tion in Illinois, or in any other place where I have a right to oppose it. Understanding the spirit of our institutions to aim at the elevation of men, am opposed to whatever tends to degrade them. I have some little notoriety for commiserating the oppressed negro; and I should be strangely inconsistent if I could favor any project for curtailing the existing rights of white men, even though born in different lands, and speaking different languages from myself. As to the matter of fusion, I am for it, if it can be had on Republican grounds; and I am not for it on any other terms. A fusion on any other terms would be as foolish as unprincipled. would lose the whole North, while the common enemy would still carry the whole South. The question of men is a different one. There are good patriotic men and able statesmen in the South whom I would cheerfully support, if they would now place themselves on Republican ground, but I am against letting down the Republican standard a hair's-breadth. It I have written this hastily, but I believe it answers your questions substantially. Yours truly, A. LINCOLN. LETTER TO SCHUYLER COLFAX1 SPRINGFIELD, ILL., July 6, 1859. My dear Sir: I much regret not seeing you while you were here among us. Before learning that you were to be at Jacksonville on the 4th, I had given my word to be at another place. Besides a strong desire to make your personal acquaintance, I was anxious to speak with you on politics a little more fully than I can well do in a letter. My main object in such conversation would be to hedge against divisions in the Republican ranks generally, and particularly for the contest of 1860. The point of danger is the temptation in different localities to "platform" for something which will be popular just there, but which, nevertheless, will be a firebrand elsewhere, and especially in a national convention. As instances, the movement against foreigners in Massachusetts; in New Hampshire, to make obedience to the fugitive-slave law punishable as a crime; in Ohio, to repeal the fugitive-slave 1 Schuyler Colfax, who was vice-president during Grant's first term, was in Congress at the time he received this letter. In replying to Lincoln he agreed that there existed a great majority opposed to slavery, but it was composed of elements almost defying coalition. "How this mass of mind," he wrote, "shall be consolidated into a victorious phalanx in 1860 is the great problem, I think, of our eventful times, and he who could accomplish it is worthier of fame than Napoleon or Victor Emmanuel." law; and squatter sovereignty, in Kansas. In these things there is explosive enough to blow up half a dozen national conventions, if it gets into them; and what gets very rife outside of conventions is very likely to find its way into them. What is desirable, if possible, is that in every local convocation of Republicans a point should be made to avoid everything which will disturb Republicans elsewhere. Massachusetts Republicans should have looked beyond their noses, and then they could not have failed to see that tilting against foreigners would ruin us in the whole Northwest. New Hampshire and Ohio should forbear tilting against the fugitiveslave law in such a way as to utterly overwhelm us in Illinois with the charge of enmity to the Constitution itself. Kansas, in her confidence that she can be saved to freedom on "squatter sovereignty," ought not to forget that to prevent the spread and nationalization of slavery is a national concern, and must be attended to by the nation. In a word, in every locality we should look beyond our noses; and at least say nothing on points where it is probable we shall disagree. I write this for your eye only; hoping, however, if you see danger as I think I do, you will do what you can to avert it. Could not suggestions be made to leading men in the State and congressional conventions, and so avoid, to some extent at least, these apples of discord? Yours very truly, A. LINCOLN. LETTER TO JAMES MILLER, TREASURER OF THE STATE OF ILLINOIS. SPRINGFIELD, ILL., July 11, 1859. Dear Sir: We suppose you are persistently urged to pay something upon the new McCallister and Stebbins bonds. As friends of yours and of the people, we advise you to pay nothing upon them under any possible circumstances. The holders of them did a great wrong, and are now persisting in it in a way which deserves severe punishment. They know the legislature has again and again refused to fully recognize the old bonds. Seizing upon an act never intended to apply to them, they besieged Governor Bissell more than a year ago to fund the old bonds; he refused. They sought a mandamus upon him from the Supreme Court; the court refused. Again they besieged the governor last winter; he sought to have them go before the legislature; they refused. Still they persisted, and dogged him in his afflicted condition till they got from him what the agent in New York acted upon and issued the new bonds. Now they refuse to surrender them, hoping to force an acquiescence, for Governor Bissell's sake. ever. A. LINCOLN, S. T. LOGAN, O. M. HATCH. LETTER TO SAMUEL GALLOWAY SPRINGFIELD, ILL., July 27, 1859. My dear Sir: Your letter in relation to the claim of Mr. Ambos for the Columbus Machine Manufacturing Company against Barret and others is received. This has been a somewhat disagreeable matter to me. As I remember, you first wrote me on the general subject, Barret having a great deal of property, owing a good y dollars, and there was some question about his taking the machinery. I think you inquired as to Barret's responsibility; and that I answered I considered him an honest and honorable man, |