
 Illinois State Journal, July 20, 1858; Political Debates, Columbus: 
 
 Follett, Foster and Company, 1860 
 letter to john matheRs — July 20, 1858. Facsimile, Jacksonville Daily 
 
 Journal, Jacksonville, Illinois, February 13, 1909 
 letter to henry ASBURY — July 31, 1858. Original owned by Mr. 
 
 Oliver R. Barrett 
 fragment: on slavery — [August 1, 1858?]. Facsimile, The Lincoln 
 
 National Life Foundation 
 letter to henry e. dummer — August 5, 1858. Original, Chicago 
 
 Historical Society 
 first debate, at Ottawa, Illinois — August 21, 1858. Political Debates, 
 
 Columbus: Follett, Foster and Company, 1860; The Lincoln 
 
 Douglas Debates, editor, E. E. Sparks, 1908 
 fragment: speech at edwardsville, Illinois — September 11, 1858. 
 
 Alton Courier, Alton, Illinois, September 16, 1858 
 letter to m. p. sweet — September 16, 1858. Original, Illinois State 
 
 Historical Library 
 verses: to rosa — September 28, 1858. Photostat, The Abraham Lincoln 
 
 Association 
 verses: to linnie — September 30, 1858. Photostat, The Abraham 
 
 Lincoln Association 
 fragment: on slavery — [October 1, 1858?]. Photostat, The Abraham 
 
 Lincoln Association 
 letter to j. n. rrown — October 18, 1858. Original, Henry E. Hunting- 
 ton Library 
 
 LAST SPEECH IN SPRINGFIELD, ILLINOIS, IN THE CAMPAIGN OF 1858 — 
 
 [October 30, 1858]. Original owned by Mr. Oliver R. Barrett 
 letter to henry asbury — November 19, 1858. Original owned by Mr. 
 
 Oliver R. Barrett 
 letter to doctor c. h. ray — November 20, 1858. Original owned by 
 
 Mr. Oliver R. Barrett 
 notes of an argument — [December ?], 1858. Original owned by Mr. 
 
 Oliver R. Barrett 
 
HIS SPEECHES AND WRITINGS 813 
 
 letter to james t. thornton — December 2, 1858. Photostat, The 
 Abraham Lincoln Association 
 
 letter to lyman trumrull — December 11, 1858. Photostat, The 
 Abraham Lincoln Association 
 
 letter to h. l. pierce and others — April 6, 1859. Original, Brown 
 University Library 
 
 letter to t. j. pickett — April 16, 1859. Original owned by Mr. Oliver 
 R. Barrett 
 
 letter to salmon Portland chase — June 9, 1859. Original, The His- 
 torical Society of Pennsylvania 
 
 letter to salmon Portland chase — June 20, 1859. Original, The His- 
 torical Society of Pennsylvania 
 
 AGRICULTURE: ANNUAL ADDRESS REFORE THE WISCONSIN STATE AGRICUL- 
 TURAL society at Milwaukee, Wisconsin — September 30, 1859. 
 Chicago Daily Press and Tribune, October 1, 1859 
 
 WRITTEN RY LINCOLN IN THE AUTOGRAPH ALRUM OF MARY DELAHAY — 
 
 December 7, 1859. Photostat, The Abraham Lincoln Association 
 letter to william kellogg — December 11, 1859. Original owned by 
 Mr. Oliver R. Barrett 
 
 LETTER TO G. W. DOLE, G. S. HURRARD, AND W. H. RROWN December 
 
 14, 1859. Original, Chicago Historical Society 
 letter to j. w. fell inclosing AUTORiOGRAPHY — December 20, 1859. 
 
 Photostat, The Abraham Lincoln Association 
 fragment: the constitution and the union — [I860?]. Original owned 
 
 by Mr. Oliver R. Barrett 
 letter to m. w. Packard — February 10, 1860. Original, Illinois State 
 
 Historical Library 
 letter to o. p. hall, j. r. fullinwider, and u. f. correll — February 
 
 14, 1860. Original, The University of Chicago Library 
 address at cooper institute, new york — February 27, 1860. Revised 
 
 edition, Charles C. Nott and Cephas Brainerd, editors, 1860 
 letter to mark w. delahay — March 16, 1860. Photostat, The Abraham 
 
 Lincoln Association 
 letter to F. c. HERRURGER — April 7, 1860. Original owned by Mr. 
 
 Oliver R. Barrett 
 letter to lyman trumrull — April 29, 1860. Photostat, The Abraham 
 
 Lincoln Association 
 letter to george ashmun — May 23, 1860. Photostat, The Abraham 
 
 Lincoln Association 
 
 LETTER TO SAMUEL HAYCRAFT AND AUTORIOGRAPHY May 28, 1860. 
 
 Photostat, The Abraham Lincoln Association 
 
814 ABRAHAM LINCOLN: 
 
 letter to charles c. nott — May 31, 1860. G. H. Putnam, Abraham 
 Lincoln: The Peoples Leader, 1909 
 
 SHORT AUTOBIOGRAPHY WRITTEN FOR THE CAMPAIGN OF 1860— June [1?], 
 
 1860. Nicolay and Hay, editors, Complete Works of Abraham 
 
 Lincoln, 1905 
 letter to samuel galloway — June 19, 1860. Original, Illinois State 
 
 Historical Library 
 letter to Abraham jonas — July 21, 1860. Photostat, The Abraham 
 
 Lincoln Association 
 letter to george latham — July 22, 1860. Photostat, The Abraham 
 
 Lincoln Association 
 letter to charles c. nott — September 22, 1860. G. H. Putnam, 
 
 Abraham Lincoln: The People's Leader, 1909 
 letter to mrs. m. j. green — September 22, 1860. Photostat, The 
 
 Abraham Lincoln Association 
 letter to miss grace bedell — October 19, 1860. Photostat, The 
 
 Abraham Lincoln Association 
 letter to george t. m. davis — October 27, 1860. Original, Illinois 
 
 State Historical Library 
 letter to h. j. Raymond — November 28, 1860. Original, Illinois State 
 
 Historical Library 
 letter to WILLIAM kellogg — December 11, 1860. Original owned by 
 
 Mr. Oliver R. Barrett 
 letter to john d. defrees — December 18, 1860. Photostat, The Abra- 
 ham Lincoln Association 
 letter to a. h. Stephens — December 22, 1860. Photostat, The Abraham 
 
 Lincoln Association 
 farewell address at springfteld, Illinois — February 11, 1861. Nicolay 
 
 and Hay, editors, Complete Works of Abraham Lincoln, 1905 
 speech at indianopolis, Indiana — February 11, 1861. Cincinnati Daily 
 
 Commercial, February 13, 1861; New York Daily Tribune, Febru- 
 ary 13, 1861 
 address to Germans at Cincinnati, ohio — February 12, 1861. New 
 
 York Daily Tribune, February 16, 1861 
 address to the senate of new jersey — February 21, 1861. New York 
 
 Daily Tribune, February 22, 1861 
 address to the assembly of new jersey — February 21, 1861. New 
 
 York Daily Tribune, February 22, 1861; Illinois State Journal, 
 
 February 22, 1861 
 
HIS SPEECHES AND WRITINGS 815 
 
 ADDRESS IN INDEPENDENCE HALL, PHILADELPHIA — February 22, 1861. 
 
 New York Daily Tribune, February 23, 1861 
 first inaugural address — March 4, 1861. Photostat of final proofsheets, 
 
 The Lincoln National Life Foundation 
 reply to secretary seward's memorandum — April 1, 1861. Nicolay 
 
 and Hay, editors, Complete Works of Abraham Lincoln, 1905 
 letter to colonel e. e. Ellsworth — April 15, 1861. Photostat, 
 
 The Abraham Lincoln Association 
 letter to colonel e. e. Ellsworth's parents — May 25, 1861. Fac- 
 simile, F. H. Meserve, Lincoln's Ellsworth Letter, privately 
 
 printed, New York, 1916 
 message to congress in special session — July 4, 1861. Congressional 
 
 Globe, Appendix, Thirty-Seventh Congress, First Session 
 proclamation of a national fast-day — August 12, 1861. Original, 
 
 The National Archives 
 
 LETTER TO GOVERNOR BERIAH MAGOFFIN — August 24, 1861. Original, 
 
 Illinois State Historical Library 
 letter to o. h. browning — September 22, 1861. Original, Illinois 
 
 State Historical Library 
 letter to major [g. d. ?] ramsay — October 17, 1861. Original owned 
 
 by Mr. Oliver R. Barrett 
 annual message to congress — December 3, 1861. Original, Division 
 
 of Manuscripts, The Library of Congress, and for missing pages 
 
 Congressional Globe, Appendix, Thirty-Seventh Congress, Second 
 
 Session 
 letter to mrs. Susannah weathers — December 4, 1861. Original 
 
 owned by Mr. Oliver R. Barrett 
 telegram to general d. c. buell — January 4, 1862. Photostat, The 
 
 Abraham Lincoln Association 
 letter to general d. c. buell — January 6, 1862. Original owned by 
 
 Mr. Oliver R. Barrett 
 letter to general a. e. burnsdde — January 28, 1862. Original, Illinois 
 
 State Historical Library 
 letter to general g. b. mc clellan — April 9, 1862. Original, Drexel 
 
 Institute of Technology 
 
 LETTER TO THE SENATE AND HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES April 16, 1862. 
 
 Original owned by Mr. Oliver R. Barrett 
 
 LETTER TO GENERAL G. B. MC CLELLAN May 9, 1862. Photostat, The 
 
 Abraham Lincoln Association 
 telegram to general g. b. mc clellan — May 28, 1862. Original, 
 Brown University Library 
 
816 ABRAHAM LINCOLN: 
 
 telegram to general g. b. mc clellan — June 28, 1862. Original, 
 
 Illinois State Historical Library 
 telegram to general g. b. mc clellan — July 1, 1862. Original, The 
 
 New York Public Library 
 letter to general g. b. mc clellan — July 2, 1862. Original, Illinois 
 
 State Historical Library 
 telegram to general g. b. mc clellan — July 3, 1862. Original, Illinois 
 
 State Historical Library 
 telegram to general g. b. mc clellan — July 5, 1862. Original, Illinois 
 
 State Historical Library 
 letter to general g. b. mc clellan — July 13, 1862. Original, Illinois 
 
 State Historical Library 
 letter to cuthbert bullitt — July 28, 1862. Nicolay and Hay, editors, 
 
 Complete Works of Abraham Lincoln, 1905 
 letter to john m. clay — August 9, 1862. Photostat, The Abraham Lin- 
 coln Association 
 letter to horace greeley — August 22, 1862. Original, Wadsworth 
 
 Atheneum, Hartford, Connecticut 
 telegram to general g. b. mc clellan — September 15, 1862. Original, 
 
 Illinois State Historical Library 
 testimonial for doctor isachar zacharte — September 22, 1862. 
 
 Original owned by Mr. Oliver R. Barrett 
 letter to john ross — September 25, 1862. Photostat, The Abraham 
 
 Lincoln Association 
 meditation on the divine will — September [30?], 1862. Nicolay and 
 
 Hay, editors, Complete Works of Abraham Lincoln, 1905 
 
 REMARKS TO THE ARMY OF THE POTOMAC AT FREDERICK, MARYLAND 
 
 October 4, 1862. New York Daily Tribune, October 6, 1862 
 letter to general g. b. mc clellan — October 13, 1862. Nicolay and 
 
 Hay, editors, Complete Works of Abraham Lincoln, 1905 
 telegram to general g. b. mc clellan— October 24, 1862. Original, 
 
 Illinois State Historical Library 
 telegram to general g. b. mc clellan — October 27, 1862. Original, 
 
 Illinois State Historical Library 
 letter to general carl schurz — November 10, 1862. Photostat, 
 
 The Abraham Lincoln Association 
 letter to samuel treat — November 19, 1862. Original, Missouri 
 
 Historical Society, St. Louis, Missouri 
 letter to general carl schurz — November 24, 1862. Photostat, 
 
 The Abraham Lincoln Association 
 
HIS SPEECHES AND WRITINGS 817 
 
 annual message to congress — December 1, 1862. Original, The 
 
 National Archives, Records of the United States Senate 
 letter to miss fanny mc cullough — December 23, 1862. Photostat, 
 
 The Abraham Lincoln Association 
 final emancipation proclamation — January 1, 1863. Photostat, 
 
 The Abraham Lincoln Association 
 letter to general j. a. mcclernand — January 22, 1863. Original, 
 
 Illinois State Historical Library 
 letter to general joseph hooker — January 26, 1863. Photostat, The 
 
 Abraham Lincoln Association 
 letter to governor Andrew johnson — March 26, 1863. Original, Pier- 
 
 pont Morgan Library 
 letter to general joseph hooker — May 7, 1863. Photostat, The 
 
 Abraham Lincoln Association 
 letter to isaac n. Arnold — May 26, 1863. Original, Chicago Historical 
 
 Society 
 telegram to general joseph hooker — June 5, 1863. Original, Illinois 
 
 State Historical Library 
 letter to erastus corning and others — June 12, 1863. Nicolay and 
 
 Hay, editors, Complete Works of Abraham Lincoln, 1905 
 telegram to general joseph hooker — June 14, 1863. Original, Alfred 
 
 J. Stern. 
 response to a serenade — July 7, 1863. New York Daily Tribune, July 
 
 8, 1863; New York Herald, July 8, 1863; New York Times, 
 
 July 8, 1863 
 letter to general u. s. grant — July 13, 1863. Original, Historical 
 
 Society of Pennsylvania 
 draft of letter to general g. g. meade — July 14, 1863. Nicolay and 
 
 Hay, editors, Complete Works of Abraham Lincoln, 1905 
 letter to general h. w. halleck — July 29, 1863. Original, Illinois 
 
 State Historical Library 
 letter to general n. p. banks — August 5, 1863. Original, Illinois State 
 
 Historical Library 
 letter to mary todd Lincoln — August 8, 1863. Nicolay and Hay, edi- 
 tors, Complete Works of Abraham Lincoln, 1905 
 letter to general j. a. mc clernand — August 12, 1863. Original, Illi- 
 nois State Historical Library 
 letter to j. h. HACKETT — August 17, 1863. Broadside printed by 
 
 Hackett 
 letter to james c. conkling — August 26, 1863. Original, Illinois State 
 
 Historical Library 
 
818 ABRAHAM LINCOLN: 
 
 letter to james c. conkling — August 27, 1863. Original, Illinois State 
 
 Historical Library 
 letter to general h. w. halleck — September 19, 1863. Original, 
 
 Illinois State Historical Library 
 proclamation for thanksgiving — October 3, 1863. Original, The 
 
 National Archives 
 telegram to general g. g. Meade— October 8, 1863. Original, Illinois 
 
 State Historical Library 
 letter to general h. w. halleck — October 16, 1863. Original owned 
 
 by Mr. Oliver R. Barrett 
 letter to j. h. HACKETT — November 2, 1863. Nicolay and Hay, editors, 
 
 Complete Works of Abralwm Lincoln, 1905 
 letter to e. m. stanton, secretary of war — November 11, 1863. 
 
 Photostat, The Abraham Lincoln Association 
 
 ADDRESS DELIVERED AT THE DEDICATION OF THE CEMETERY AT GETTYSBURG 
 
 — November 19, 1863. Facsimiles in W. E. Barton, Lincoln at 
 Gettysburg, 1930 
 
 letter to edward everett— November 20, 1863. Original, Massa- 
 chusetts Historical Society 
 
 proclamation of amnesty and reconstruction — December 8, 1863. 
 Original, The National Archives 
 
 letter to crafts j. wright and c. k. hawkes — January 7, 1864. Ori- 
 ginal, Illinois State Historical Library 
 
 letter to general n. p. banks — January 31, 1864. Original, Illinois 
 State Historical Library 
 
 letter to e. m. stanton, secretary of war — March 1, 1864. Stanton 
 Papers, The Library of Congress 
 
 letter to governor michael hahn — March 13, 1864. Original owned 
 by Mr. Roger W. Barrett 
 
 letter to e. m. stanton, secretary of war — March 15, 1864. Photo- 
 stat, The Abraham Lincoln Association 
 
 memorandum for mrs. s. w. hunt — April 11, 1864. Original owned 
 by Mr. Oliver R. Barrett 
 
 ADDRESS AT A SANITARY FAIR IN BALTIMORE — April 18, 1864. Original, 
 
 The Rosenbach Company 
 
 letter to general u. s. grant — April 30, 1864. Photostat, The Abra- 
 ham Lincoln Association 
 
 speech at a sanitary fadr in Philadelphia — June 16, 1864. Nicolay 
 and Hay, editors, Complete Works of Abraham Lincoln, 1905 
 
 LETTER TO WILLIAM DENNISON & OTHERS, A COMMITTEE OF THE NATIONAL 
 
HIS SPEECHES AND WRITINGS 819 
 
 union cdNVENnoN — June 27, 1864. Photostat, The Abraham Lin- 
 coln Association 
 
 letter to Horace greeley — July 15, 1864. Original owned by Mr. 
 Oliver R. Barrett 
 
 address to the 164th ohio regiment — August 18, 1864. New York 
 Times, August 19, 1864; New York Daily Tribune, August 19, 
 1864 
 
 address to the 166th ohio regiment — August 22, 1864. New York 
 Herald, August 23, 1864 
 
 letter to mrs. eliza p. gurney — September 4, 1864. Original, At- 
 lantic City Free Public Library 
 
 letter to general u. s. grant — September 22, 1864. Original, Louis 
 J. Kolb Collection 
 
 letter to henry w. hoffman — October 10, 1864. Photostat, Maryland 
 Historical Society 
 
 response to a serenade — October 19, 1864. Photostat, Illinois State 
 Historical Library 
 
 proclamation of THANKSGrviNG — October 20, 1864. Original, The 
 National Archives 
 
 TELEGRAM TO GENERAL P. H. SHERIDAN October 22, 1864. Photostat, 
 
 The Abraham Lincoln Association 
 response to a serenade — November 10, 1864. Photostat, The Abraham 
 
 Lincoln Association 
 letter to general w. s. ROSECRANS — November 19, 1864. Original 
 
 owned by Mr. Oliver R. Barrett 
 letter to mrs. rixry — November 21, 1864. Boston Transcript, 
 
 November 25, 1864 
 story written for noah rrooks — December [6?], 1864. Facsimile, Carl 
 
 Sandburg, Abraham Lincoln: The War Years, 1939 
 annual message to congress — December 6, 1864. Original, The 
 
 National Archives, Records of the United States Senate, Thirty- 
 Eighth Congress, Second Session 
 letter to general w. t. Sherman — December 26, 1864. Copy, Stanton 
 
 Papers, The Library of Congress 
 letter to general u. s. grant — January 19, 1865. Original, The Grand 
 
 Rapids Art Gallery 
 terms for general r. e. lee's capitulation — March 3, 1865. Original, 
 
 Louis J. Kolb Collection 
 second inaugural address — March 4, 1865. Photostat, The Abraham 
 
 Lincoln Association 
 
820 ABRAHAM LINCOLN: 
 
 letter to thurlow weed — March 15, 1865. Photostat, The Abraham 
 
 Lincoln Association 
 address to the 140th Indiana regiment — March 17, 1865. New York 
 
 Herald, March 18, 1865' 
 telegram to general u. s. grant — April 2, 1865. Original owned by 
 
 Mr. Oliver R. Barrett 
 last public address — April 11, 1865. Photostat, The Abraham Lincoln 
 
 Association 
 
 TELEGRAM TO GENERAL GODFREY WEITZEL April 12, 1865. Original 
 
 owned by Mr. Oliver R. Barrett 
 
 WORKS CITED IN THE NOTES 
 
 angle, paul M. Lincoln: 1854-1861, Being the Day-by-Day Activities 
 of Abraham Lincoln from January 1, 1854, to March 4, 1861. 
 Springfield, Illinois, 1933. 
 
 "The Record of a Friendship," Journal of the Illinois State His- 
 torical Society, Vol. XXXI, No. 2, June, 1938. 
 
 (collaborator. Work cited under sandburg). 
 
 (editor. Work cited under kellogg). 
 
 (editor. Work cited under Lincoln). 
 
 anonymous. History of Gallatin, Saline, Hamilton, Franklin, and 
 Williamson Counties, Illinois. Chicago, 1887. 
 
 barrett, roger w. (editor. Work cited under Lincoln). 
 
 barton, William e. Lincoln at Gettysburg. Indianapolis, Indiana, 1930. 
 
 basler, roy p. "The Authorship of the 'Rebecca' Letters" The Abra- 
 ham Lincoln Quarterly, Vol. II, No. 2, June, 1942. 
 
 'Who Wrote the 'Letter to Mrs. Bixby?," Lincoln Herald, Vol. 
 
 XLV, No. 1, February, 1943. 
 
 beveridge, albert j. Abraham Lincoln: 1809-1858, 2 vols. Boston and 
 
 New York, 1928. 
 butler, Nicholas Murray. Across the Busy Years; Recollections and 
 
 Reflections, 2 vols. New York, 1939-40. 
 Clark, leon pierce. Lincoln; a Psychobiography. New York, 1933. 
 davis, george t. m. Autobiography of the Late Colonel George T. M. 
 
 Davis. New York, 1891. 
 Dennett, tyler (editor. Work cited under hay), 
 dodge, daniel KTLHAM. Abraham Lincoln: Master of Words. New York, 
 
 1924. 
 
 Abraham Lincoln: The Evolution of His Literary Style. The 
 
 University Studies, University of Illinois, Vol. I, No. 1, May, 1900. 
 
HIS SPEECHES AND WRITINGS 821 
 
 federal writers project. Washington, City and Capital. Washington, 
 
 1937. 
 hay, john. Lincoln and the Civil War in the Diaries and Letters of John 
 
 Hay, edited by Tyler Dennett. New York, 1939. 
 herndon, william h. The Hidden Lincoln: From the Letters and 
 
 Papers of William H. Herndon, edited by Emanuel Hertz. New 
 
 York, 1938. 
 and jesse william weik. Herndons Lincoln: The True Story of 
 
 a Great Life, 3 vols. Chicago, 1889. 
 hertz, emanuel (editor. Work cited under herndon). 
 kellogg, william pitt. "The Recollections of William Pitt Kellogg/' 
 
 edited by Paul M. Angle, The Abraham Lincoln Quarterly, Vol. 
 
 Ill, No. 7, September, 1945. 
 kincaid, rorert l. Joshua Fry Speed: Lincoln's Most Intimate Friend. 
 
 Harrogate, Tennessee, 1943. 
 Lincoln, arraham. A Strange Affair, edited by Roger W. Barrett. 
 
 Peoria, Illinois, 1933. 
 Complete Works of Abraham Lincoln, edited by John G. Nicolay 
 
 and John Hay, 12 vols. New York, 1905. 
 
 Lincoln on Agriculture: Address, Wisconsin State Agricultural 
 
 Society, State Fair, Milwaukee, September 30, 1859. Reprinted 
 from Proceedings of the Society, 1859, Lincoln Fellowship of Wis- 
 consin Historical Bulletin No. 1. Madison, Wisconsin, 1943. 
 
 New Letters and Papers of Lincoln, edited by Paul M. Angle. 
 
 Boston and New York, 1930. 
 
 linn, james werer. "Such Were His Words," Abraham Lincoln Asso- 
 ciation Papers, Delivered before the Members of the Abraham 
 Lincoln Association at Springfield, Illinois, on February 11, 12, 
 1939. Springfield, Illinois, 1940. 
 
 moore, frank. The Civil War in Song and Story 1860-1865. New York, 
 1889. 
 
 nicolay, john g., and john hay. Abraham Lincoln: A History, 10 vols. 
 New York, 1890. 
 
 (editas. Work cited under Lincoln). 
 
 obyrne, michael c. History of LaSolle County, Illinois, 3 vols. Chicago, 
 1924. 
 
 palmer, john m. (editor). The Bench and Bar of Illinois, 2 vols. 
 Chicago, 1899. 
 
 pease, theodore calvin. Frontier State: 1818-1848. Springfield, Illinois, 
 1918. 
 
 Petersen, william f. Lincoln-Douglas: The Weather as Destiny. 
 Springfield, Illinois, 1943. 
 
 [philld?s, david lyman]. Biographies of the State Officers. Spring- 
 field, Illinois, 1883. 
 
822 ABRAHAM LINCOLN: 
 
 pratt, harry e. "Lincoln — Author of the Letters by 'A Conservative/ " 
 Bulletin of the Abraham Lincoln Association, No. 50, Decem- 
 ber, 1937. 
 
 The Personal Finances of Abraham Lincoln. Springfield, Illinois, 
 
 1943. 
 
 sandburg, carl. Abraham Lincoln: The Prairie Years, 2 vols. New 
 
 York, 1926. 
 Abraham Lincoln: The War Years, 4 vols. New York, 1939. 
 
 and paul m. angle. Mary Lincoln: Wife and Widow. New York, 
 
 1932. 
 
 seymour, glen h. " 'Conservative* — Another Lincoln Pseudonym?" 
 Journal of the Illinois State Historical Society, Vol. XXIX, No. 2, 
 July, 1936. 
 
 shutes, milton henry. Lincoln and the Doctors: A Medical Narrative 
 of the Life of Abraham Lincoln. New York, 1933. 
 
 speed, joshua f. Reminiscences of Abraham Lincoln and Notes of a 
 Visit to California. Louisville, Kentucky, 1884. 
 
 tarbell, Ida m. In the Footsteps of the Lincolns. New York, 1924. 
 
 thayer, w. r. Life and Letters of John Hay, 2 vols. Boston and New 
 York, 1915. 
 
 townsend, william h. Lincoln and His Wife's Home Town. Indian- 
 apolis, Indiana, 1929. 
 
 van hoesen, h. b. The Humor of Lincoln and the Seriousness of His 
 Biographers. Books at Brown, Published by the Friends of the 
 Library of Brown University, Vol. Ill, No. 2, 3, December, 1944, 
 March, 1945. 
 
 warren, louis a. "Gettysburg Addresses in Autograph," Lincoln Lore, 
 No. 182, October 3, 1932. 
 
 "Original Draft of the First Inaugural," Lincoln Lore, No. 358, 
 
 No. 359, February 17, 24, 1936. 
 
INDEX 
 
INDEX 
 
 "A House Divided: Speech Delivered 
 at Springfield, Illinois," 19, 21, 23- 
 27, 32, 40, 332n., 372-381, 515- 
 516; replies to Douglas's criticism 
 of, 391-396, 423-424, 425n., 446, 
 449. 
 
 "A Letter from the Lost Townships," 
 72n., 148-154. 
 
 A Strange Affair, 182n. 
 
 Able, Bennett, 62. 
 
 Able, Mrs. Bennett, 62. 
 
 Abolitionism, Douglas charges Lin- 
 coln with, 430-435, 437, 438; 
 Lincoln's reply, 442-445. 
 
 Abraham Lincoln Association, The, 
 557n. 
 
 Abraham Lincoln Quarterly, The, 
 154n. 
 
 Adams, Charles Francis, Jr., 2. 
 
 Adams, John, 489, 709. 
 
 Adams, John Quincy, 105, 108, 
 231n., 268, 348. 
 
 "Address at a Sanitary Fair in Balti- 
 more," 748-750. 
 
 "Address at Cooper Institute," 17, 
 19, 20, 22, 32-33, 514n., 517-536, 
 536-539n. 
 
 "Address before the Springfield Scott 
 Club," 18. 
 
 "Address before the Wisconsin Agri- 
 cultural Society," 31, 39, 493- 
 505n. 
 
 "Address Delivered at the Dedication 
 of the Cemetery at Gettysburg," 
 9, 12, 29, 35, 40, 41-44, 47, 490n., 
 710n., 734-737n. 
 
 "Address in Independence Hall, 
 Philadelphia," 577-578. 
 
 "Address to Germans at Cincinnati, 
 Ohio," 572-573. 
 
 "Address to the Assembly of New 
 Jersey," 575-576. 
 
 "Address to the 140th Indiana Regi- 
 ment," 794-796. 
 
 "Address to the 164th Ohio Regi- 
 ment," 755-756. 
 
 "Address to the 166th Ohio Regi- 
 ment," 756-757. 
 
 "Address to the Senate of New Jer- 
 sey," 574-575. 
 
 Aesop's Fables, 5. 
 
 African slave trade, suppression of, 
 628, 667. 
 
 "Agriculture: Annual Address before 
 the Wisconsin State Agricultural 
 Society at Milwaukee," 31, 39, 
 493-505n. 
 
 Agriculture Department, report on, 
 627, 675, 784. 
 
 Albany, N. Y., Democratic Conven- 
 tion at, 699, 708. 
 
 Albert, Prince, 231n. 
 
 Aldie, Va., 658. 
 
 Alexander, Jediah F., letter to, 369, 
 370n. 
 
 Alexander the Great, 83. 
 
 Alexandria, Va., 592n. 
 
 Allen, Charles, 320. 
 
 Allen, G. T., 327. 
 
 Allen, Robert, 148, 161, 168; letter 
 to, 59-60, 60n. 
 
 Allen, , 226. 
 
 Allison, John, 234, 235. 
 
 Alton, III, 160, 172, 352n., 563n.- 
 564n.; last debate at, 29. 
 
 Alton Courier, 474n. 
 
 American Colonization Society, 275, 
 276. 
 
 American Fur Company, 509n. 
 
 American News Company, 569n. 
 
 Amnesty and reconstruction, procla- 
 mation of, 738-741, 743. 
 
 Anderson, Robert, 595-596, 614. 
 
 Andre, John, 315. 
 
 825 
 
826 
 
 INDEX 
 
 Angle, Paul M., 282n.; Lincoln: 1854- 
 1861, 486n.; and Carl Sandburg, 
 Mary Lincoln: Wife and Widow, 
 120-121n., 228n.; ed., New Let- 
 ters and Tapers of Lincoln, 
 230n., 258n., 372n., 514n.; ed., 
 "The Recollections of William Pitt 
 Kellogg," 566n.; "The Record of a 
 Friendship," 172n. 
 
 "Annual Message to Congress" (De- 
 cember 3, 1861), 39, 616-635. 
 
 "Annual Message to Congress" (De- 
 cember 1, 1862), 38, 39-40, 666- 
 688. 
 
 "Annual Message to Congress" (De- 
 cember 8, 1863), 797. 
 
 "Annual Message to Congress" (De- 
 cember 6, 1864), 773-789. 
 
 Antietam, battle of, 659, 723. 
 
 Appomattox, Va., surrender at, 801n. 
 
 Arabian Nights, 5. 
 
 Army of the Potomac, remarks to, 
 656. 
 
 Arnold, Isaac N., 696-697, 697n. 
 
 Arnold, Matthew, 42. 
 
 Articles of Association, 582. 
 
 Articles of Confederation, 284, 492, 
 582, 603. 
 
 Asbury, Henry, letters to, 425-426, 
 426n., 482. 
 
 Ashby's Gap, Va., 659. 
 
 Ashmun, George, 217, 553; letter 
 to, 543-544. 
 
 Atchison, David R., 348. 
 
 Atherton's Ferry (Ky.), 548. 
 
 Atlanta, Ga., 789. 
 
 Auburn, N. Y., 760. 
 
 Autobiography, see "Short Autobiog- 
 raphy Written for the Campaign of 
 1860," and "Letter to J W. FeU 
 Inclosing Autobiography." 
 
 Autographed Leaves of Our Coun- 
 try's Authors, 735n. 
 
 Baird, Mrs., 744. 
 
 Baker & Van Bergen, 148. 
 
 Baker, Edward D., 118, 165-166, 
 167, 168, 171, 174n., 218, 248, 
 253, 256, 257n., 382, 554, 665. 
 
 Baker, Ezra, 69. 
 
 Baker, Palmer, 327. 
 
 Baldwin, Abraham, 519, 520, 521, 
 
 560. 
 Bale, Abram, letter to, 258, 258n. 
 Baltimore, Md., 249, 748, 752, 759; 
 
 address at Sanitary Fair at, 748- 
 
 750n. 
 Baltimore American, 239. 
 Baltimore and Ohio Railroad, 638, 
 
 713. 
 Baltimore Convention, 238. 
 Bank of Illinois, 8, 64-72, 72n., 5l0n. 
 Banks, Nathaniel P., 638, 646, 696, 
 
 711, 798; letters to, 714-716n., 
 
 743-744n. 
 Bardstown, Ky., 548. 
 Barrett, Joseph H., 36. 
 Barrett, Oliver R., 163, 381n., 426n. 
 Barrett, Roger W., 182n. 
 
 Barry, , 108-110. 
 
 Barton, W. E., Lincoln at Gettys- 
 burg, 735n. 
 Basler, Roy P., "The Authorship of 
 
 the 'Rebecca' Letters," 154n.; 
 
 "Who Wrote the 'Letter to Mrs. 
 
 Bixby?," 766n. 
 Bassett, Richard, 519. 
 Bates, Edward, 542. 
 Beardstown, 111., 172, 337n., 368, 
 
 427, 550. 
 Beck, Mrs., 168. 
 
 Bedell, Grace, letter to, 561-562n. 
 Bell, James, & Co., 148, 197-198. 
 Bell, John, 255. 
 Belleville, 111., 257n. 
 
 Benton, 578n. 
 
 Beveridge, Albert J., Abraham Lin- 
 coln: 1809-1858, 72n., 85n., 154n., 
 
 185n., 201n., 277n. 
 
 Birdsall, , 239. 
 
 Bishop, , 218, 221, 222, 223. 
 
 Bixby, Mrs. Lydia, letter to, 34-36, 
 
 725n., 766-772n. 
 Black Hawk War, 242, 511, 551, 
 
 689n., 693n. 
 Blackstone's Commentaries, 2, 6. 
 Blair, Francis P., 697. 
 
INDEX 
 
 827 
 
 Blenker, Louis, 638. 
 Blittersdorf, August, 731. 
 Bloomington, 111., 329, 338n., 345n., 
 
 413, 414, 418, 514, 689n.; "Lost 
 
 Speech" at, 21. 
 Blount, William, 519. 
 Bohlen, Henry, 665. 
 Boker, G. H., letter to, 769n. 
 Bolivar, Simon, 266. 
 Bonaparte, Napoleon, 77, 83, 266, 
 
 321, 694. 
 Book of Common Prayer, The, 37. 
 Boonville, Mo., 168. 
 Boston, Mass., 99, 230, 752. 
 Boutwell, George S., 715. 
 Brainerd, Cephas, 536n.-539n. 
 
 Branson, , 148. 
 
 Breckinridge, John C., 164n., 703. 
 
 Bright, Jesse D., 348. 
 
 Brooklyn, N. Y., 752. 
 
 Brooks, Noah, story written for, 772- 
 
 773n. 
 Brooks, Preston S., 416. 
 Broome, Mrs., 226. 
 Brown, James N., letter to, 478-479, 
 
 480n. 
 Brown, John, opinion of, 529-532. 
 Brown University Library, 770n. 
 Brown, W. H., letter to, 507-510n. 
 Browning, Mrs. O. H., letter to, 85- 
 
 88, 89n. 
 Browning, O. H., 88, 89n., 256, 
 
 257n., 393, 435, 589n.; letter to, 
 
 613-615n. 
 Brumfield, Nancy (Lincoln), 547. 
 Brumfield, William, 547. 
 Buchanan, Franklin, 703. 
 Buchanan, James, 22, 25, 231n., 339- 
 
 345, 347, 348, 351, 368, 371, 
 
 372n., 374, 377, 387, 408, 410, 
 
 425, 449, 457, 465. 
 Buckner, A. H., 69. 
 Buckner, Simon B., 703. 
 Buell, D. C., 664; letter to, 636-637; 
 
 telegram to, 636. 
 Bullard, F. Lauriston and Edward 
 
 C. Stone, Lincoln Wrote the Bixby 
 
 Letter, a Detective Story, 766- 
 
 767n., 772n. 
 
 Bullitt, Cuthbert, 16; letter to, 648- 
 
 650. 
 Bunyan's The Pilgrim's Progress, 5. 
 Burke, Edmund, 40. 
 Burnet, David G., 213n. 
 Burns, Robert, 6. 
 Burnside, A. E., 646, 693; letter to, 
 
 637. 
 Butler, Benjamin F., 696, 697, 718. 
 Butler, Nicholas Murray, Across the 
 
 Busy Years, 767n., 770n.-771n. 
 Butler, Pierce, 519. 
 Butler, William, 115, 146, 161, 
 
 163n., 166n., 168. 
 Butterfield, Justin, 257n. 
 
 Caesar, Julius, 16, 83, 111, 733. 
 Calhoun, John, 6, 102, 282, 348, 
 
 389. 
 Cambridge, Mich., 746n. 
 Campbell, John A., 622, 802. 
 Campbell, Thomas, 475, 475n. 
 Cannan & Harlan, 167. 
 Capital and labor, views on, 22, 31- 
 
 32, 39, 500-503, 633-634. 
 Carlin, Thomas, 151. 
 Carlisle, Pa., 712. 
 Carpenter, Milton, 150, 151. 
 Carroll, Daniel, 519. 
 Carson, John M., 541n. 
 Carter, Nick, 195. 
 Cartwright, Peter, 13, 186-187, 188- 
 
 189n. 
 Carusi, Louis, 230-23 In. 
 Cass, Lewis, 15, 235, 237, 238, 240, 
 
 242-247, 250n., 351, 466; Nichol- 
 son letter, 472-473. 
 Chancellorsville, Va., 709. 
 Chandler, William E., 771n., 772n. 
 Channing, William Ellery, 8. 
 Charleston Courier, 218. 
 Charleston, 111., 123, 225, 261, 480n. 
 Charleston, S. C, 99, 487, 542, 643, 
 
 668. 
 Chase, Salmon P., 378, 430, 434, 
 
 453, 466; letters to, 491-493. 
 Cherokee Indians, treaty relations 
 
 with, 654, 674. 
 Chester County (Pa.) Times, 512n. 
 
828 
 
 INDEX 
 
 Chester Gap, Va., 659. 
 
 Chicago, Alton & St. Louis R. R., 
 338n. 
 
 Chicago American, The, 115. 
 
 Chicago & M. Rd., 338n. 
 
 Chicago Daily Press and Tribune, 
 370, 384n., 483n„ 504-505n., 506, 
 509n. 
 
 Chicago Democrat, 326n. 
 
 Chicago Democratic Convention 
 (1864), 760-761. 
 
 Chicago Historical Society, 510n. 
 
 Chicago, III, 245-246, 325, 366, 367, 
 413, 415, 418, 480n., 509 n., 541, 
 752; speech in reply to Douglas 
 at, 28, 385-404. 
 
 Chicago Journal, 367n. 
 
 Chicago Times, 383n. 
 
 Chitty's Pleadings, 2. 
 
 Christian Commission, 751. 
 
 Christy, Samuel C, 69. 
 
 Cicero, 40. 
 
 Cincinnati, O., 329, 663, 752; ad- 
 dress to Germans at, 572-574n. 
 
 Cincinnati Platform, 399, 420, 459. 
 
 Clark, Beverly L., 233. 
 
 Clark, Leon Pierce, Lincoln; a Psy- 
 chobiography, 62n. 
 
 Clark, , 579n. 
 
 Clary's Grove, 117, 119. 
 
 Clay, Brutus, 717. 
 
 Clay, Cassius, 218, 717. 
 
 Clay, Henry, 14, 18, 23, 169-170, 
 185, 218, 239, 248, 264-278n., 
 287, 322, 331, 421, 422, 429, 460, 
 471, 551, 553, 589n.; Mendenhall 
 speech, 479, 480n.; eulogy on, 
 264-277. 
 
 Clay, John M., letter to, 651. 
 
 Cleveland, O., 238. 
 
 Clinton, 111., 451, 454. 
 
 Clymer, George, 519. 
 
 Codding, Ichabod, 462. 
 
 Coercion and invasion, attitude on, 
 571-572. 
 
 Coleridge, S. T., 9. 
 
 Collingsworth, James, 214n. 
 
 Colonization of freed slaves, 685-688. 
 
 Columbus, Christopher, 472. 
 
 Columbus, O., 517; Douglas's speech 
 at, 32. 
 
 Compensated emancipation, 676- 
 688, 721. 
 
 "Concluding Speech," see "Last 
 Speech in the Campaign of 1858." 
 
 Condorcet, Marquis de, 9. 
 
 Confederate Peace Commissioners, 
 754-755n. 
 
 Congress, annual message to (1861), 
 39, 616-635; annual message to 
 (1862), 38, 39-40, 666-688; an- 
 nual message to (1863), 797; an- 
 nual message to (1864), 773-789; 
 message to in special session 
 (1861), 594-609. 
 
 Congress of the Federation, 518-519. 
 
 Congressional Globe, 609n. 
 
 Conkling, James C, letters to, 35, 
 720-724n., 725, 725n. 
 
 Constitution, U. S., 32-33, 81, 103, 
 244, 271, 272, 281, 284, 285, 287, 
 305, 307, 311, 313, 314, 318, 333, 
 345, 351, 355, 356, 357, 358, 373, 
 375, 376, 378, 390, 393, 395, 396, 
 403, 416, 419, 421, 431, 436, 439, 
 450, 453, 455, 484, 491, 492, 513, 
 513-514n., 517, 518-526, 532, 
 533, 543, 552, 572, 575, 576, 579- 
 588, 594, 600-609, 614, 629, 640, 
 649, 650, 651, 652, 676-677, 679, 
 687, 700-703, 705, 707, 721, 738- 
 739, 741, 760, 761, 785, 788, 800. 
 
 Constitutional Convention, 715. 
 
 Cook, Burton C, 327. 
 
 Cooper Institute, address at, 517- 
 539n., 545-546; see also "Address 
 at Cooper Institute." 
 
 Cooper Shop and Union Volunteer 
 Refreshment Saloons, 752. 
 
 Corning, Erastus, and Others, letter 
 to, 699-708n. 
 
 Corning, Erastus, letter to, 36. 
 
 Correll, U. F., letter to, 515-517n. 
 
 "Correspondence About the Lincoln- 
 Shields Duel," 156-158. 
 
 Corydon, Ind., 225. 
 
 Couch, Darius N., 711, 712. 
 
 Crawford, Andrew, 549. 
 
INDEX 
 
 829 
 
 Crittenden, John J., 221, 256, 257n., 
 
 717. 
 Crume, Mary (Lincoln), 547, 635. 
 Crume, Ralph, 547, 635. 
 Crume, Susannah, see Weathers, 
 
 Susannah (Crume). 
 Culpeper Court House, 657. 
 Curtis, Benjamin R., 354, 357, 378. 
 Curtis, Samuel R., 718. 
 Cuthbert, John, 93n. 
 Cuthbert, Mrs., 716. 
 Cuyler, Theodore, 577-578n. 
 
 Daily National Intelligencer, 23 In. 
 
 Daniel, Peter V., 622. 
 
 Danites, 486, 487n. 
 
 Davidson, W. H., 69. 
 
 Davis, David I., 328, 663. 
 
 Davis, Eliza Julia (Speed), 123, 142. 
 
 Davis, George T. M., 218; letter to, 
 563-564n. 
 
 Davis, Walter, 252, 253n. 
 
 Dayton, Jonathan, 521. 
 
 Dayton, William L., 343, 347. 
 
 Decatur Convention, 280n. 
 
 Declaration of Independence, 28, 40, 
 42, 43, 81, 103, 284, 285, 291, 
 309, 314, 315, 358, 359, 360-362, 
 390, 401-403, 422, 423, 437, 443, 
 445, 460, 462, 472, 479, 489- 
 490n., 513, 513-514n., 577, 578n., 
 582, 603, 607, 709-710. 
 
 Defoe's Robinson Crusoe, 5. 
 
 Defrees, John D., 38; letter to, 566- 
 567n. 
 
 Delahay, Mark W., 172, 506n.; letter 
 to, 539-540n. 
 
 Delahay, Mary, 505. 
 
 Democracy, see Political philosophy. 
 
 Demosthenes, 40. 
 
 Dennett, Tyler, ed., Lincoln and the 
 Civil War in the Diaries and Let- 
 ters of John Hay, 768n. 
 
 Dennison, William, and Others, A 
 Committee of the National Union 
 Convention, letter to, 753-754. 
 
 Detroit Daily Advertiser, 345n. 
 
 Detroit, Mich., 250n. 
 
 Dilworth's A New Guide to the 
 English Tongue, 3. 
 
 "Discoveries, Inventions and Im- 
 provements," lecture, 30-31. 
 
 Dodge, Daniel Kilham, Abraham 
 Lincoln: Master of Words, 36, 
 729n.; Abraham Lincoln: The Evo- 
 lution of his Literary Style, 26-27. 
 
 Dole, G. W., G. S. Hubbard, and 
 W. H. Brown, letter to, 507-510n. 
 
 Dole, W. P., 509n. 
 
 Doniphan, Alexander W., 218. 
 
 Dorman, Mrs. Rebecca, 165n. 
 
 Dorman, William, 164. 
 
 Dorsey, Azel W., 549. 
 
 Douglas, Stephen A., 18, 20, 22, 23, 
 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 47, 90, 
 104, 106, 107, 108, 110, 283, 287, 
 288, 290, 295, 298, 304, 305, 316, 
 318-323, 324-325n., 332n., 335, 
 340, 342, 350, 351, 352, 354, 355, 
 356, 359-365n., 366-371n., 377, 
 379, 380, 383n., 385-400, 402, 
 404n., 406, 407, 409-415, 417, 
 418-423, 425, 426n.,469-473, 475, 
 481, 482, 483, 486, 487, 506, 507, 
 507n., 516, 516n., 517, 518, 524, 
 535, 542, 545, 555, 557, 565-566, 
 707; debate at Ottawa, 428-469n.; 
 speech at Columbus, Ohio, 32. 
 
 Douglass, Frederick, 430, 433, 434, 
 438. 
 
 Dred Scott decision, 22, 24, 27, 28; 
 speech on, 346n., 352-365n., 373, 
 375, 376, 377, 378, 384, 396, 397, 
 399, 402, 417, 418, 420, 421, 436- 
 438, 448, 451, 453, 454, 458, 460, 
 461, 470, 473, 524. 
 
 Dubois, Jesse K., 563, 717. 
 
 Dumbolton, J. A., 231n. 
 
 Dummer, Henry E., 337; letters to, 
 171-172n., 427. 
 
 Dunbar, Alexander P., 221, 223. 
 
 Duncan, Garnett, 257. 
 
 Durant, Thomas J., 648-650, 715, 
 716. 
 
 Durley, Williamson, letter to, 169- 
 171n. 
 
830 
 
 INDEX 
 
 Eastham, Marvelous, 142. 
 Education, 1-5, 511, 548, 549, 551; 
 
 views on, 2, 56, 501-504, 559. 
 Edwards, Cyrus, 256, 257n. 
 Edwards, N. W., 59. 
 Edwardsville, 111., speech at, 469- 
 
 474n. 
 Elections during war, views on, 763- 
 
 764. 
 Ellsworth, E. E., letter to, 592-592n. 
 Ellsworth's (E. E.) Parents, letter 
 
 to, 34-35, 593. 
 Emancipation, compensated, 676- 
 
 688, 721. 
 "Emancipation Proclamation," 36, 
 
 689-692n., 715, 721-722, 789, 797- 
 
 798. 
 Emerson, Ralph W., 8. 
 Emigration Act, operation of, 777- 
 
 778. 
 English Bill, 405n. 
 Euclid, 489, 490n.; Lincoln s study 
 
 of, 43, 549. 
 "Eulogy on Benjamin Ferguson," 
 
 128-129n. 
 "Eulogy on Henry Clay Delivered 
 
 in the State House at Springfield, 
 
 Illinois," 18, 264-277, 278n. 
 Evening Mirror, 185n. 
 Everett, Edward, letter to, 737-738n. 
 
 Everett, , 145-146. 
 
 Ewell, Richard S., 643, 732. 
 Exeter Academy, 559n.-560n. 
 
 Falstaff, Sir John, 86. 
 
 "Farewell Address at Springfield, 
 
 Illinois," 12, 29, 41, 46, 568-570n. 
 Farmington, 111., 121, 372n. 
 Farnsworth, John F., 437. 
 Fell, Jesse W., 20; letter to, inclosing 
 
 autobiography, 510-512n. 
 Ferguson, Benjamin, eulogy on, 10, 
 
 128-129n. 
 Few, William, 519, 521. 
 Figures of speech, employment of, 
 
 24-28. 
 Filisola, Vincente, 214n. 
 Fillmore, Millard, 341. 
 
 "Final Emancipation Proclamation," 
 
 689-692n. 
 "First Debate at Ottawa, Illinois," 
 
 28-29, 428-469n. 
 "First Inaugural Address," 29, 39, 
 
 41, 48, 576-577, 579-590n., 595. 
 Fish, Daniel, 112n. 
 Fisher, Archibald, 117, 119, 120, 
 
 175-184n. 
 Fitzsimmons, Thomas, 519. 
 Flanders, Benjamin F., 716. 
 Flint, Abel, 551. 
 Florida War, cost of, 107. 
 Florville, William, 514. 
 Flournoy, Thomas S., 216n. 
 Follet, Foster and Company, 38 In., 
 
 483n., 555. 
 Forbes & Hill, 164. 
 Ford, Allen N., 188n. 
 Ford, Thomas, 150. 
 Ford's History of Illinois, 459. 
 Foreign affairs, report on, 773-777. 
 Foreign and domestic policy, 590- 
 
 591, 617, 619, 667-669. 
 Fort Jefferson, 594. 
 Fort Monroe, 642n., 645. 
 Fort Pickens, 591, 594, 596. 
 Fort Pillow, 749-750. 
 Fort Sumter, 591, 594, 596-599, 630. 
 Fort Taylor, 594. 
 Fort Wayne, Ind., 245-246. 
 "Fragment: On Slavery," 427. 
 "Fragment: On Slavery," 477-478. 
 "Fragment: Speech at Edwards- 
 ville," 469-474. 
 "Fragment: The Constitution and the 
 
 Union," 513. 
 "Fragments: On Slavery," 278-279. 
 Francis, Mrs. Simeon, 126n. 
 Francis, Simeon, 155n. 
 Franklin, Benjamin, 436. 
 Franklin, William B., 642. 
 Frederick, Md., 656. 
 Fredericksburg, Va., 643, 698, 709; 
 
 battle of, 746n. 
 Freeport Heresy, 27, 426n. 
 Freeport, III, 426n. 
 Freese, Jacob R., 16, 733. 
 "Fremont, Buchanan, and the Exten- 
 
INDEX 
 
 831 
 
 sion of Slavery: Speech at Kala- 
 mazoo, Michigan," 22, 339-345. 
 
 Fremont, John C, 22, 339-345, 347, 
 348, 613-615, 645, 696, 697, 718. 
 
 French Indemnities, cost of, 108, 
 110. 
 
 French Revolution, 266. 
 
 Fry, Nelson, 197-198. 
 
 Fugitive Slave Law, 312, 431, 444, 
 462, 491-493. 
 
 Fullinwider, J. R., letter to, 515- 
 517n. 
 
 Fulton, 111., 367. 
 
 Gaines, John P., 222, 248. 
 
 Galena Advertiser, 351n. 
 
 Galena, 111., 325n., 351n., 367, 555. 
 
 Galloway, Samuel, letter to, 555n., 
 555-557n. 
 
 Galloway, , 120. 
 
 Garrison, William Lloyd, 8. 
 
 General Assembly of Illinois, Lin- 
 coln's resolutions on slavery in, 
 552. 
 
 General Ticket System, 115-116n. 
 
 Germon, , 231n. 
 
 Gettysburg, Pa., 711-712, 738n.; 
 battle of, 43, 723; see also "Ad- 
 dress Delivered at the Dedication 
 of the Cemetery at Gettysburg." 
 
 Gibson, Robert, 551. 
 
 Giddings, Joshua R.. 284, 430, 433, 
 434, 438. 
 
 Gilder, Richard W., 771n. 
 
 Gilman, Nicholas, 519. 
 
 Gilman, W. S., 69. 
 
 Gilmore, Dr., 119-120, 179, 180. 
 
 Glover, Sam, 615. 
 
 Goddard, Dr., 150. 
 
 Godfrey, Benjamin, 69. 
 
 Godwin, William, 9; Political Justice, 
 10. 
 
 Graham, Mentor, 4, 5, 6. 
 
 Grand Gulf, Miss., 711. 
 
 Grant, Ulysses S., 640n., 664n., 
 693n., 696, 697, 717-718, 752, 
 753, 790, 802; letters to, 710-711, 
 750-751, 758, 790-791n. ; telegram 
 to, 796. 
 
 Grayson, P. W., 214n. 
 
 Greeley, Horace, 35, 506-507n., 
 
 560; letters to, 651-653n., 754- 
 
 755n. 
 Green, Mrs. M. J., letter to, 561. 
 Green, Robert R., 69. 
 Greene, William G., 717. 
 Greenleafs Evidence, 2. 
 Greenville Advocate, 370n. 
 Greenville, 111., 370. 
 Gregory's Gap, Va., 659. 
 Grigg, John, 255n. 
 Grimshaw's History of the United 
 
 States, 5. 
 Gurney, Mrs. Eliza P., letter to, 757- 
 
 758. 
 
 Hackett, J. H., letters to, 45, 718- 
 
 719n., 732. 
 Hagerstown, Md., 712. 
 Haggard, Linnie, verses to, 477. 
 Haggard, Rosa, verses to, 476. 
 Hahn, Michael, 716, 744n.; letter to, 
 
 745. 
 Hall, Bell & Co. v., 148, 167. 
 Hall, O. P., J. R. Fullinwider, and 
 
 U. F. Correll, letter to, 5l5-517n. 
 Halleck, Henry W., 647, 657, 692, 
 
 696, 697, 698, 711; letters to, 713- 
 
 714n., 724n., 726-727, 731-732, 
 
 768n. 
 Haman, 334. 
 
 Hamburg, financial system of, 93n. 
 Hamilton, Alexander, 234, 436. 
 Hamilton, Richard L, 69. 
 Hamilton, Schuyler, 642. 
 Hancock, Winfield S., 753. 
 Hanks, Chapman, 262. 
 Hanks, Dennis, 262n. 
 Hanks, Elizabeth (Johnston), 262n. 
 Hanks, John, 550. 
 Hanover, abolition of the stade dues, 
 
 667. 
 Hanover Junction, Va., 643. 
 Hanscomb ("Hanscum"), S. P., 
 
 768n. 
 Hardiman, B., 214n. 
 Hardin, John J., 168, 172, 173, 
 
 174n., 248, 382, 554. 
 
832 
 
 Harlan, Justin, 167. 
 Harper, Walter, & Co., 229. 
 Harper's Ferry, W. Va., 529, 530, 
 
 531, 532, 599, 643, 657, 659. 
 Harpers Weekly, 569n. 
 
 Harrington, , 110. 
 
 Harrington, , 23 In. 
 
 Harris, Thomas L., 280. 
 
 Harris, , 97. 
 
 Harrisburg, Pa., 663. 
 
 Harrison Literary Institute, 541, 
 
 541n. 
 Harrison, Quinn, 189n. 
 Harrison, William Henry, 152, 222, 
 
 241-242, 269, 348, 552-553. 
 Hart, Ellis, 120. 
 Harvard University, 559, 790. 
 Harvey, William, 167. 
 Haskell, William P., 218, 222, 248. 
 Hatch, Ozias M., 483, 717. 
 Hawkes, C. K., letter to, 742-742n. 
 
 Hawkins, , 97. 
 
 Hay, John, 713n.-714n., 724n.-725n., 
 
 755n., 759n., 767n.-772n.; see also 
 
 Nicolay and Hay. 
 Hay Market, Va., 658. 
 Haycraft, Samuel, letter to, and 
 
 autobiography, 544. 
 Hayne, Robert Y., 26, 589n. 
 Hazel, Caleb, 548. 
 Heintzelman, Samuel P., 641. 
 Hendershot, Robert H., 745, 746n. 
 Hennepin, 111., 171n. 
 Henning, Fanny, see Speed, Fanny 
 
 (Henning). 
 Henry, Anson C, 113-114. 
 Henry, John, 382-383. 
 Henry, Patrick, 271. 
 Hentz, Caroline Lee, 6. 
 Herburger, F. C, 49 In.; letter to, 
 
 541-541n. 
 Herndon, Uncle Billy, 128. 
 Herndon, William H., 6, 8, 12, 15, 
 
 47, 62n., 85n., 215n., 223n., 227n., 
 
 367, 381n., 537n., 546n., 588n., 
 
 589n., 767n., 771n.; letters to, 199, 
 
 217-218, 219n., 220-221, 232, 
 
 232n„ 252-253. 
 
 INDEX 
 
 Hertz, Emanuel, ed., The Hidden 
 Lincoln, 189n., 767n. 
 
 Hewett, Mary, 230. 
 
 Hickox, Virgil, 117, 119, 120, 258. 
 
 Hickox's mill, 178. 
 
 Hill, Ambrose P., 732. 
 
 Hoffman, Henry W., letter to, 759, 
 770n. 
 
 Hollander, , 706. 
 
 Homestead Law, 573. 
 
 Hood, John B., 790. 
 
 Hood, P. H., & Co., 229. 
 
 Hooker, Joseph, 638, 696, 718; let- 
 ters to, 35, 693-694, 695; tele- 
 grams to, 36, 698, 708-709. 
 
 Hooper, Johnson Jones, 11. 
 
 "House Divided Speech," see "A 
 House Divided." 
 
 Hovey, Alvin P., 697. 
 
 Howard, James Q., 556, 556n. 
 
 Howard , 23 In. 
 
 Howells, William D., 556, 557n. 
 
 Hubbard, G. S., 507-509, 509-510n. 
 
 Hudson's Bay and Puget's Sound 
 Agricultural Companies, 777. 
 
 Hull, Dr., 384. 
 
 Hull, William, 241-242, 250n. 
 
 Humor, character of, 15-17, 57n.- 
 58n., 89n., 323n., 468-469n. 
 
 Humphreys, Andrew A., 637. 
 
 Hunt, Daniel, 747n. 
 
 Hunt, Mrs. S. W., memorandum for, 
 747, 747n. 
 
 Hunter, David, 646, 696, 718. 
 
 Hurlbut, Stephen A., 615. 
 
 Hurst, Charles R., 165, 167, 169, 
 197-198. 
 
 Illinois College, 346n. 
 
 Illinois Gazette, letter to, 13, 188n. 
 
 Illinois House Journal, Lincoln's 
 resolution on slavery in, 552. 
 
 Illinois Intelligencer, 51 On. 
 
 Illinois Legislature (General Assem- 
 bly), Lincoln a candidate for Gen- 
 eral Assembly, 53ff.; resolutions 
 in, 552; speech in, 63-72. 
 
 Illinois Savings Institution, 509n. 
 
INDEX 
 
 833 
 
 Illinois State Journal, 278n., 282n., 
 324n., 381n., 481n., 540, 569n. 
 
 Illinois State Register, criticism of 
 Lincoln's humor, 15, 113n., 368. 
 
 Inaugural Addresses, see "First In- 
 augural Address" and "Second In- 
 augural Address." 
 
 Independence Hall, address in, 577- 
 579n. 
 
 Independence, Mo., 365n. 
 
 Indian tribes, relations of govern- 
 ment with, 627, 654-655, 674-675, 
 783. 
 
 Indiana, 140th Regiment, address to, 
 794-796. 
 
 Indianapolis, Ind., speech at, 571- 
 572, 574n. 
 
 Interior Department, report on op- 
 erations of, 626, 673-674, 782- 
 783. 
 
 Internal Improvement Convention, 
 61. 
 
 Irwin, James S., 167; letter to, 163- 
 164n. 
 
 Irwin, John, 148, 167. 
 
 Iverson, Alfred, 239, 240. 
 
 Jackson, Andrew, 23, 103, 105, 238, 
 240-241, 268, 269, 348, 356-357, 
 397, 398, 419, 459, 551, 589n., 
 706. 
 
 Jackson, Thomas J., 643. 
 
 Jacksonville Daily Journal, 425n. 
 
 Jacksonville, 111., 53, 145, 160, 164n., 
 186, 425n. 
 
 James, B. F., letter to, 173-174. 
 
 James, , 218. 
 
 Jarvis, , 418. 
 
 Jay, John, 436. 
 
 Jefferson, Thomas, 6, 105, 234, 272, 
 275, 284, 285, 418, 419, 436, 447, 
 449, 459, 474n., 488-489, 489n.- 
 490n., 531, 607, 629, 709. 
 
 Jenkins, A. M., 69. 
 
 Jesus, 98. 
 
 Jewett, , 167. 
 
 Johnson, Andrew, 729n.; letter to, 
 694-695. 
 
 Johnson, Reverdy, 637. 
 
 Johnson, William S., 519. 
 Johnston, Abram, 262n., 263. 
 Johnston, Andrew, 11, 181n., 193n.; 
 
 letters to, 184-185n., 189-190. 
 Johnston, John D., 550; letters to, 
 
 250-252n., 259, 261-262, 263-264. 
 Johnston, Joseph E., 703. 
 Jonas, Abraham, letter to, 557-558n. 
 Jonesboro, III, 432. 
 Journal of the Illinois State Historical 
 
 Society, 172n. 
 Judas, 98. 
 Judd, Norman B., 327, 508-509. 
 
 Kalamazoo, Mich., speech at, 339- 
 
 345n. 
 Kansas Constitutional Convention, 
 
 353. 
 Kansas-Nebraska Bill, 17, 18, 20, 
 
 24, 27, 281-282, 293, 298, 310, 
 
 312, 313, 316, 317, 318, 319-322, 
 
 335, 341, 345, 350, 353, 359, 373- 
 
 375, 377-378, 387, 393, 398-399, 
 
 416, 422, 429, 430, 452, 453, 466, 
 
 467, 471. 
 Kaskaskia, III, 510n. 
 Kearny, Philip, 665. 
 Kellogg, William, 368; letters to, 
 
 506-507n., 565-566n. 
 Kelso, Jack, 6. 
 Kentucky Preceptor, The, 3. 
 Keyes, Erasmus D., 641. 
 Keys, James W., 117, 119. 
 Kincaid, Robert L., Joshua Fry 
 
 Speed: Lincoln's Most Intimate 
 
 Friend, 12 In. 
 King James Bible, 5, 45. 
 King, Rufus, 519, 521. 
 King, William R., 343, 348. 
 
 King, , 643. 
 
 Kirkham's Grammar, 3, 4. 
 Knob Creek (Ky.), 548. 
 Kbow-Nothings, Lincoln's attitude 
 
 toward, 21, 328-329, 335-336, 
 
 557-558n. 
 Knox, William, "Mortality," 11-12, 
 
 185n. 
 Knoxville, Tenn., 618. 
 
834 
 
 INDEX 
 
 Labor and capital, views on, 22, 31- 
 
 32, 39, 500-503, 573, 633-634. 
 Lacon, 111., 173. 
 LaFayette, Marquis de, 528. 
 La Harp, 111., 225. 
 Lamborn, Josiah, 104, 110, 111, 118. 
 Land Office appointment, 256-257n. 
 Lane, James H., 539, 540. 
 Lane, John, 164-165n. 
 Langdon, John, 519, 521. 
 Langford, James P., 120. 
 
 Larrimore, , 515. 
 
 "Last Debate at Alton, Illinois," 29. 
 "Last Public Address," 796-801n., 
 
 803n. 
 "Last Speech in the Campaign of 
 
 1858," 12, 23-24, 29, 480-481n. 
 Latham, George, letter to, 559-560n. 
 
 Latshaw, , 223. 
 
 Lavely, William, 118. 
 
 Law, advice on study of, 2, 337; 
 
 philosophy of, 70-72n., 483-484. 
 Lebanon, Ky., 618. 
 Lecompton Constitution, 371-372n., 
 
 375, 390, 399, 404n., 408, 409- 
 
 413, 456-457, 487, 487n. 
 Lecture on "Discoveries, Inventions 
 
 and Improvements," 30-31, 491n. 
 Lee, Robert E., 36, 698, 703, 712, 
 
 713, 721, 731; terms for Lee's 
 
 capitulation, 79 1-79 In. 
 Letter writing, 34-36. 
 Lewis, Joseph J., 512n. 
 Lewiston, 111., 119, 179. 
 Lexington, Ky., 225, 226, 228, 229, 
 
 268, 331n., 618. 
 Liberty, definition of, 748-750. 
 Library of Congress, 609n., 642n. 
 Lincoln, Abraham (Lincoln's grand- 
 father), 224, 510-511, 547. 
 Lincoln, Abraham (son of Morde- 
 
 cai), 225. 
 Lincoln, David, letters to, 224, 224- 
 
 225. 
 Lincoln, Eddy, 226, 227. 
 Lincoln Fellowship of Wisconsin, 
 
 505n. 
 Lincoln Herald, 766n. 
 Lincoln, 111., 351n. 
 
 Lincoln, Isaac (brother of Lincoln's 
 grandfather), 225, 547. 
 
 Lincoln, Jacob (brother of Lincoln's 
 grandfather), 225, 547. 
 
 Lincoln, John (uncle), 225, 547. 
 
 Lincoln, Josiah (uncle), 225, 547. 
 
 Lincoln Lore, 589n. 
 
 Lincoln, Mary (Todd), 10, 114n., 
 120, 120n., 126n., 131n., I59n., 
 160n., 168, 169, 198, 336, 553, 
 747n. ; letters to, 226-228n., 228- 
 229, 229-230, 716-717; telegram 
 to, 770n. 
 
 Lincoln, Mordecai (uncle), 225, 547. 
 
 Lincoln, Mordecai (son of Morde- 
 cai), 225. 
 
 Lincoln, Nancy (Hanks), 510, 548. 
 
 Lincoln, Robert, 198, 227, 229, 
 555n., 559-560n., 569, 790-791. 
 
 Lincoln, Sarah (Bush Johnston), 
 252n., 259, 261-262n., 263-264, 
 548. 
 
 Lincoln, Thomas (father), 225, 
 252n., 259, 511, 547-548; and 
 John D. Johnston, letters to, 250- 
 252n. 
 
 Lincoln, Thomas (son of Josiah), 
 225, 547. 
 
 Lincoln, Thomas (uncle), 225. 
 
 Lincoln, Thomas Todd ("Tad"), 
 716. 
 
 Linder, Usher F., 15, 63, 69, 72n.; 
 letter to, 221-223n. 
 
 Linn, James Weber, "Such Were 
 His Words" (Abraham Lincoln 
 Association Papers, 1940), 85n. 
 
 Linn, W., 69, 97. 
 
 Lockridge, John, 145, 148, 165. 
 
 Logan & Lincoln, 12. 
 
 Logan, John A., 697. 
 
 Logan, Stephen T., 116, 118, 163, 
 164, 219. 
 
 Longstreet, Augustus Baldwin, 11. 
 
 Longstreet, James, 731. 
 
 "Lost Speech," 21, 345n. 
 
 Lost Townships, 148-l54n., 156n., 
 158, 159; letter from, 148-156n. 
 
 Louaillier, , 706. 
 
INDEX 
 
 835 
 
 Louisiana government, recognition 
 
 of, 797-801. 
 Louisville Courier Journal, 563n. 
 Louisville, Ky., 120, 123n., 146, 
 
 333, 663. 
 Love joy, Elijah P., 564n. 
 Lovejoy, Owen, 430, 434, 442; letter 
 
 to, 328-330n. 
 Lowell, James R., 8. 
 Lyceum Address, 76-85n. 
 Lyon, Nathaniel, 665. 
 
 McCallen, Andrew, letter to, 260, 
 260n. 
 
 McClane, Robert M., 249. 
 
 McClellan, George B., 35, 632, 636, 
 656n., 662, 664, 696, 718, 727; 
 letters to, 638-640n., 641-642, 
 645-646, 647-648, 657-659; tele- 
 grams to, 643, 644, 645, 646-647, 
 647, 653, 659, 660. 
 
 McClernand, J. A., letters to, 692- 
 693n., 697, 717-718. 
 
 McCullough, Fanny, letter to, 34, 
 688-689. 
 
 McCullough, Mrs. William, 689. 
 
 McCullough, William, 688-689n. 
 
 McDowell, Irvin, 638, 646. 
 
 McDowell, James, 224, 225. 
 
 Mace, Daniel, 378. 
 
 McGaughey, Edward W., 256, 257n. 
 
 McHenry, James, 518. 
 
 Mcintosh, lynching, 78. 
 
 McKinley, , 384. 
 
 McKnight, , 226. 
 
 McLaughlin, Robert K., 69. 
 
 McLean, John, 354, 378, 542, 622. 
 
 McPherson, James B., 697. 
 
 Madison, James, 105, 234, 436, 440, 
 447, 449, 519. 
 
 Magoffin, Beriah, letter to, 611-612n. 
 
 Magruder, John B., 703. 
 
 Maine boundary question, 110. 
 
 Mallory, , 120. 
 
 Mammon, 359. 
 
 Manassas Junction, Va., 638-639. 
 
 Manassas Gap, Va., 659. 
 
 Mangum, Willie P., 348. 
 
 Mansfield, Joseph K., 665. 
 
 Marion, Francis, 315. 
 
 Marshall, Samuel D., 248; letter to, 
 
 164-165n. 
 Martinsburg, Va., 708-709. 
 Maryland, new constitution for, 759- 
 
 761. 
 Matheny, James H., 430, 434, 435. 
 Mather, Thomas, 69. 
 Mathers, John, letter to, 424-425n. 
 Matteson, Joel A., 326-328. 
 Maxcy, Jim, 117-119. 
 May, William L., 118. 
 Maynard, Horace, 637. 
 Meade, G. G., 713, 721, 726, 732, 
 
 753; draft of letter to, 711-712; 
 
 telegram to, 731. 
 Mechanicsburg, 111., 516n. 
 Medill, Joseph, 370; letter to, 382- 
 
 384n. 
 "Meditation on the Divine Will," 
 
 655. 
 Melancholia, 63n., 114n. 
 "Memorandum for Mrs. S. W. Hunt", 
 
 747, 747n. 
 "Memorandum of Instructions to E. 
 
 H. Merryman, Lincoln's Second," 
 
 159-160. 
 
 Menzies, , 717. 
 
 Merryman, E. H., 118, 156n., I58n., 
 
 159n., 160-162. 
 "Message to Congress in Special 
 
 Session," 38-39, 594-609. 
 Messages to Congress, style of, 38- 
 
 41. 
 Metaphor, employment of, 24-28. 
 Mexican War, 14, 199-214n., 217- 
 
 218, 220-223, 247-248, 382-383, 
 
 434, 445-446, 553. 
 Mifflin, Thomas, 518. 
 Military strategy, 638-639, 641, 642, 
 
 644-645, 646, 647-648, 653, 657- 
 
 659, 694, 695, 698, 711-712, 713, 
 
 726-727, 731-732. 
 Miller, Jacob W., 242-243. 
 
 Milroy, , 708. 
 
 Milwaukee, Wis., agricultural so- 
 ciety, address at, 493-504. 
 Missouri Compromise, 19, 20, 21, 
 
 30, 281-282, 283-323, 330, 332n., 
 
836 
 
 INDEX 
 
 333, 334, 350, 416, 417, 422, 429, 
 
 467, 481, 508, 512, 554. 
 Mitchell's Station, Va., 731. 
 Mob law, opinion on, 77-81. 
 Moffett, Thomas, 167. 
 Molly (Mary Todd Lincoln), 120. 
 Montgomery, Ala., 599. 
 Moore, Frank, The Civil War in 
 
 Song and Story, 746n. 
 Morgan, John, 747. 
 Morgan Journal, 173. 
 Morgan, R. P., letter to, 16, 338, 
 
 338n. 
 Morley, John, 767n. 
 Mormons, 352-353, 365-366n. 
 Morris, Robert, 519. 
 Morrison, James L. D., 248, 256, 
 
 257n., 327. 
 Mt. Sterling, 111., 164n. 
 Mudsill theory, 500-503. 
 Murfreesboro, Tenn., battle of, 723, 
 
 746n. 
 Muscatine, Iowa,.483n. 
 "My Childhood Home I See Again," 
 
 11, 185n., 190-193. 
 Myers, , 117, 120, 175, 176, 
 
 179, 180. 
 
 Nasby, Petroleum V., 16. 
 
 Nashville, Tenn., 243, 548, 636-637. 
 
 National Bank, contrasted with Sub- 
 Treasury, 90-1 13n., 397, 459; re- 
 port on, 780. 
 
 Navy Department, report on opera- 
 tions of, 621-622, 672, 780-781. 
 
 Nebraska Bill, see Kansas-Nebraska 
 Bill. 
 
 Necessity, doctrine of, 9, 13. 
 
 Negro military force, attitude toward 
 organization of, 694-695. 
 
 Negro soldiers, attitude toward, 722- 
 724, 749-750. 
 
 Nelson, Samuel, 378. 
 
 New Jersey, address to Assembly of, 
 575-576. 
 
 New Jersey, address to Senate of, 
 574-575. 
 
 New Orleans, La., 285, 549, 663, 
 691, 700, 706, 747n., 798. 
 
 New Salem, 111., 6, 7, 60n., 258, 337, 
 433, 551. 
 
 New York Daily Tribune, 507n., 
 573n., 578n., 651. 
 
 New York, N. Y., 99, 546, 569n. 
 
 New York Times, 517, 565n. 
 
 New York Weekly Tribune, 560. 
 
 Newman, Ralph G., 731n. 
 
 Newton, , 229. 
 
 Niagara Falls, N. Y., 755n. 
 
 Nicholasville, Ky., 618. 
 
 Nicholson, A. O. P., 243. 
 
 Nicolay and Hay, Abraham Lincoln: 
 A History, 569n., 655 n., 755n.; 
 editors, Complete Works of Abra- 
 ham Lincoln, 18, 36, 57n., 113n., 
 131n., 252n., 277n., 284n., 324n., 
 351-352n., 569n. 
 
 Nicolay, John G., 569n., 590n., 
 615n., 724n., 767n., 768n. 
 
 Niles' National (or Weekly) Regis- 
 ter, 206, 218, 243. 
 
 Norfolk, Va., 599, 691, 776. 
 
 "Notes of an Argument," 483-484. 
 
 Nott, Charles C, 536-539n.; letters 
 to, 545-546, 560. 
 
 Noyes, Crosby S., 590n. 
 
 Oberline, Fred, 574n. 
 
 O'Byrne, M. C, History of LaSaUe 
 
 County, Illinois, 486n. 
 Offutt, Denton, 550, 551. 
 Ohio, 164th Regiment, address to, 
 
 755-756. 
 Ohio, 166th Regiment, address to, 
 
 756-757. 
 Ohio State Journal, 556n. 
 Ordinance of 1787, 524. 
 Osgood, Uri, 327. 
 Otis, James, 271. 
 Ottawa, 111., 432, 480n.; debate at, 
 
 428-468. 
 Owens, Mary, letters to, 60-62, 63n., 
 
 73-74, 74n„ 75-76, 89n., 228n.; 
 
 affair with, 114n. 
 
 Packard, M. W., letter to, 514-515. 
 
 Paine, Thomas, 6. 
 
 Palmer, John M., letter to, 279-280n. 
 
INDEX 
 
 837 
 
 Palmer, John M., The Bench and 
 Bar of Illinois, 260n., 261n. 
 
 Paris, France, 767n. 
 
 Parker, John, 226, 229. 
 
 Parker, Theodore, 8. 
 
 Parks, Samuel C, 557n. 
 
 Parrington, V. L., Main Currents in 
 American Thought, 25. 
 
 Party allegiance, indecision concern- 
 ing, 328-330n. 
 
 Patent office, report on, 626. 
 
 Paterson, William, 519. 
 
 Peace, attitude on, 723-724. 
 
 Pease, Theodore Calvin, The Frontier 
 State, 112n.-113n. 
 
 Peay, Mrs. Peachy W., 123. 
 
 Pekin, 111., 172, 173. 
 
 Pell, , 231n. 
 
 Pendleton, John S., 216n. 
 
 Pensacola, Fla., port of, 776. 
 
 Pension office, report on, 626-627, 
 783-784. 
 
 Peoria, 111., 119, 324n., 480n.; speech 
 at, 282n., 283-325n., 332n. 
 
 Peoria Register, 115. 
 
 Petersburg, 111., 258. 
 
 Petersburg, Va., 796. 
 
 Petersen, William F., Lincoln-Doug- 
 las: The Weather as Destiny, 62n., 
 114n. 
 
 Pharaoh, 277. 
 
 Philadelphia, Pa., 228, 663; speech 
 at a Sanitary Fair in, 751-753. 
 
 Phillips, D. L., Biographies of the 
 State Officers, 486n. 
 
 Phillips, , 321. 
 
 Pickett, T. J., letter to, 490, 491n. 
 
 Pierce, Franklin, 18, 25, 343, 351, 
 377, 449, 465. 
 
 Pierce, H. L., letter to, 488-489. 
 
 Pierson, Edward L., 69. 
 
 Pinckney, Charles, 521. 
 
 Piqua, O., 245-246. 
 
 Pittsburgh, Pa., 752. 
 
 Poe, Edgar Allan, "The Raven/' 
 184, 185n. 
 
 Political institutions, see "The Per- 
 petuation of Our Political Institu- 
 tions." 
 
 Political philosophy, 8, 21, 28, 29- 
 30, 42-43, 58-59, 81, 85n., 330- 
 331, 400-403, 427, 473-474, 488- 
 489, 501-504, 513, 525, 526, 577- 
 578, 580-588, 598, 606, 607, 608, 
 609, 632, 755-757. 
 
 Polk, James K., 14, 201n.-202n., 222, 
 238, 240, 269, 287. 
 
 Pope, Alexander, quoted, 494. 
 
 Pope, John, 644. 
 
 Pope, Nathaniel, 255. 
 
 Popular sovereignty, 18, 28, 387, 
 388, 389, 408, 409, 421, 422, 
 447-449, 453, 472, 473, 528, 565- 
 566. 
 
 Population, ratio of increase of, 682- 
 683. 
 
 Port Gibson, Miss., 711. 
 
 Porter, Fitz-John, 642, 643. 
 
 Porter, William, 120. 
 
 Portsmouth, Va., 691. 
 
 Post Office Department, cost of, 108- 
 110, 255n., 594; reports on, 625- 
 626, 672-673, 781-782. 
 
 Pratt, Harry E., 7|, 13, 113n.; Per- 
 sonal Finances of Abraham Lin- 
 coln, 165n. 
 
 Prentice, Charles, 69. 
 
 Presidential question, speech on, 
 233-250n. 
 
 Preston, William B., 216n., 703. 
 
 Price, , 97, 110. 
 
 "Proclamation for Thanksgiving," 
 727-729, 729n. 
 
 "Proclamation of Amnesty and Re- 
 construction," 738-741. 
 
 "Proclamation of a National Fast- 
 Day," 610-611. 
 
 "Proclamation of Thanksgiving," 
 761-762. 
 
 Proclamations, style of, 36-38. 
 
 Proverbs, 513n. 
 
 Psychoanalysis of Lincoln, 62n.- 
 63n., 114n. 
 
 Quakers, 547. 
 
 Quincy, 111., 11, 156, 426, 558n., 
 615n. 
 
838 
 
 INDEX 
 
 Quincy Whig, 11, 181n., 329. 
 Quitman, John A., 564n. 
 
 Ramsay [G. D.?], letter to, 615. 
 Ramsey's Life of Washington, 5. 
 Randolph, Edmund, 234. 
 Ransdell, Wharton, 118, 182n. 
 
 Ranson, , 167. 
 
 Ray, Charles H., 367; letter to, 482- 
 
 483n. 
 Raymond, H. J., letter to, 564-565n. 
 Reade, George, 519, 520, 521. 
 Reading, 5-6. 
 
 Reavis, Isham, letter to, 337, 337n. 
 "Rebecca" letters, 7, 7f, 10, 12, 15, 
 
 16, 154n., 155n., 158, 159, 159n.; 
 
 see also "A Letter from the Lost 
 
 Townships." 
 Rebellion, views on, 594-609, 616- 
 
 617, 632, 680, 701-705, 707, 709, 
 
 738-741. 
 Reconstruction, 738-741, 797-801. 
 Reeder, Andrew H., 334. 
 Reeside, James, 109. 
 Religious views, 13, 41, 186-188, 
 ^ 655, 772, 793, 794. 
 "Religious Views: Letter to the 
 
 Editor of the Illinois Gazette" 
 t 186-189n. 
 "Remarkable Case of Arrest for 
 
 Murder," 175-184n. 
 "Remarks to the Army of the Poto- 
 mac at Frederick, Maryland," 
 
 656. 
 Removal of Indians, cost of, 107- 
 
 108. 
 Reno, Jesse L., 665. 
 "Reply to Secretary Seward's Mem- 
 orandum," 590-591. 
 Republican National Convention 
 
 (I860), 491, 493. 
 "Resolutions in the United States 
 
 House of Representatives," 199- 
 
 202n. 
 "Resolutions upon the Subject of 
 
 Domestic Slavery," 552. 
 Responses to Serenades, 709-710, 
 
 738n., 760-761, 763-764, 768n. 
 Revolutionary War, 323. 
 
 Richardson, Israel B., 665. 
 Richardson, Mrs. W. A., 230. 
 Richardson, William A., 203, 208, 
 
 217, 230, 359, 557. 
 Richmond and Fredericksburg Rail- 
 road, 643. 
 
 Richmond Enquirer, 343. 
 Richmond, Va., 599, 638, 643, 644, 
 
 646, 648, 657-659, 726-727, 753, 
 
 796. 
 Rickard, Elizabeth, 163n. 
 Rickard, Sarah, 120, 128, 145, 163n. 
 Riley, John C, 69. 
 Riney, Zachariah, 548. 
 
 Rives, , 96. 
 
 Roberts, Edmund, 69. 
 
 Robertson, George, letters to, 21, 
 
 330n., 330-332n. 
 Robertson, George, Scrap Book on 
 
 Law and Politics, Men and Times, 
 
 332n. 
 Rock Island, 111., 490. 
 Rockingham, Va., 224. 
 Rollin, Charles, 6. 
 Rolling Fork (Ky.), 548. 
 Rosecrans, William S., 696; letters 
 
 to, 36, 765, 765n. 
 Ross, John, letter to, 654-655. 
 Ross, Rev. Dr., 478. 
 Rossville, Ind., 635. 
 Rousseau, Jean Jacques, 9, 10. 
 
 Rowland, , 769n. 
 
 Rush, Richard, 348. 
 Rusk, T. J., 214n. 
 Rutledge, Ann, 62n. 
 
 St. Clair, 111., 327. 
 
 St. Louis, Mo., 99, 122, 123n., 161, 
 
 218, 226, 251, 255, 275, 333, 
 663, 664n., 752; lynching of Mc- 
 intosh at, 78-79. 
 
 San Francisco, Cal., 669, 678. 
 
 Sandburg, Carl, Abraham Lincoln: 
 The War Years, quoted, 35, 
 733n.; Abraham Lincoln: The 
 Prairie Years, 165n., 486n.; and 
 Paul M. Angle, Mary Lincoln: 
 Wife and Widow, 120n.-121n., 
 228n. 
 
INDEX 
 
 839 
 
 Sangamo Journal, 7, 7*, 10, 57n., 
 58, 112n., 115, 145, 148, 154n., 
 155n., 156n., 157, 158, 159, 161n., 
 181n. 
 
 Sangamon (Sangamo) County, in- 
 ternal improvements of, 53-55. 
 
 Sangamon (Sangamo) River, navi- 
 gation of, 54-55. 
 
 Sanitary Commission, 751. 
 
 Santa Anna, Antonio Lopez de, 205, 
 206, 213n., 214n. 
 
 Savannah, Ga., 631, 789. 
 
 Saxton, Rufus, 643. 
 
 Schlater, C. U., letter to, 254. 
 
 Schurz, Carl, letters to, 660-662n., 
 664-665. 
 
 Schurz, Mrs. Carl, 660. 
 
 Scott, Dred, 352-365, 376, 396, 397, 
 418. 
 
 Scott, Winfield, 18, 212, 567, 591, 
 632. 
 
 Scott's Lessons in Elocution, 3. 
 
 Scripps, John L., 5, 555n. 
 
 Secession, views on, 33, 586, 595- 
 609, 616-617, 648-650, 676-679, 
 683-684, 701. 
 
 "Second Inaugural Address," 12, 29, 
 41, 45, 46, 773n., 792-793. 
 
 "Sectionalism," 22, 347-351. 
 
 Self-government, attitude toward, 
 303-308, 314, 318. 
 
 Senate and House of Representa- 
 tives, letter to, 640-641. 
 
 Seward, William H., 36, 37, 47, 
 542, 565n., 589n., 611, 691, 729, 
 729-730n., 741, 760, 762; reply 
 to Seward's memorandum, 590- 
 591. 
 
 Seymour, Glen H., " 'Conservative' 
 — Another Lincoln Pseudonym?," 
 7f. 
 
 Shakespeare, William, 6; comment 
 on plays of, 718-719. 
 
 Shawneetown, 111., 165n., 261n. 
 
 Shelbyville, Ky., 229. 
 
 Shelley, Percy Rysshe, 9. 
 
 Shepley, George F., 715. 
 
 Sheridan, Philip H., telegram to, 763. 
 
 Sherman, Roger, 518, 519, 521. 
 
 Sherman, William T., 693n., 697, 
 784, 790n.; letter to, 789-790. 
 
 Shields, Alexander, 182n. 
 
 Shields, James A., 64, 72n., 150, 
 151, 152, 153, 154n., 155n., 157, 
 158, 159, 160n.-161n., 161-162, 
 326-327, 359, 434, 441. 
 
 "Short Autobiography Written for 
 the Campaign of 1860," 4, 547- 
 555n. 
 
 Shutes, Milton Henry, Lincoln and 
 the Doctors, 62n. 
 
 Sigel, Franz, 696, 697, 718. 
 
 Silliman letter, 375. 
 
 Sioux Indians, 674. 
 
 Slavery, abolition of in District of 
 Columbia, 640-641; Emancipation 
 Proclamation, 689-691, 721-722, 
 797-798; extension of, 283-323; 
 extinction of, 330-331; proposed 
 amendment for abolishment of, 
 785; resolutions in Illinois Legis- 
 lature, 552; views on, 8, 19-22, 
 24, 29-30, 32-33, 122, 123n:, 169- 
 171, 278-279, 321-322, 332-336, 
 339-345, 347-351, 360, 363-365, 
 372-381, 392-394, 400, 427, 446- 
 448, 458, 469-471, 473-474, 477- 
 479, 500-501, 517-536, 552, 580- 
 588, 652, 680, 688, 721, 795. 
 
 Smith, C. B., 236. 
 
 Smith, Charles F., 711-712. 
 
 Smith, Edgar, 65. 
 
 Smith, Green C, 717. 
 
 Smith, Truman, 216n. 
 
 Snicker's Gap, Va., 659n. 
 
 Solomon, 150, 571. 
 
 Somers, James W., letter to, 384. 
 
 South, attitude toward, 291-292, 
 443, 480-481, 500, 526-534, 567- 
 568, 580-588, 594-609, 616, 648- 
 650, 792-793. 
 
 South Bend, Ind., 567n. 
 
 Sovereignty, 601, 604. 
 
 "Speech at a Sanitary Fair in Phila- 
 delphia," 751-753. 
 
 "Speech at Indianapolis, Indiana," 
 571-572. 
 
840 
 
 INDEX 
 
 "Speech at Peoria, Illinois," 17-20, 
 282n., 283-325n., 332n. 
 
 Speech Delivered at Kalamazoo, Mi- 
 chigan, see "Fremont, Buchanan, 
 and the Extension of Slavery: 
 Speech at Kalamazoo, Michigan." 
 
 "Speech in Reply to Douglas at 
 Chicago, Illinois," 28, 385-404. 
 
 "Speech in Reply to Douglas at 
 Springfield, Illinois," 28, 405-424, 
 451. 
 
 "Speech in the Illinois Legislature," 
 63-72, 223n. 
 
 Speed, Fanny (Henning), 123, 130- 
 131, 141-142, 143-144, 145, 147, 
 148, 162, 169, 198, 257, 336. 
 
 Speed, Joshua F., 10, 11, 12, 21, 
 120-122, 123n., 154n., 181n., 
 330n.; letters to, 116-120, 124- 
 126n., 127-128, 130-131, 141- 
 142n., 143-144, 144-146, 146- 
 148, 161-163n., 165-166n., 167- 
 169, 196-198, 256-257, 332-336n.; 
 Reminiscences of Abraham Lin- 
 coln, 336n. 
 
 Speed, Mary, 89n., 123n.; letter to, 
 121-123, 336n. 
 
 Speed, William P., 124, 143, 197. 
 
 "Spot Resolutions," 14, 199-202n. 
 
 Springfield, 111., 7, 41, 53, 60n., 61, 
 73, 113, 117-118, 122, 152, 156, 
 175, 176, 177, 179, 225, 258n., 
 278n., 316, 441, 451, 461-463, 
 550, 555, 569n., 588n., 589n., 
 725n.; farewell address at, 568- 
 570; speech in reply to Douglas at, 
 405-424; last speech at, during 
 campaign of 1858, 480-481; Dred 
 Scott decision, speech at, 352- 
 365. 
 
 Squatter sovereignty, 373, 387-388. 
 
 Stanton, Edwin M., 16, 642n., 758, 
 790n., 791; letters to, 733, 733n., 
 744, 745-746. 
 
 Stanton, Frederick P., 233. 
 
 Stanwood, , 231n. 
 
 State Bank, see Bank of Illinois. 
 
 States' rights, views on, 572, 580, 
 
 587, 594-609. 
 Steamboat Lebanon, 122. 
 Steele, Frederick, 697. 
 Stephens, Alexander H., 42, 215n.- 
 
 261n., 219, 514n. ; letter to, 567- 
 
 568n. 
 Stevens, Isaac, 665. 
 Stillman's defeat, 242. 
 Stone, Dan, 8, 171n.; co-author of 
 
 resolutions on slavery, 552. 
 Stone, Edward C, 772n. 
 Story's Equity, 2. 
 Story's Equity Pleadings, 2. 
 "Story Written for Noah Brooks," 
 
 772. 
 Stringfellow, Benjamin R., & Co., 
 
 335. 
 Strong, William, 227. 
 
 Strunk, , 326-327. 
 
 Stuart, John T., 6, 172n., 551, 552; 
 
 letters to, 113-114, 115-116n. 
 
 Stuart, , 455. 
 
 Sturtevant, Julian M., letter to, 346. 
 Sub-Treasury, speech on, 90-1 13n. 
 Sumner, Charles, 42, 416. 
 Sumner, Edwin V., 638, 641. 
 Supreme Court, report on operations 
 
 of, 622-625. 
 
 Swartwout, , 97, 110. 
 
 Sweeney, William, 549. 
 
 Sweet, M. P., 256, 257n.; letter to, 
 
 475. 
 
 Taney, Roger B., 25, 354, 357, 358, 
 . 360, 377, 378, 449, 451, 465. 
 
 Tarbell, Ida M., In the Footsteps of 
 the Lincolns, 338n. 
 
 Taylor, Edmund D., 69. 
 
 Taylor, John, 69. 
 
 Taylor, Zachary, 15, 201, 210, 221, 
 222, 233-237, 240, 247-250n., 269, 
 553-554. 
 
 Tazewell Whig, 174n. 
 
 "Temperance Address Delivered be- 
 fore the Springfield Washington 
 Temperance Society," 8, 10, 131- 
 141. 
 
INDEX 
 
 841 
 
 "Testimonial for Doctor Isachar 
 Zacharie," 654. 
 
 "Terms for General Lee's Capitula- 
 tion," 791. 
 
 Texas, annexation of, 170-171. 
 
 Thayer, W. R., Life and Letters of 
 John Hay, 771n. 
 
 "The Bear Hunt," 193-196. 
 
 "The Dred Scott Decision: Speech 
 at Springfield, Illinois," 22, 352- 
 365. 
 
 "The 14th Section; An Editorial in 
 the Illinois Journal" 281-282. 
 
 The National Archives, 609n. 
 
 "The Perpetuation of Our Political 
 Institutions: Address before the 
 Young Men's Lyceum of Spring- 
 field, Illinois," 4, 8, 9, 72n., 76- 
 85n., 514n. 
 
 "The Presidential Question: Speech 
 in the United States House of 
 Representatives," 233-250n. 
 
 "The President's Last, Shortest, and 
 Best Speech," see "Story Written 
 for Noah Brooks." 
 
 "The Repeal of the Missouri Com- 
 promise and the Propriety of Its 
 Restoration: Speech at Peoria, 
 Illinois, in Reply to Senator 
 Douglas," 283-325n. 
 
 "The Sub-Treasury: Speech at a 
 Political Discussion in the Hall of 
 the House of Representatives at 
 Springfield, Illinois," 4, 90-1 13n. 
 
 "The War with Mexico: Speech in 
 the United States House of Repre- 
 sentatives," 14, 202-216n. 
 
 Thomas, George H., 789. 
 
 Thomas, Lorenzo, 665. 
 
 Thomas, William, 515. 
 
 Thoreau, Henry D., 8. 
 
 Thornton, James T., letter to, 337n., 
 485, 485n. 
 
 Thornton, J. W., 485-486n. 
 
 Thornton, W. F., 69. 
 
 Thornton's Gap, Va., 659. 
 
 Tilson, John, 69. 
 
 Todd, Ann, 125, 168. 
 
 Todd, Mary, see Lincoln, Mary 
 
 (Todd). 
 Todd, Robert S., 553. 
 Toombs, Robert, 216n. 
 Tordenskiold, P., 668. 
 "To the People of Sangamo County," 
 
 4, 5. 
 Townsend, William H., Lincoln and 
 
 His Wife's Home Town, 747n. 
 Trailor, Archibald, 117-120, 175- 
 
 181, 182-184n. 
 Trailor, Henry, 117-120, 175-181, 
 
 182-184n. 
 Trailor, William, 117-120, 175-181, 
 
 182n.-184n. 
 Transportation, report on, 675. 
 Transylvania College, 332n. 
 
 Trapp, , 327. 
 
 Treasury Department, report on 
 
 operations of, 619-620, 670-672, 
 
 778-780. 
 Treat, Samuel, letter to, 663, 664n. 
 Tremont, 111., 174n. 
 Trenton, N. J., 574. 
 Trumbull, Lyman, 20, 280n., 326- 
 
 328, 340, 374, 391, 412, 430, 
 
 434, 435, 441, 508, 539; letters 
 
 to, 486-487, 542-543. 
 Tunstall, Warrich, 226. 
 Twain, Mark, 11. 
 Tyler, Daniel, 708. 
 Tyler, John, 152, 348. 
 
 Underwood, 
 
 486-487. 
 
 Union, preservation of, 308-311, 
 315, 584, 630-631, 650, 652, 687- 
 688, 699-708, 722, 734. 
 
 Urbana, 111., 485n.-486n. 
 
 Usury, proposal for laws governing, 
 55-56, 57-58n. 
 
 Vallandigham, Clement L., 704, 
 
 706, 707, 708n. 
 Van Bergen, Peter, 148, 167. 
 Van Buren, Martin, 61, 91, 92, 105, 
 
 106, 107, 110, 111, 203, 239, 
 
 240, 244, 269. 
 Vandalia, 111., 87, 510n. 
 
842 
 
 INDEX 
 
 Van Hoesen, H. B., The Humor of 
 Lincoln and the Seriousness of 
 His Biographers, 17, 57n.-58n. 
 
 "Verses: To Linnie," 477. 
 
 "Verses: To Rosa," 476. 
 
 Vestal's Gap, Va., 659. 
 
 Vicksburg, Miss., 697, 711; lynch- 
 ing at, 79. 
 
 Victoria, Queen, 23 In. 
 
 Volney, C. F. C. de, 6. 
 
 Voltaire, 6, 275. 
 
 Wallace, William S., 168. 
 Walters, William, 165, 167, 168. 
 Wann, Daniel, 69. 
 War Department, report on oper- 
 ations of, 620-621, 672, 780. 
 War, effect on American society, 
 
 666-667; report on progress of, 
 
 784-785. 
 War of 1812, 250n., 270, 271. 
 Ward, Artemus, 16. 
 Warren, Louis A., Lincoln Lore, 
 
 735n. 
 Washburne, E. B., 20, 280n.; letters 
 
 to, 325, 326-328, 366-367n., 370- 
 
 371. 
 Washington Daily Chronicle, 773n. 
 Washington, D. C, 64, 246, 266, 
 
 297, 560n., 589n., 592n., 638, 
 
 644, 645, 646, 658-659, 719, 
 
 719n., 725n., 726, 729, 741, 762, 
 
 784, 798, 801n. 
 Washington, George, 46, 85, 103, 
 
 105-106, 141, 209, 215n., 234, 
 
 271, 436, 440, 447, 449, 519, 
 
 527, 568, 570n., 607, 608, 656; 
 
 discussion of Farewell Address, 
 
 527-528. 
 Washington Star, 590n. 
 Washington Temperance Society, 
 
 129n. 
 Washington Union, Lincoln reads 
 
 article in, 454-457. 
 Weathers, Mrs. Susannah (Crume), 
 
 letter to, 635. 
 Webster, B. C., & Co., 167, 169. 
 Webster, Daniel, 26, 150, 248, 322, 
 
 421, 429, 589n. 
 
 Webster, Noah, 319. 
 Weed, Thurlow, letter to, 794. 
 Weems, Mason L., Life of Washing- 
 ton, 5, 574. 
 Weik, Jesse W., 47. 
 W r eitzel, Godfrey, telegram to, 802. 
 Weldon, Lawrence, 384. 
 Welles, C. R., letter to, 254-255n. 
 Wentworth, John, 237-238, 325, 
 
 326n., 435. 
 Westfield, N. Y., 562n. 
 Whig, 175, 181n. 
 White, Horace, 381n. 
 White, Hugh L., 59. 
 
 White, , 231n. 
 
 Whiteside, John D., 156n., 157, 
 
 158n., 159n., 161-162. 
 Whitman, Walt, 8, 39. 
 Whitney, Henry C., 21. 
 Whittier, John G., 8. 
 Wickersham, Josiah, 117. 
 Wickliffe family, 226. 
 Wickliffe, Robert, 331n. 
 
 Wickliffe, , 717. 
 
 Widmer,' John 'h., 2, 485, 485n.- 
 
 486n. 
 Wiggins, Samuel, 65-72. 
 Wight, A. G. S., 69. 
 Wilkinson, Samuel, letter to, 371- 
 
 372n. 
 Williams, Archibald, 329, 435. 
 Williamson, Elizabeth, 142. 
 Williamson, Hugh, 518. 
 Williamson, John, 142. 
 Williamsport, Va., 713. 
 Willis, N. P., 185n. 
 Wilmot, David, 288. 
 Wilmot Proviso, 235, 237, 242, 243, 
 
 288, 289, 293, 294, 295, 296, 
 
 297 335 
 Wilson, Charles L., 367, 367n., 368, 
 
 370. 
 Wilson, Edward M., 69. 
 Winchester, 111., 433, 476, 476n., 
 
 477. 
 Winchester, V^., 657, 658, 708. 
 Wisconsin State Agricultural Society, 
 
 address before, 493-504, 504n.- 
 
 505n. 
 
INDEX 
 
 843 
 
 Wolf, Enoch O., 765, 765n.-766n. 
 
 Women's Central Association of Re- 
 lief, 750n. 
 
 Woodbury, Levi, 93n. 
 
 Woodward, , 187. 
 
 Wool, John E., 639, 646. 
 
 Wordsworth, William, 9. 
 
 Wren, Aquilla, 69. 
 
 Wright, Crafts J., and C. K. Hawkes, 
 letter to, 742. 
 
 Wright, Silas, 92. 
 
 "Written by Lincoln in the Auto- 
 
 graph Album of Mary Delahay," 
 505. 
 
 Yates, Richard, 320, 462, 554, 717. 
 Yazoo Pass expedition, 711. 
 Yeatman, James E., 255. 
 Young & Brothers, 254. 
 Young, Brigham, 366n. 
 Young Men's Central Republican 
 Union, 32, 536n.-539n. 
 
 Zacharie, Isachar, testimonial for, 
 654.