Page images

JOINT RESOLUTION OF THE REBEL LEGISLATURE |phy, J. A. Newell, Lucien P. Normand, P. K. O'Conner,


Be it resolved, &c., That the barbarous manner in which our enemies have waged war against us deserves the execration of all men, and has confirmed and strengthened us in the determination to oppose to the last extremity a re-union with them, and that the spirit of our people is unabated in the resolution to resist every attempt at their subjugation.

1864, August 5-Messrs. BENJAMIN F. WADE and HENRY WINTER DAVIS published in the New York Tribune a paper arr igning President LINCOLN for his course on the Reconstruction bill. A few extracts are subjoined:

Thomas Ong, Benjamin II. Orr, John Payne, J. T. Paine,
uel Pursell. J. B. Schroeder, Martin Schnurr, John
Eudaldo G. Pintado, O. II. Poynot, John Purcell, Sain-
Sullivan, Alfred Shaw, Charles Smith, Johu A. Spellicy.
Wixiam Tompkins Stocker, John Stumpf, J. II. Stier,
C. W. Stauffer, Robert W. Taliaferro, J. Randall Terry, T.
B. Thorpe, John W. Thomas, Ernest J. Wenck, Thomas M.
Wells, Joseph Hamilton Wilson, and E. II. Durell, Presi

NAYS-Messrs. Edmund Abell, John Buckley, Jr., Berj.
Campbell, Thomas J. Decker, Dufresne, of Iberville.
Robert J. Duke, Louis Gastinel, C. H. L. Gruneberg, IL. J.
W. Waters-13.
Heard, Xavier Maurer, John A. Mayer, A. Mendiverri, H.

A. Cazabat and James Ennis voted aye the next day, having been absent when the vote was taken.

that loyal owners shall be compensated."
May 9-Mr. JOSEPH H. WILSON moved to provide: "And

which was agreed to-yeas 45, nays 30, as
Mr. GOLDMAN moved to lay the motion on the table;

Collin, Cazabat, J, K. Cook, Cutler, Davies, Duane, Dupaty,
YEAS-Messrs. Ariail, Austin, Bailey, Bonzano, Burke,
Edwards, James Ennis, Fish, Flagg, Flood, Foley, Fosdick,
Goldman, Gorlinski, Healy, Harnan, Hills, Hire, Howes,
Maas, Mann, Millspaugh, E. Murphy, Newell, Normand, J.
Payne, Pintado, S. Pursell, Schroeder, Schnurr, Shaw,
Smith, Spellicy, Stauffer, Taliaferro, Terry, Thorpe, Weils


NAYS-Messrs. Abell, Barrett, Bell, Bofill, George F. Brott, Buckley, T. Cook, Crozat, Dufresne, Duke, Fuller, Gruneberg, Hart, Heard, Henderson, E. H. Knobloch, Maurer, Mayer, Mendiverri, Montamat, M. W. Murphy, O'Conner, Ong, W. II. Seymour, Stocker, Stumpf, Stiner, Sul


The Free State Convention met January 11,1864, and adopted a Constitution, which was submitted to a vote of the people, March 14th, 15th, and 16th, and received 12,177 votes, 226 being polled against it.

The President, by preventing this bill from becoming a law, holds the electoral votes of the rebel States at the dictation of his personal ambition. If those votes turn the balance in his favor, is it to be supposed that his competitor, defeated by such means, will acquiesce? If the rebel majority assert their supremacy in those States, and send votes which elect an enemy of the Government, will we not repel his claims? And is not that civil war for the Presidency inaugurated by the votes of rebel States? Seriously impressed with these dangers, Congress, "the proper constitutional authority," formally declared that there are no State governments in the rebel States, and provided for their erection at a proper time; and both the Senate and the House of Representatives rejected the Senators and Representatives chosen under the authority of what the President calls the free constitution and government of Arkansas. The President's proclamation "holds for naught" this judgment, and discards the authority of the Supreme Court, and strides headlong to-livan, Waters, Wilson―30. ward the anarchy his proclamation of the 8th of December inaugurated. If electors for President be allowed to be chosen in either of those States, a sinister light will be cast on the motives which induced the President to "hold for naught" the will of Congress rather than his govern ment in Louisiana and Arkansas. That judgment of Congress which the President defies was the exercise of an authority exclusively vested in Congress by the Constitution to determine what is the established government in a State, and in its own nature and by the highest judicial authority binding on all other departments of the Government. ** A more studied outrage on the legislative authority of the people has never been perpetrated. Congress passed a bill; the President refused to approve it, and then by proclamation puts as much of it in force as he sees fit, and proposes to execute those parts by officers unknown to the laws of the United States and not subject to the confirmation of the Senate! The bill directed the appointment of Provisional Governors by and with the advice and consent of the Senate. The President, after defeating the law, proposes to appoint without law, and without the advice and consent of the Senate, Military Governors for the rebel States! IIe has already exercised this dictatorial usurpation in Louisiana, and he deteated the bill to prevent its limitation. The President has greatly presumed on the forbearance which the supporters of his Administration have so long practiced, in view of the arduous conflict in which we are engaged, and the reckless ferocity of our political opponents. But he must understand that our support is of a cause and not of a man; that the authority of Congress is paramount and must be respected; that the whole body of the Union men of Congress will not submit to be impeached by him of rash and unconstitutional legislation; and if he wishes our support, he must confine himself to his executive duties to obey and execute, not make the laws-to suppress by arms armed rebellion, and leave political reorganization to Congress. If the supporters of the Government fail to insist on this, they becoine responsible for the usurpations which they fail to rebuke, and are justly liable to the indignation of the people whose rights and security, committed to their keeping, they sacrifice. Let them consider the remedy for these usurpations, and, having found it, fearlessly execute it.


1864, May 11-The vote in Convention was-yeas 72, nays 13:

YEAS-Messrs. M. R. Ariail, O. W. Austin, John T. Barrett, Raphael Beauvais, J. V. Bofill, Robert Bradshaw Bell, Robert W. Bennic, M. F. Bonzano. J. B. Bromley, Young Burke, Emile Collin, J. K. Cook, Terence Cook, F. M. Cro zat, R. King Cutler, John L. Davies, James Duane, Joseph Dupaty, II. C. Edwards, W. R. Fish, G. II. Flagg, Edmond Flood, John Foley, G. A. Fosdick, James Fuller, George Geier, E. Goldman, Joseph Gorlinski, Jeremiah J. Healy, Patrick Harman, Edward Hart, John Henderson, Jr., Alfred C. Hills, William H. Hire, George Howes, P. A. Kugler, II. Maas, William Davis Mann, H. Millspaugh, John P. Montamat, Robert Morris, Edward Murphy, M. W Mur

The Emancipation clause was adopted unanimously. The following named persons constituted the Convention: John McCoy, President of Convention, Luther C. White, C. A. Harper, John Austin, Josiah Harrell, Harmon L Holleman, John R. Smoot, Randolph D. Swindell, G. W. Seamans, James T. Swafford, W. Holleman, John M. Demint, Enoch II. Vance, Miles L. Langly, J. M. Stapp, C. D. Jordan, John Burton, John C. Pridy, Reuben Lamb, E. D. Ayres, T. D. W. Yonley, E. L. Maynard, William Stomt, Burk Johnson, Elias Cook, L. D. Cantrell, Willis Jones, James A. Butler, T. M. Jacks, Horace B. Allis, John Box, Calvin C. Bliss, A. B. Fryrear, Lemuel Helms, R. L. Turner, Thomas J. Young, James Huey, Andrew G. Evans, R. H. Stanfield, Willian Cox, L. Dunscomb.

ABOLITION OF SLAVERY IN MISSOURI. 1865, January 11-The vote in Convention was-yeas 59, nays 4, as follows:

YEAS-W. B. Adams, A. M. Bedford, David Bonham, Geo. K. Budd, Harvey Bunce, Isador Bush, R. L. Childress, Henry A. Clover, R. C. Cowden, Samuel T. Davis, John H. Davis, Isham B. Dodson, Wm. D. D'Oench, Charles D. Drake, John H. Ellis, John Esther, Ellis J. Evans, Chauncey I. Filley, J. W. Fletcher, Wm. II. Folmsbee, F. M. Fulkerson, John W. Gamble, Archibald Gilbert, Abner L. Gilstrap, Moses P. Green, J. M. Grammer, David Henderson, E. A. Holcomb, John II. Holdsworth, Wm. S. Holland, B. F. Hughes, Jos. F. Hume, Geo. Ilusmann, Wyllis King, R. Leonard, M. L. Linton, J. F. McKernan, A. M. McPherson, John A. Mack, A. II. Martin, Ferdinand Meyer, James P. Mitchell, A. G. Newgent, A. P. Nixdorf, James W. Owens, Dorastus Peck, J. T. Rankin, Phillip Rohrer, Gustavus St. Gemme, K. G. Smith, Eli Smith, Geo. P. Strong, James T. Sutton, John R. Swearinger, G. C. Thilenius, S. W. Wea therby, Jeremiah Williams, Eugene Williams, Arnold Krekel, President-59.

NAYS-Samuel A. Gilbert, Thomas B. Harris, William A. Martin, William F. Switzler-4.

ABSENT-A. J. Barr, Emory S. Foster, J. Roger. The last named had not attended the Convention up to the day of voting.


1865, January 10-A convention of Unionists met in Nashville, and adopted a series of propositions to be submitted to the people February 22d, the first of which de crees the abolition of slavery. Over five hundred delegates attended, representing nearly every county. March 4, a Governor and Legislature are to be chosen. William G. Brownlow is the Convention's nominee for Governor.

Tennessee, 21 in Middle, 1 in West, and 10 hospitals, regi The latest returns published comprise 8 counties in East ments, &c., giving an aggregate of 21,104 for, and 49 against the Constitution. March 4, the Union State ticket was chosen.


EXPLANATORY OF GOVERNMENT PURCHASES IN I also directed the commandant of the navy

MAY, 1861.

1862, May 29-The PRESIDENT sent this message to Congress:

To the Senate and

House of Representatives:

The insurrection which is yet existing in the United States, and aims at the overthrow of the Federal Constitution and the Union, was clandestinely prepared during the winter of 1860 and 1861, and assumed an open organization in the form of a treasonable provisional government at Montgomery, in Alabama, on the 18th day of February, 1861. On the 12th day of April, 1861, the insurgents committed the flagrant act of civil war by the bombardment and capture of Fort Sumter, which cut off the hope of immediate conciliation. Immediately afterwards all the roads and avenues to this city were obstructed, and the capital was put into the condition of a siege. The mails in every direction were stopped, and the lines of telegraph cut off by the insurgents, and military and naval forces, which had been called out by the Government for the defence of Washington, were prevented from reaching the city by organized and combined treasonable resistance in the State of Maryland. There was no adequate and effective organization for the public defence. Congress had indefinitely adjourned. There was no time to convene them. It became necessary for me to choose whether, using only the existing means, agencies, and processes which Congress had provided, I should let the Government fall at once into ruin, or whether, availing myself of the broader powers conferred by the Constitution in cases of insurrection I would make an effort to save it with all its

blessings for the present age and for posterity. I thereupon summoned my constitutional advisers, the heads of all the Departments, to meet on Sunday, the 20th day of April, 1861, at the office of the Navy Department, and then and there, with their unanimous concurrence, I directed that an armed revenue cutter should proceed to sea, to afford protection to the commercial marine, and especially the California treasure ships then on their way to this coast.

* Called forth by the passage of a resolution, April 30, in the House-yeas 79, nays 45-censuring Secretary Cameron for a supposed responsibility for, and connection with, the circumstances detailed.

Similar directions

yard at Boston to purchase or charter, and arm
as quickly as possible, five steamships, for pur-
poses of public defence. I directed the com-
mandant of the navy-yard at Philadelphia to
purchase, or charter and arm, an equal number
I directed the comman-
for the same purpose.
dant at New York to purchase, or charter and
arm, an equal number. I directed Commander
Gillis to purchase, or charter and arm, and put
to sea two other vessels
were given to Commodore Du Pont, with a view
to the opening of passages by water to and from
I directed the several officers to
the capital.
take the advice and obtain the aid and efficient
services in the matter of his Excellency Edwin
D. Morgen, the Governor of New York, or, in
his absence, George D. Morgan, William M.
Evarts, R. M. Blatchford, and Moses H. Grin-
nell, who were, by my directions, especially em-
Powered by the Secretary of the Navy to act for
his Department in that cri is, in matters per-
taining to the forwarding of troops and supplies
for the public defence.

On the same occasion I directed that Governor Morgan and Alexander Cummings, of the city of New York, should be authorized by the Secretary of War, Simon Cameron, to make all necessary arrangements for the transportation of troops and munitions of war, in aid and assistance of the officers of the Army of the United States, until communication by mails and telegraph should be completely re-established between the cities of Washington and New York. No security was required to be given by them, and either of them was authorized to act in case of inability to consult with the other.

On the same occasion I authorized and directed the Secretary of the Treasury to advance, without requiring security, two millions of dollars of public money to John A. Dix, George Opdyke, and Richard M. Blatchford, of New York, to be used by them in meeting such requisitions as should be directly consequent upon the military and naval measures necessary for the defence and support of the Government, requiring them only to act without compensation, and to report their transactions when duly called upon.

The several departments of the Government at that time contained so large a number of disloyal persons that it would have been impos

sible to provide safely, through official agents only, for the performance of the duties thus confided to citizens favorably known for their ability, loyalty, and patriotism.

in the field cannot be successfi 1, not only the Secretary of
War, but myself, for the time being the master of them Loth,
to be successful, and I know he does not wish it any more
than the Secretary of War for him, and both of them
together no more than I wish it. Sometimes we have a
and those who would disparage him say that he has had a
very large number, and those who would disparage the
Secretary of War insist that General McClellan has had a
very small number. The basis for this is, there is always
a wide difference, and on this occasion, perhaps a wider one
than usual, between the grand total on McClellan's rolls
disparage him talk of the grand total on paper, and those
and the men actually fit for duty; and those who would
who would disparage the Secretary of War talk of those at
present fit for duty. General McClellan has sometimes
asked for things that the Secretary of War did not give him.
General McClellan is not to blame for asking for what he
wanted and needed, and the Secretary of War is not to,
blame for not giving when he had none to give. And I say
here, as far as I know, the Secretary of War, has withheld
no one thing at any time in my power to give him. I have
no accusation against him. I believe he is a brave and
able man, and I stand here, as justice requires me to do, to
of War, as withholding from him.
take upon myself what has been charged on the Secretary

cannot but be failures. I know General McClellan wishes

The several orders issued upon these occur-dispute about how many men General McClellan has had, rences were transmitted by private messengers, who pursued a circuitous way to the seaboard cities, inland, across the States of Pennsylvania and Ohio and the Northern Lakes. I believe that by these and other similar measures taken in that crisis, some of which were without any authority of law, the Government was saved from overthrow. I am not aware that a dollar of the public funds thus confided without authority of law to unofficial persons was either lost or wasted, although apprehensions of such misdirection occurred to me as objections to those extraordinary proceedings, and were necessarily overruled.

I recall these transactions now because my attention has been directed to a resolution which was passed by the House of Representatives on the 30th day of last month, which is in these words:

Resolved, That Simon Cameron, late Secretary of War, by investing Alexander Cummings with the control of large sums of the public money, and authority to purchase military supplies without restriction, without requiring from him any guarantee for the faithful performance of his duties, when the services of competent public officers were available, and by involving the Government in a vast number of contracts with persons not legitimately engaged in the business pertaining to the subject-matter of such contracts, especially in the purchase of arms for future delivery, has adopted a policy highly injurious to the public service, and

deserves the censure of the House.

Congress will see that I should be wanting equally in candor and in justice if I should leave the censure expressed in this resolution to rest exclusively or chiefly upon Mr. Cameron. The same sentiment is unanimously entertained by the heads of Departments, who participated in the proceedings which the House of Representatives has censured. It is due to Mr. Cameron to say that, although he fully approved the proceedings, they were not moved nor suggested by himself, and that not only the President but all the other heads of Departments were at least equally responsible with him for whatever error, wrong, or fault was committed in the premises.


THE PRESIDENT'S REMARKS AT A UNION MEETING IN WASHINGTON, AUGUST 6, 1862. FELLOW-CITIZENS: I believe there is no precedent for my appearing before you on this occasion, but it is also true that there is no precedent for your being here yourselves, and I offer, in justification of myself and of you, that, upon examination, I have found nothing in the Constitution against it. I, however, have an impression that there are younger gentlemen who will entertain you better, and better address your understanding than I will or could, and therefore I propose but to detain you a moment longer.

I am very little inclined on any occasion to say anything unless I hope to produce some good by it. The only thing I think of just now not likely to be better said by some one else, is a matter in which we have heard some other persons blamed for what I did myself. There has been a very widespread attempt to have a quarrel between Gen. McClellan and the Secretary of War. Now, I occupy a position that enables me to observe, that these two gentlemen are not nearly so deep in the quarrel as some pretending to be their friends. General McClellan's attitude is such that, in the very selfishness of his nature, he cannot but wish to be successful, and I hope he will-and the Secretary of War is in precisely the same situation. If the military commanders

I have talked longer than I expected to do, and now I avail myself of my privilege of saying no more. The President's Letters on Politics.

[blocks in formation]

My paramount object is to save the Union and not either to save or 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 be cause I believe it helps to save the Union, and what I for bear, 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 shall do more whenever I believe doing more will help the cause.

I shall adopt new views so fast as they shall appear to be
I shall try to correct errors when shown to be errors, and

true views.

official duty, and I intend no modification of my oft-expressed
I have here stated my purpose according to my view of
personal wish that all men everywhere could be free.

JULY, 1863.

FELLOW-CITIZENS: I am very gld indeed to see von to night, and yet I will not say I thank yen, 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 representatives, as sein bled 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 very peculiar recognitions. The two men most distinguished in the framing and support of the Declaration

were Thomas Jefferson and John Adams-the one having penned it, and the other sustained it the most forcibly in debate the only two of the fifty-live who signed it, and were elected Presidents of the United States. Precisely fity years after they put their hands to the paper, it pleased Almighty God to take both from this stags 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 were 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 great battle, on the first, second, and third of the month of July; and on the fourth the cohorts of those who opposed the Declaration that all men are created equal, turned tail" and run. (Long continued cheers.] Gentle men, 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 their country from the beginning of the war. These are trying occasions, not only in success, but for the want of success. I dislike 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.


people, according to the bond of service, the United States Constitution; and that, as such, I am responsible to them. But, to be plain. You are dissatisfied with me about the negro. Quite likely there is a difference of opinion between you and myself upon that subject. I certainly wish that all men could be free, while you, I suppose, do not. Yet, I have neither adopted nor proposed any measure which is not consistent with even your view, provided that 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 a 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 prop erty. Is there, has there ever been, any question that by the law of war, property, both of enemies and friends, may be taken when needed? And is it not needed whenever it helps us and hurts the enemy? Armies, the world over, destroy enemies' property when they cannot use it; and even destroy their own to keep it from the enemy. Civil. ized 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 noa-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 cannot be retracted, any more than the dead can be brought to life. Some of you profess to think its retraction

THE PRESIDENT'S LETTER TO THE ILLINOIS CON- would operate favorably for the Union. Why better after



Hon. JAMES C. CONKLING: MY DEAR SIR: Your letter inviting me to attend a mass meeting of unconditional Union men, to be held at the capital of Illinois, on the 3d day of September, has been received. It would be very agreeable for me thus to meet my old friends at my own home: but I cannot just now be absent from here so long as a visit there would require. The meeting is to be of all those who maintain unconditional devotion to the Union; and I am sure that my old political friends will thank me for tendering, as I do, the nation's gratitude to those other noble men whom no partisan malice or partisan hope can make false to the nation's 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 that any compromise embracing the maintenance of the Union is now possible. All that I learn leads to a directly opposite beliei. The strength of the Rebellion is its military, its army. That army dominates all the country, and all the people within its range. Any offer of terms made by any man or men within that range, in opposition to that army, is simply nothing for the pres ent; because such man of men have no power whatever to enforce their side of a compromise, if one were made with


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 Le'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 compromis to which the controilers of Lee's army are not agreed can at all affect that army. In an effort at such compromise we would waste time, which the enemy would improve to our disadvantage; and that would be all.

A compromise, to be effective, must be made either with those who control the rebel army, or with the people, first Liberated from the domination of that army by the success of our own army. Now, allow me to assure you that no word or intimation from that rebel army, or from any of the men coutrolling it, in relation to any peace compromise, has ever come to iny 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 to be the servant of the

the retraction than before the issue? There was more than a year and a half of trial to suppress the rebellion before the Proclamation was 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 opinion of others that some of the commanders of our armies in the field, who have given us our most important victories, believe the emancipation policy and the use of colored troops constitute the heaviest blows yet dealt to the rebellion, and that at least one of those important successes could not have been achieved when it was but for the aid of black soldiers.

Among the commanders who hold these views are some who have never had an affinity with what is called “abolitionism," or with "Republican party politics," but who hold them purely as military opinions. I submit their opinions as 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 that you will not fight to free negroes. Some of them seem willing to fight for you; but no matter. Fight you, then, exclusively, to save the Union. I issued the procla mation on purpose to aid you in saving the Union. Whenever you shall have conquered all resistance to the Union, if I shall urge you to continue fighting, it will be an apt time then for you to declare you will not fight to free negroes. I thought that in your 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 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 anything for us if we will do nothing for them? If they stake their lives for us they must be prompted by the strongest motives, even the promise of freedom. And the promise, being made, must be kept.

The signs look better. The Father of Waters again goes unvexed to the sea. Thanks to the great Northwest for it; nor yet wholly to them. Three hundred miles up they met New England, Empire, Keystone, and Jersey, hewing their way right and left. The sunny South, too, in more colora than one, also lent a helping 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 slighted 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 less note. Nor must Uncle Sam's web feet be forgotten. At all the watery margins they have been present, not only on the deep sea, the broad bay, and the rapid river, but also up the narrow, muddy bayou, and wherever the ground was a little damp they have been and made their tracks. Thanks to all. For the great Ro

public-for the principle it lives by and keeps alive-for | I could not take the office without taking the oath. Nor man's vast future-thanks to all.

Peace does not appear so distant as it did. I hope it will come soon and come to stay; and so come as to be worth the keeping in all future time. It will then have been proved that among freemen there can be no successful appeal from the ballot to the bullet, and that they who take such appeal are sure to lose their case and pay the cost. And there will be some black men who can remember that with silent tongue, and clinched teeth, and steady eye, and well-poised bayonet, they have helped mankind 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 have striven 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,




EXECUTIVE MANSION, WASHINGTON, January 16, 1864. GENTLEMEN: The number for this month and year of the North American Review was duly received, and for which please accept my thanks. Of course, I am not the most impartial judge, yet, with due allowance for this, I venture to hope that the article entitled "The President's Policy," will be of value to the country. I fear I am not quite worthy of all which is therein kindly said of me personally. The sentence of twelve lines, commencing at the top of page 252, I could wish to be not exactly as it is. In what is there expressed the writer has not correctly understood

me. I have never had a theory that secession could absolve States or people from their obligations. Precisely the contrary is asserted in the inaugural address; and it was because of my belief in the continuation of these obligations that I was puzzled, for a time, as to denying the legal rights of those citizens who remained individually innocent of

treason or rebellion. But I mean no more now than to merely call attention to this point.

Yours respectfully,


was it my view that I might take an oath to get power, and
break the oath in using the power. I understood, too, that
in ordinary and civil administration this oath even forbade
me to practically indulg my primory abstract juogment on
the moral question of slavery. I had publicly declared this
many times, and in many ways. And I aver that, to this
day, I have done no official act in mere deference to my ab-
stract judgment and feeling on slavery I did understand,
however, that my oath to preserve the Constitution to the
best of my ability, imposed upon me the duty of preserv
ing, by every indispensable means, that Government-that
nation, of which that Constitution was the organic law.
Was it possible to lose the nation and yet preserve the Con-
tution? By general law, life and limb must be protected;
yet often a limb must be amputated to save a life; but a
life is never wisely given to save a limb. I felt that meas-
ures, otherwise unconstitutional, might become lawful, by
becoming indispensable to the preservation of the Constitu-
tion, through the preservation of the nation. Right or
wrong, I assumed this ground, and now avow it. I could
not feel that, to the best of my ability I had even tried to
preserve the Constitution, if, to save slavery, or any minor
matter, I should permit the wreck of Government, country,
and Constitution, altogether. When early in the war, Gen-
eral Fremont attempted military emancipation, I forbade
it, because I did not then think it an indispensable neces-
sity. When a little later, General Cameron, then Secretary
of War, suggested the arming of the blacks, I objected, be-
cause I did not yet think it an indispensable necessity.
When, still later, General Hunter attempted military eman-
cipation, I again forbade it, because I did not yet think the
indispensable necessity had come.
May, and July, 1862, I made earnest and successive appeals
to the border States to favor compensated emancipation, I
believed the indispensable necessity for military emancipa
tion and arming the blacks would come, unless averted by
that measure. They declined the proposition, and I was, in
my best judgment, driven to the alternative of either sur-
rendering the Union, and with it, the Constitution, or of
latter. In choosing it, I hoped for greater gain than loss,
laying strong hand upon the colored element. I chose the
but of this I was not entirely confident More than a year of
trial now shows no loss by it in our foreign relations, none
in our home popular sentiment, none in our white military
force, no loss by it any how, or anywhere. On the contrary,

When in March and

The sentence in the January number, refered it shows a gain of quite a hundred and thirty thousand sol to by Mr. Lincoln, is as follows:

diers, seamen, and laborers. These are palpable facts, about which, as facts, there can be no cavilling. We have the nien; aud we could not have had them without the meas

"And now let any Union man who complains of this measure, test himself by writing down in one line, that he is for subdui g the rebell on by force of arms; and in the next, that he is for taking three hundred and thirty thousand men from the Union side, and placing them where they would be best for the measure he condemns. If he cannot face his case so stated, it is only because he cannot face the truth."

Even so long ago as when Mr. Lincoln, not yet convinced of the danger and magnitude of the crisis, was endeavoringure. to persuade himself of Union majorities at the South, and to carry on a war that was half peace in hope of a peace that would have been all war, while he was still enforcing the fugitive slave law, under some theory that secession, how ever it might absolve States from their obligations, could not escheat them of their claims under the Constitution, and that slaveholders in rebellion had alone, among mortals, the privilege of having their cake and eating it at the same time-the enemies of free government were striving to persuade the people that the war was an abolition crusade. To rebel without reason was proclaimed as one of the rights of man, while it was carefully kept out of sight that to suppress rebellion is the first duty of the Government.

To this the editors of the Review append a note, as follows:

Nothing could have been further from the intention of the editors than to misrepresent the opinions of the President. They merely meant that, in their judgment, the policy of the administration was at first such as practically to concede to any rebel who might choose to profess loyalty, rights under the Constitution whose corresponding obligations he repudiated.


WASHINGTON, April 4, 1864.

I add a word which was not in the verbal conversation. In telling this tale, I attempt no compliment to my own sagacity. I claim not to have controlled events, but confess plainly that events have controlled me. Now at the end of three years' struggle, the nation's condition is not what either party, or a y man devisel, or expected. God alone can claim it. Whither it is tending seems plain. If God now wills the removal of a great wrong, and wills also that we of the North, as well as you of the South, shall pay fairly for our complicity in that wrong, impartial history will find therein new causes to attest and revere the justice and goodness of God. Yours, truly, A. LINCOLN.



Hon. F. A. CONKLING, and others:

GENTLEMEN: Your letter, inviting me to be present at a mass meeting of loyal citizens to be held at New York, on A. G. HODGES, Esq., Frankfort, Ky: the 4th inst., for the purpose of expressing gratitude to MY DEAR SIR: You ask me to put in writing the sub- Lieutenant General Grant for his signal services, was restance of what I verbally said the other day, in your pres-ceived yesterday. It is impossible for me to attend. I ap ence, to Governor Bramlette and Senator Dixou. It was prove, nevertheless, whatever may tend to strengthen and about as follows: sustain General Grant and the noble armies now under his direction.

"I am naturally anti-slavery. If slavery is not wrong, nothing is wrong. I cannot remember when I did not so think and feel, and yet I have never understood that the Presidency conferred upon me an unrestricted right to act officially upon this judgment and feeling. It was in the onth I took that I would to the best of my ability preserve, protect, and defend the Constitution of the United States.

My previous high estimate of General Grant has been maintained and heightened by what has occurred in the remarkable campaign he is now conducting. While the magnitude and difficulty of the task before him do not prove less than I expected, he and his brave soldiers are now in the midst of their great trial, and I trust at your

« PreviousContinue »