Lincoln Warns About Secession (Article 6)
For ten years before the Civil War, Abraham Lincoln had been warning of the perils that could result from secession. However, there were numerous threats to secede made by Southern politicians and the plantation aristocracy who were willing to separate from the United States, and even risk war, to preserve their slave-based antebellum culture.
On the other hand, by 1861 with Lincoln as President, the U.S. government was only willing to engage in war to preserve the Union; not to change the status of slavery in those states where it was authorized by the Constitution. Most leaders in the North did, however, oppose the expansion of slavery to any additional states; while Southern political leaders feared that unless more states permitted slavery, the eventual result would be new federal laws interfering with, or abolishing, slavery.
Jefferson Davis said that secession is inevitable but war is not, while Lincoln said secession is unconstitutional so war is inevitable only if secession occurs. A clear clash of ideals!
As late as 1862, while the war was raging, Lincoln reiterated his position by saying (in part),”My paramount object in this struggle is to save the Union, and is 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 of the slaves I would do it.”
As a purely legal matter, Lincoln had long believed that, after a state had ratified the U.S. Constitution in 1789, the Union was perpetual, the individual states were thereafter subordinate to the Federal government, its people were U.S. citizens, and secession was illegal; therefore no state could ever be permitted to separate from the United States. Of course, that view was not held by most Southern leaders.
However, as a purely practical matter, Lincoln also believed that if secession were permitted, the various departed states would likely further divide over time as their self- interests and cultural differences would cause future breaches. He believed the result would be several small nation-states unable to defend against foreign intervention or attacks from other states. He called it, “The worst of Europe.” Lincoln saw his duty as President to bring those “misguided state governments” back into the Union; first through diplomacy if possible, but through force of war if necessary.
His early warnings about secession included this comment in 1854 about an ill-fated attempt to keep Southern states in the Union by extending slavery to other states, “This Nebraska act is usurpation. We will say to the Southern Democrats, we won’t go out of the Union and you shan’t;” adding later, “We will stop you!”
In 1856, a Democratic candidate for President said, “If the Republicans are elected the Union will be dissolved.” Lincoln replied (in part), “We in the majority of this nation would not strive to dissolve the Union, and if any attempt is made it must be by you. But the Union won’t be dissolved. If you attempt it we won’t let you. With the purse and the sword in our hands, you couldn’t do it.”
In 1859, abolitionist John Brown was executed for his failed raid on the Harper’s Ferry arsenal, which he hoped would arm a slave revolt. Hearing new threats to secede, Lincoln said that Brown was wrong to resort to violence and his sentence was justified; but he continued with this warning to the South, “If Constitutionally we elect a President, and thereafter you undertake to destroy the Union, it will be our duty to deal with you as old John Brown has been dealt with.”
By the time of his Inauguration speech on March 4, 1861, seven of the eventual eleven states had already seceded, but war had not yet started. President Lincoln said (in part),”I hold that the Union of these states is perpetual. No state upon its mere motion can lawfully get out of the Union and I shall take care of the laws of the United States. If a minority will secede rather than acquiesce, they will make a precedent which will divide and ruin them. The central idea of secession is the essence of anarchy. In your hands my dis-satisfied countrymen, is the momentous issue of Civil War. You have no oath in heaven to destroy the government, while I shall have the most solemn one to protect and defend it.”
Southern leaders certainly knew Lincoln’s position but, in my opinion, they underestimated his resolve, believing he would be an ineffective President and, if conflict came, he would not fight a war for very long. As Jefferson Davis believed, and said, “There is no fire in his fight.”
Clearly Lincoln entered the war to preserve the Union and expected that the eventual victory over the “rebellion” would restore the Union and “forever settle the issue of secession.”
Of course as the war dragged on, Lincoln saw an opportunity to abolish slavery by Constitutional Amendment and end, once and for all, the divisive issue of slavery among the states.
He just did not start out with that in mind.
Contact the author at gadorris2@gmail.com
Posted in Uncategorized
Edwin Booth - Robert Lincoln Incident (Article 5)
The final version of my book, “Abraham Lincoln-An Uncommon, Common Man,” does not include this encounter between Robert Lincoln, eldest son of Abraham Lincoln, and Edwin Booth, the older brother of Lincoln’s assassin. However, it is a fascinating irony of the times and deserves a brief narration.
In an odd coincidence, Robert Lincoln was once saved from possible serious injury or even death by Edwin Booth, who was the country’s most famous actor. Edwin’s brother, John Wilkes Booth, who was also an actor but with lesser talent and public recognition, would later murder Robert’s father, President Abraham Lincoln.
The incident took place on a train platform in Jersey City, New Jersey and, while neither man could later remember the exact date, it took place in early 1864, about a year before the President’s assassination in April 1865. Robert Lincoln wrote the following explanation of the encounter:
“The incident occurred while a group of passengers were late at night purchasing their sleeping car places from the conductor who stood on the station platform at the entrance to the car. The platform was about the height of the car floor, and there was of course a narrow space between the platform and the car body. There was some crowding, and I happened to be pressed by it against the car body while waiting my turn. In this situation the train began to move and, and by the motion I was twisted off my feet, and had dropped somewhat, with feet downward into the open space, and was personally helpless, when my coat collar was vigorously seized and I was pulled up and out to a secure footing on the platform. Upon turning to thank my rescuer I saw it was Edwin Booth, whose face was of course well known to me, and I expressed my gratitude to him, and in doing so, called him by name.”
However, it seems that while Robert recognized Edwin and profusely, and nervously, thanked him, Robert evidently failed to introduce himself; not surprising considering his emotional state immediately following the harrowing escape.
After Edwin’s swift rescue actions, but before Abraham Lincoln’s death, Robert was in the Union Army serving as an officer on the staff of General Ulysses S. Grant. Robert recalled the events in a conversation with a fellow officer, Colonel Adam Badeau, who happened to be a friend of Edwin Booth. Colonel Badeau then sent a letter to Edwin, recounting Robert’s story and complimenting the actor for his heroism. Booth later said he remembered that the young man very graciously thanked him but the two separated before being introduced. Until Colonel Badeau’s letter arrived, Edwin had been unaware that the man whose life he had saved on the train platform was the President’s son. Presumably at the request of Colonel Babeau, General Grant also sent a letter to Edwin stating his appreciation for Edwin’s selfless actions.
Following John Wilkes Booth’s assassination of the President, the family and friends of Edwin said that the opportune encounter and quick response to save Robert was of great comfort to Edwin who, while not overly political, had supported the Union cause and admired President Lincoln.
Robert had earlier graduated from Harvard and, after the War ended in 1865, he left the Army and began a legal career. Although he was never a politician, Robert went on to become the Secretary of War under President James Garfield, then became the Ambassador to Great Britain under President Benjamin Harrison, and later a successful railroad executive. He is buried at Arlington National Cemetery.
This is a fine example of the old proverb, “A life saved should become a life well lived!”
contact the author at gadorris2@gmail.com
Lincoln, Black Bill, and the N-Word (Article 4)
In the preface to my book, “Abraham Lincoln – An Uncommon, Common Man,” I wrote the following paragraph (in part) about Lincoln’s avoidance of racially disparaging language contrary to the common norm of the day.
“I have read numerous quotations by Lincoln with the words Negro, Black, and African, but not one validated quote using the pejorative of Negro or any words intended to be disrespectful.”
I was recently reminded by a reader about an incident in which Lincoln used the pejorative of Negro, often referred to these days as the “N-word” to avoid actually using it. The reader was correct. I should have been more clear in the preface because I was aware of Lincoln’s use of the N-word in a slander trial in 1856.
Lincoln agreed to represent as a plaintiff a man named William “Black Bill” Dungy, a dark skinned Portuguese who had recently married a White woman. The brother of Dungy’s new wife began to tell neighbors that he believed “Black Bill” was a Negro, and as was common with the language of that day, chose to use the N-word, as he re-told his suspicions throughout the community. Lincoln knew there were really two issues at stake; first a slander case against the brother-in-law but, even more important, he needed to avoid a criminal trial for Dungy because it was illegal in Illinois at that time for a Negro to marry a White person and the penalty could be severe, in some cases death!
During the trial for slander, Lincoln repeated, in court, the language used by the brother-in-law and then said, “If the malice of the defendant had rested, satisfied with speaking the words once or twice, my client would have borne it in silence; but when the defendant went gabbling, yes gabbling, about it, then it was that my client determined to bring this suit.”
Lincoln won the slander suit and the brother-in-law was required to pay Dungy $ 600.00 but Lincoln suggested that Dungy agree to only $400.00 as a “gesture of good-will.” The defendant was also ordered to pay all legal fees, and Lincoln asked the Judge and a few other lawyers how much he should charge. He then astounded all of them, including the defendant, when he set his fee at only $25.00 rather than the $100.00 others suggested.
By winning the slander case, Lincoln stated publicly that no other party should bring a criminal case as the point had been made moot in a court of law; and no criminal case against Dungy was ever filed.
Some abolitionists in the 1860′s and other critics of Lincoln from the safe perch in the late 20th century, argued that he should have taken the criminal case to court and attempted to use the subsequent trial (and probable appeals) to change Illinois law. One of Lincoln’s friends later remarked that “I suppose Lincoln didn’t see what good that would do for his client, Mr. Dungy, as a loss would have had terrible consequences for the man and his wife.”
In another irony of history, some of Dungy’s later descendants believed that “Black Bill” was not Portuguese after all. But, thankfully, in today’s world it wouldn’t be a criminal matter in any event.
So, although Lincoln used the N-word in the trial, I still maintain that he did not use such disrespectful language in his conversations among friends or in public discourse, despite its common usage by many people at that time.
William Seward, then a Senator but later Lincoln’s Secretary of State, once told Senator Stephen Douglas that no man who spells Negro with two G’s should ever be President. I don’t believe Abraham Lincoln spelled Negro with 2 G’s, and he became a fine President.
contact the author at gadorris2@gmail.com
Lincoln and the 4th of July (Article 3)
Abraham Lincoln celebrated the 4th of July much as we do. He enjoyed fireworks, flags, parades, band concerts, and social gatherings with family, friends, and neighbors. The food was more likely to be hams, biscuits, and apples rather than barbecue, hot dogs, and hamburgers, but pies and even ice cream were favorites too. However, the 4th of July was more commemorative than we see today. Although it was not declared a National holiday until 1870 and only became a paid holiday in 1938 for federal employees, in Lincoln’s day the country was only a few generations removed from its beginnings and there was a deep appreciation for the date. Before the Civil War, and even during the war, both North and South celebrated the day and the founding fathers, especially George Washington and Thomas Jefferson.
For Lincoln, however, after about 1846, the day also became a time to reflect on the meaning of equality as stated in the Declaration of Independence and the disassociation he saw between that noble document and the constitutionally protected institution of slavery. He wrote letters and articles for newspapers, gave speeches and made statements in the Illinois Legislature and the U.S. Congress condemning slavery, while admitting it was permitted by the Constitution. He proposed plans to gradually eliminate the “ownership of one human being by another” and to compensate slave owners who would voluntarily free the men, women, and children they held in bondage. By 1850 he felt he had to confront a new wave of pro-slavery activism, primarily from Southern states, which attempted to re-enforce slavery and to justify its expansion to other states and territories. He called slavery “this national abomination” and “our national shame.” He thought the country was “losing its way” and called for a return to the ideals expressed in the Declaration of Independence; and he used the 4th of July as a focal time to express his views against any measure that might perpetuate slavery.
On July 4, 1861, his first as President, and at a time when Confederate military forces had given the Union several early defeats, Lincoln gave an impassioned speech against secession with a call for national sovereignty and unity. He stated that “a few Southern leaders had been drugging the public mind in their section for thirty years” to assure that the slave owners, not the larger public, would benefit from secession, which was intended to keep slavery in perpetuity.
Then in 1863, as the President of a country still divided and embroiled in a devastating Civil War, he wrote a 4th of July speech as a message to Congress and the American people; but, he did not deliver the speech until July 7th! A major battle was raging near Gettysburg between large armies of the Union and the Confederacy and the long siege at Vicksburg was ongoing, with the outcome of both of these epic engagements not yet known. So, Lincoln waited several days until it became clear that the Union would prevail in both areas. For the first time since the War began, Lincoln had reason to be optimistic about the eventual outcome; and his speech reflected his belief that the Union would be perpetual, but secession and slavery would not. Also, unknown to any except a few members of his Cabinet, at the same time he was drafting what would become the Emancipation Proclamation.
Unfortunately, Lincoln was murdered in April 1865 so we can only speculate about a speech he might have written for that 4th of July. The Civil War was over and the 13th Amendment to the Constitution which abolished slavery had passed the Senate and the House and was in the ratification process by the states; so can you imagine his message? I personally think it would have been astounding!
I hope you have a wonderful, and reflective, 4th of July.
Abraham Lincoln Dad (Article 2)
Abraham Lincoln and his wife, Mary, had four sons. They suffered together through the deaths of two of the boys; Eddie in 1852 at three years old and Willie in 1862 at eleven. Mary also survived Tad, who died in 1871, six years after President Lincoln’s assassination. Only their first son, Robert, lived through adult-hood.
But those are only basic historical facts. Lincoln relished his role as a father. Of course, both he and Mary were devastated by the deaths of Eddie and Willie and grieved for some time. But Lincoln knew he had to still be a caring father to Robert, Willie and Tad after little Eddie’s death; and then especially to young Tad after Willie’s death (Robert was already seventeen and away at school). Mary, however, experienced incapacitating grief for much longer than Lincoln and one contemporary, speaking of Tad, noted that Abraham was now the only parent for the little boy.
There is a modern saying that almost any man can become a father, but not all become a Dad. So, how was Lincoln as a Dad?
Abraham Lincoln did not have a close relationship with his father, Thomas, who was very strict and showed no support for young Lincoln’s determination for self-improvement, including his desire to become better educated. Perhaps as a result of the restraints his father placed upon him, Lincoln became a very supportive, and permissive, father to his sons. As is common with most parents, Lincoln seemed to become even more lenient with each boy born after Robert. To be fair to Lincoln regarding his relationship with Robert, he was often traveling for weeks at a time throughout central Illinois as part of the legal circuit during Robert’s early years; however, he was at home much more as the other boys were growing up. Robert acknowledged that he knew his father loved him, but their relationship, while supportive and kind, was more formal. The younger boys certainly enjoyed more “rollicking” time with their father,
And rollick they did!
The boys were almost always welcome in Lincoln’s law offices, sometimes to the consternation of his partners. Most of them commented that Lincoln would happily sit by while his sons had the run of the office, frequently leaving a mess in their wake. Then, when the Lincolns occupied the White House, Willie and Tad had almost complete run of the place; with one Cabinet member remarking that the boys “rambunctiousness” did not bother Lincoln a bit. In fact, after Willie’s death in 1862, Tad had even fewer limitations and would frequently enter Cabinet meetings and perch on his father’s lap. Stories were told by neighbors in Springfield that Lincoln was often met by the “exuberant” boys in the street as he walked home from work; they could not wait to spend time with him. Once, when three sons were clamoring over him, a neighbor asked what the “ruckus” was about this time and Lincoln laughingly replied that he only had two coins and all three boys wanted one. In his Lincoln biographies, Carl Sandburg includes many such anecdotes and recollections by family, friends and neighbors illustrating Lincoln’s deep love for, and his relationships with, all of his sons.
So, I believe Abraham Lincoln was a Dad, in the best sense of the word.
contact the author at gadorris2@gmail.com
Why this book, why now? (Article 1)
I wrote “Abraham Lincoln-An Uncommon, Common Man” to give readers what I call the “basic” Lincoln life story.
Two years ago, a teacher told me “a lot of history has occurred since you were in school that needs to be covered in the class room and, out of necessity, Abraham Lincoln is allocated less time today.” Of course, she was right. Among other newer history lessons are several tragic wars, new Presidents (including another Presidential assassination and other attempted assassinations), civil rights movement, international terrorism, technological advances, development of the space program, and the changes resulting from the word-wide internet and social media. However, that means that today’s young people, including my grandson, do not have sufficient classroom opportunity to learn about the extraordinary legacy of Abraham Lincoln.
She also reminded me that the “story of Abraham Lincoln” has been modified over time to include criticism of some of his personal traits and Presidential decisions. She was again correct as, over the past 30 years, there have been numerous books and articles that focus on a very narrow aspect of Lincoln’s life. Some delve deeply into his relationships with long-time friends, political allies and opponents, his Cabinet and Generals; whether he suffered from Clinical Depression; whether his 1863 directives to stop draft protests were violations of the Constitution and even impeachable; whether he really cared about the issue of slavery; and a few even speculated about his sexuality. Many of these authors had a scholarly purpose to provide valuable insight into his personality and political philosophy. However, there have also been revisionist attempts by some authors to inappropriately, and incorrectly, challenge his legacy to either sell more books and/or to promote a personal cause
How does a reader separate the earnest scholars from the those who only have a defamation agenda? I believe we first need to return to his basic life story, without getting lost in the minutiae. Not to disregard his faults (and he had a few) nor to embellish his attributes (and he had many), but to re-introduce Lincoln who, like all of us, made mistakes and had self-doubts, but he still managed to achieve great objectives. It is also helpful to put his statements and decisions, which some modern authors have criticized, into the perspective of the times in which he lived and the societal norms of his day. I hope my book “Abraham Lincoln-an Uncommon, Common Man” may remind those who have extensively studied Lincoln that his broad life story is still an important character lesson; and, I hope it may give to those others who are not as well acquainted with Lincoln an introduction that may result in a desire to learn more about him.