{"1": {"fulltext": "E 457\\n.n66\\nCopy 1", "height": "2744", "width": "1777", "jp2-path": "reallincoln00minor_0001.jp2"}, "2": {"fulltext": "Class __1AH\\nBook\\nGopyrigtitlN^\\nCOPYRIGHT DEPOSm", "height": "2744", "width": "1777", "jp2-path": "reallincoln00minor_0002.jp2"}, "3": {"fulltext": "", "height": "2744", "width": "1777", "jp2-path": "reallincoln00minor_0003.jp2"}, "4": {"fulltext": "", "height": "2744", "width": "1777", "jp2-path": "reallincoln00minor_0004.jp2"}, "5": {"fulltext": "", "height": "2744", "width": "1777", "jp2-path": "reallincoln00minor_0005.jp2"}, "6": {"fulltext": "", "height": "2744", "width": "1777", "jp2-path": "reallincoln00minor_0006.jp2"}, "7": {"fulltext": "FHE REAL LINCOLN,\\nBY\\nCHARLES L. C MINOR,\\nWITH ARTICLE\\nBY\\nLYdN a TYLpR\\nEDITED BY\\nKATE MASON ROWLAND,\\n\\\\uthor of Life of George Mason, Life of Charles Carroll of Carrollton, etc\\nRICHMOND, VA.:\\nEVERETT WADDEY COMPANY.\\n1901.", "height": "2744", "width": "1777", "jp2-path": "reallincoln00minor_0007.jp2"}, "8": {"fulltext": "", "height": "2744", "width": "1777", "jp2-path": "reallincoln00minor_0008.jp2"}, "9": {"fulltext": "THE REAL LINCOLN,\\nBY\\nCHARLES L, C, MINOR,\\nWITH ARTICLE\\nBY\\nLYON a TYLER,\\nEDITED BY\\nKATE MASON ROWLAND,\\nAuthor of Life of George Mason, Life of Charles Carroll of CarroUton, etc.\\nRICHMOND, VA.:\\nEVERETT WADDEY COMPANY.\\n1901.", "height": "2744", "width": "1777", "jp2-path": "reallincoln00minor_0009.jp2"}, "10": {"fulltext": "THE LrSRARY OF\\nCONGRESS,\\nTwo Copies Received\\nMAY. 13 1901\\nCOPYBIOHT ENTRY\\nCLASS ^XXc. No\\nCOP^^\\nCOPYRIGHTED, 1901,\\nBY CHARLES L. C. MINOR.", "height": "2744", "width": "1777", "jp2-path": "reallincoln00minor_0010.jp2"}, "11": {"fulltext": "PRKKACB.\\nBY THE EDITOR.\\nWhosoever in writing a modern history, shall follow\\ntruth too near the heels, it may haply strike out his teeth.\\nThere is no mistress or guide that hath led her followers and\\nservants into greater miseries. He that goes after her too\\nfar, loseth her sight, and loseth himself; and he that walks\\nafter her at a middle distance, I know not whether I should\\ncall that kind of course temper or Ijaseness.\\nNo man can long continue masked in a counterfeit\\nbehavior: the things that are forced for pretences, having no\\nground of truth, cannot long dissemble their own natures.\\nSir Walter Raleigh.\\nThe Genius of History will surely vindicate her right to\\ntruth, though a whole people conspire against her. So the\\nman behind the mask, whether it be placed there by himself\\nor others, must at length come forth in his own true character.\\nWe have seen, as has been well said, the Lincoln legend\\nin actual process of evolution, and cannot again be surprised\\nat the historical myths that have come down to us from more\\nuncritical ages. But legend and myth must give way before\\nconscientious investigation, an investigation which brings out\\nsuppressed facts and points an unerring finger at fallacies and\\nfabrications.\\nWhile the private character of Lincoln has been made by\\nhis eulogists to appear the thing it was not, his public career\\nhas been described by them as meriting unqualified approbation.\\nIt is of the latter alone I would speak here. What was he\\nthen? the liberator who set free slaves that did not belong\\nto him in order to injure a people over whom he had no sort of", "height": "2744", "width": "1777", "jp2-path": "reallincoln00minor_0011.jp2"}, "12": {"fulltext": "The Real Lincoln.\\njurisdiction; the saviour of the Union who called armies\\ninto action to force a confederacy of States back into a federa-\\ntion they had abjured? He was in truth the Constitution-\\nbreaker, the violator of solemn political obligations, and the\\nprime agent in a gigantic act of robbery and confiscation. To\\njustify themselves, the Northern people glorify Lincoln, set a\\nnimbus about his head, crown him with bays as their pro-\\ntagonist in the drama by which the great crime of the century\\nwas consummated the suppression of Southern independence.\\nWith unconscious irony Lincoln is compared by these illogical\\nidolaters with Washington. To liken the oppressor of whole\\ncommunities to the arch rebel who achieved the independ-\\nence of these communities is surely the veriest climax of incon-\\nsequentness. Washington led thirteen colonies to independ-\\nence; Lincoln deprived thirteen States of the rights secured\\nto them by the arms of Washington. The one fought for\\nthe principle that governments derive their just powers from\\nthe consent of the governed; the other upheld the doctrine\\nthat governments should rest on force and not on consent.\\nLincoln s true peer and prototype is found in George III. In the\\neighteenth century it was Washington who represented the\\nrights of communities in a so-called indissoluble empire;\\nin the nineteenth century it was Lincoln who opposed this\\nprinciple and maintained the supremacy of a so-called indis-\\nsoluble federal republic. Jefferson Davis exemplified the\\ncreed of Thomas Jefferson in opposition to the George III.\\nand Lincoln dogma the creed that a community (and if a\\ncolony, much more certainly a State), has a reserved sovereign\\npower in its people, giving them a right to ordain and alter\\ntheir own form of government, whether these communities\\nare in an empire under a king or in a union of States under\\na president.\\nWhen, in 1861, says a distinguished Virginia writer,\\nmoved by her sovereign pleasure, but acting in accordance\\nwith her old principles and traditions, she [Virginia] threw\\noff a grievous Federal yoke, she found an American President,\\nwhose power was but the rank and unhealthy growth of those\\nprinciples, as prompt to stifle them with force as King George\\nhad been, who denied the school of politics out of which they", "height": "2744", "width": "1777", "jp2-path": "reallincoln00minor_0012.jp2"}, "13": {"fulltext": "Preface. 5\\nsprang, nor in petition, nor remonstrance, had ever heard of\\nthese extravagant pretensions of his American subjects. Mr.\\nLincoln, by his armed powers, produced far greater results\\nthan the loss of independence by the Southern States, for he\\ndestroyed the head-spring from which had been derived the\\nright, which the majority claimed to govern the State. It is\\nevident the only authority for that theorem of politics was\\nthe assertions of those charters of popular rights which the\\nlate General Grant overthrew with his myrmidons. If at this\\nday, the majority governs anywhere, within the extended\\nlimits of political society, it is by the reverence which men\\npay to positive law. The moral ground has been broken up\\nand swept away. The party of moral ideas, as the Republican\\nparty arrogantly and insolently call themselves, has remitted\\nsociety, in every land, to the government of force, and we\\nstand now in this advanced era where Caesar and Genseric\\nstood. From that time [the date of the war -upon the Con-\\nfederate States] the Republic of the United States, regarded\\nas a model for imitation, ceased, by its own act, to be a\\ngovernment of consent, as in two famous Charters and in the\\nConstitution which created it, it had been with exultation\\nproclaimed to be, and under the control of Abraham Lincoln\\nand the Republican party, became a government of force,\\naccording to the American classification, as much as the\\nsternest military monarchy in king-governed Asia.\\nFacilis deoensus Averni. Secretary Root justifies the latest\\nAmerican war of subjugation by the precedent of 1861.\\nNothing can be more mischievous, he tells us, than a prin-\\nciple misapplied. The doctrine that government derives its\\njust powers from the consent of the governed was applicable\\nto the conditions for which Jefferson wrote it and to the people\\nto whom he applied it. Lincoln did not apply it to\\nthe South, and the great struggle of the Civil War was a\\nsolemn assertion by the American people that there are other\\nprinciples of law and liberty which limit the application\\nof the doctrine of consent. Government does not depend upon\\nThe Republic as a Form of Government; or, The Evolution of Democ-\\nracy in America, pp. 11, 12, 7,S, by .John Scott (of Fauquier), London, Chap-\\nman and Hall, 1890.", "height": "2744", "width": "1777", "jp2-path": "reallincoln00minor_0013.jp2"}, "14": {"fulltext": "The Real Lincoln.\\nconsent. The Northern Democrat to-day differs only from\\nthe Republican in being more shamelessly inconsistent. It will\\nbe seen that this party opposed in 1861 the coercion of the\\nSouthern Confederacy, and was dragged into the war by Lin-\\ncoln. But who among them now raises his voice to confess\\nthe wrong of which the United States were then guilty? In\\nthe late presidential campaign, William Jennings Bryan, who,\\nif elected, would have owed his elevation to the vote of the\\nSolid South, equally with Mr. Root, declared the doctrine\\nof consent totally inapplicable to the sovereign States of the\\nlate Confederacy. Republicans tell us, he says, that the\\nPhilippine war is the same as was the War between the States.\\nA man does not need to have much intelligence to see the\\ndifference between the principles involved. In the Civil War\\nthe North was holding the people of the South in the Union,\\nbut the people were not to be subjects; they were to be\\ncitizens. They were not held in the Union to be denied the\\nprivileges of citizenship. Neither did George III. intend to\\ndeprive the people of the American colonies of the privileges\\nof British citizens! But here is Mr. Bryan s conclusion, in\\npleading for the Filipinos: There are but -two theories of\\ngovernment. One is that governments come up from the\\npeople. The other is that governments rest upon force. If this\\nnation rejects the idea that governments derive their just\\npowers from the consent of the governed, then civilization\\nstarts backward toward the Dark Ages. -f-\\nIs it not, then, v/ithin the bounds of truth to say that the\\nman who first rejected this idea, the man who first spurned\\nand trampled under foot the principles of 76, leading to the\\nconditions of 1865 and 1901, was even more the enemy of\\nAmerica and of liberty than George III. and Lord North?\\n*Speech of Elihu Root, Secretary of War, Canton, Ohio, October 24.1900.\\nMr. March, of Illinois, in a debate in the House of Representatives. January 26,\\n1899, said he was in favor of annexation of the Philippines whether the\\nnatives were willing; or not. For four years we had fought in tliis country\\nto force the Southern people to submit to the Constitution against their\\nwill. It was absurd to say that we could not employ force to talfe and liold\\nthe Philippines. So Puck, in a cartoon of the 25th of January, inscribes on\\nthe wall of Uncle Sam s schoolhouse: The Confederate States refused\\ntheir consent to be governed; but the Union was preserved without their\\nconsent.\\nSpeech of Hon. Wm. J. Bryan, Shepherdstown, W. Va., September 5, 1900.", "height": "2744", "width": "1777", "jp2-path": "reallincoln00minor_0014.jp2"}, "15": {"fulltext": "The Real Lincoln,\\nINTRODUCTION\\nA mistaken estimate of Abraliam Lincoln has been spread\\nabroad very widely, and even in the South an editorial in a\\nvery respectable religious paper lately said as follows: Our\\ncountry has more than once been singularly fortunate in the\\nmoral character and the admirable personality of its popular\\nheroes. Washington, Lincoln and Lee have been the type\\nof character that it was safe to hold up to the admiration\\nof their own age and the imitation of succeeding generations.\\nIn the North the psean of praise that began with his death has\\ngrown to such extravagance that he has been called by one\\neminent popular speaker a servant and follower of Jesus\\nChrist, and by another first of all that have walked the\\nearth after the Nazarene, and on his late birthday a eulogist\\nasked us to give up aspirations for a heaven where Lincoln s\\npresence is not assured.\\nTo try to reawaken or to foster ill will between the North\\nand the South would be a useless, mischievous and most cen-\\nsurable task, and it will be seen that this sketch has an\\nexactly opposite purpose, but it is a duty to correct such\\nmisrepresentations, for the reason that they make claims for\\nLincoln entirely inconsistent with the concessions of grave\\ndefects in him that are made by the closest associates of his\\nprivate life, and by his most respectable and most eulogistic\\nbiographers, and equally inconsistent with the estimates of\\nhim expressed by the greatest and closest associates of his\\n*A part of the historical material used in this sketch has been used before\\nin letters over the author s name in daily papers, as follows: In the Rich-\\nmond (Va.) Times, of December .31st, 1898: of September 3d, 1899. and of May\\n11th, 1900; in the Baltimore Sun, of April 3d, 1899, of August 25th, 1900, of\\nOctober 12th, 1900, and of March 4th, 1901 in the Richmond (Va.) Dispatch,\\nJanuary 14th, 1900, and of March 13th, 1900. The last two appeared in the\\nSouthern Historical Society Papers, Vol. XXVII., as Articles XXI. and\\nXLIII., pp. 165, 365.", "height": "2744", "width": "1777", "jp2-path": "reallincoln00minor_0015.jp2"}, "16": {"fulltext": "The Real Lincoln.\\npublic life, and by a very large part of the great Northern\\nand Western Republican leaders of his own day. This sketch\\nis based on the testimony of such witnesses only.\\nIn the Appendix will be found, in alphabetical order, the\\nnames of all the witnesses whose evidence is submitted in this\\nsketch. Referfence is invited to that Appendix, as each witness\\nis reached by the reader, and it will be found that each is\\nincluded in one of the above indicated classes. Only old\\nand exceptionally well-informed men of this day are likely\\nto know the ample authority with which these witnesses speak.\\nSee Horace Greeley, whose lofty integrity extorted admiration\\nfrom thousands on whose nearest and dearest interests his\\nTribune newspaper waged a war as deadly as it was honest;\\nsee Lincoln s greatest Cabinet Ministers Seward, Chase and\\nStanton; see two among the foremost leaders of thought\\nand action of their day, John Sherman and Ben Wade; see\\nrepresentatives of the highest standards, intellectual and\\nmoral, Richard Dana and Edward Everett; see the most ardent\\nand prominent of Abolitionists, Wendell Phillips; and see\\nthe correspondent of the London Times, Russell; see the most\\nup-to-date historians of our own day, Ida Tarbell, A. K.\\nMcClure, Schouler, Ropes and Rhodes; and see the most inti-\\nmate associates of Lincoln s lifetime, Lamon and Herndon,\\nwho give such reasons for telling not the good only, but all\\nthey know about their great friend, as win commendation from\\nthe latest biographers of all, Morse and Hapgood, whose books\\nhave received only praise from the American reading public.\\nWas Lincoln Heroic\\nAmong the heroic traits claimed for Lincoln is personal\\ncourage. This claim is hard to reconcile with his carefully-\\nconcealed midnight ride into Washington a day or two before\\nhis inauguration. McClure and others have been at no small\\npains to apologize for it, but Greeley likened him* to a\\nhunted fugitive, and Lamon, the intimate friend of his life-\\ntime, who was selected by himself as the one heavily armed\\ncompanion of the midnight journey, expressly declares that\\nAmerican Conflict, Vol. I., p. 421.", "height": "2744", "width": "1777", "jp2-path": "reallincoln00minor_0016.jp2"}, "17": {"fulltext": "Was Lincoln Heroic f 9\\nthe apprehensions of violence were without the slightest\\nfoundation then or on the inauguration day, described below.\\nNicolay and Hay devote a chapter (XX. of Vol. III.) to it, but\\ndo not claim that there was any danger. Morse, as jealous to\\ndefend Lincoln as any other, concedes there was no danger,\\nand that Lamon s account of it is doubtless the\\nmost trustworthy.\\nIda Tarbell describes Lincoln s progress through the city to\\nhis Inaugural ceremony the strong military force, including\\nartillery, assembled to protect him under command of General\\nWinfield Scott platoons of soldiers at the street corners,\\ngroups of riflemen on the housetops, and shows how he\\npassed through a board tunnel into the Capitol building with\\nfifty or sixty soldiers under the platform. The titory of the\\njourney and of the Inauguration makes quite comprehensible\\nwhat Lamon and Vice-President Hamlin record, that Lincoln\\nwas bitterly ashamed ever afterward of what he had done in\\nthis matter.*\\nWhen Baltimore had stopped the Massachusetts soldiers\\nand Maryland had stopped all soldiers going to Washington,\\nso that the capital seemed to be left at the mercy of the South,\\nIda Tarbell, Nicolay and Hay, Schouler and Rhodes, give singu-\\nlar accounts of Lincoln s state of apprehension. Rhodes and\\nTarbell quote his words: Why don t they come? Why don t\\nthey come? I begin to believe there is no North. The Seventh\\nRegiment is a myth. -j-\\nRussell wrote to the London Tiiiirs (My Diary, North and\\nSouth, page 43) that when Washington city was in panic after\\nMcClare s Our Presidents and his Lincolni.p.46 etseq.); Lamon s Lincoln {p.\\n16 et seq., SS-et seq., 513 et seq.) Ida Tarbell, in McClure s Magazine for January\\nand February, 1900; Greeley s American Conflict (Vol. I., p. 421 et seq,) Morse s\\nLincoln (p. 197 etseq); Hamlin s Life of Hamlin (p. 389), and Rhodes Hifrtory\\nof the United States (Vol. III., p. 304). The Hon. Henry L. Dawes says, in\\nTribiitcs from, his A.isociates (p. 4) He never altogether lost to me the look\\nwith which he met the curious and, for the moment, not very kind gaze of\\nthe House of Representatives on that first morning after what they deemed\\na pusillaminous creep into Washington.\\nilda Tarbell. in McClure s Magazine for February, 1899 (p. 325); Rhodes\\nHistory of the United States (Vol. III., p. 368) Nicolay and Hay s Lincoln (Vol.\\nIV., p. 152 et seq.); Schouler s History of tlie United States (Vol. VI., p. 45).", "height": "2744", "width": "1777", "jp2-path": "reallincoln00minor_0017.jp2"}, "18": {"fulltext": "10 The Real Lincoln.\\nthe defeat at Bull Run* Lincoln sat listening in fear and\\ntrembling for the sound of the enemy s cannon.\\nIn the second great panic in Washington, when the Union\\narmy under General Pope was utterly routed and close on\\nWashington in retreat, Gorham and Rhodes f describe Lincoln\\nin such doubt and apprehension as to say to Chase and Stan-\\nton, of his Cabinet, that he would gladly resign his place.\\nGeneral B. F. Butler censures the account of Lincoln s condi-\\ntion given by Nicolay and Hay, as follows: A careful reading\\nof that description would lead one to infer that Lincoln was\\nin a state of abject fear.\\nThe Life of Charles Francis Adams describes (page 120 ct seq.)\\nAdams visit to the new President to get his instructions as\\nMinister to England. He got none whatever, was half\\namused, half mortified, altogether shocked, and got an im-\\npression of dismay at Lincoln s behavior and his uncon-\\nsciousness of the gravity of the crisis, or his insensibility\\nto it, and perceived that Lincoln was only intent on the\\ndistribution of offices. The biographer, his son, says that this\\nimpression had not faded from the mind of Mr. Adams twelve\\nyears later, when he made a Memorial Address on the death\\nof Seward, as indeed plainly appears in that address.\\nRhodes records contempt for Lincoln expressed by his\\nSecretary, Salmon P. Chase, afterwards made by Lincoln Chief\\nJustice of the Supreme Court, and says that Chase was by no\\nmeans alone in his judgment, and that in many Senators\\nand Representatives existed a distrust of his ability and force\\nof character, and he further quotes so high an authority as\\nRichard H. Dana, who said in one letter, when on a visit to\\nWashington, the lack of respect for the President in all\\nparties is unconcealed, and wrote, in March, 1863, to Charles\\nFrancis Adams, Minister to England, that Lincoln has no\\nadmirers ^nd does not act, talk, or feel like the\\nruler of a great empire in a great crisis, he is an\\nunspeakable calamity to us where he is. J General Donn Piatt,\\nRussell s Ml/ Dianj\\nGorham s Life of Stanton (Vol. II., p. 44 et seq Rhodes Histwy of the\\nUnited States (Vol. IV p. 137 et seq.) Butler s Book (p. 219).\\nt Rhodes History of the United States (Vol. IV., pp. 205 to 210 el seq. and a note\\non p. 210).", "height": "2744", "width": "1777", "jp2-path": "reallincoln00minor_0018.jp2"}, "19": {"fulltext": "Was Lincoln Heroic .11\\nin Reminiscences of Lincoln (page 286) denies the claim made\\nfor Lincoln that he was of a kind or forgiving nature or of\\nany gentle impulses, and shows (page 493) his extraordinary\\ninsensibility to the ills of his fellow-citizens and soldiers when\\nthe miseries of the war were at their worst, and sets forth\\n(page 481 to 500) his entire indifference to the condition of the\\nnegroes or their future fate. Whitney, too, says he had no\\nintention to make voters of the negroes in fact their welfare\\ndid not enter into his policy at all.\\nWhat Lincoln was capable of in his dealings with women\\nis conclusively illustrated by his letter to Mrs. Browning about\\nMiss Owens. Lamon copies it and so do Herndon and Hapgood.\\nNicolay and Hay concede its authenticity in trying to make\\nlight of it; Hapgood copies besides another letter in which\\nLincoln asks Miss Owens to marry him. Morse calls the letter\\nto Mistress Browning one of the most unfortunate epistles\\never penned, and elsewhere calls it that most abominable\\nepistle. t Acknowledging that he had lately asked Miss Owens\\nto marry him and had been refused by her, Lincoln writes to\\nMrs. Browning that one of his reasons for asking her to marry\\nhim was the conviction that no other man would ever do so.\\nLamon speaks (page 181) of its coarse exaggeration in de-\\nscribing a person whom the writer was willing to marry, its\\nimputation of toothless and weather-beaten old age to a woman\\nyoung and handsome.\\nEvidence of the marriage of Lincoln s parents has been\\nfound since Lamon s Lincoln was published in 1872 (see page\\n10), and like evidence of his mother s legitimate birth since\\nHapgood s Lincoln was published in 1900 (see page 5). But\\nLincoln himself was capable of bringing shame upon the birth\\nof his mother to escape the reproach of being of the unmixed\\npoor white blood of the Hanks family. Herndon s Lincoln\\n(Vol. I., page 3) says: It was about 1850, when he and I were\\ndriving in his one-horse buggy to the court in Minard county,\\nIllinois. He said of his mother that she\\nwas the illegitimate daughter of Lucy Hanks and of a well-\\nOn Circuit with Lincoln, p 364.\\nfSee Lamon s Lincoln, -p. et seq., n6. Herndon s Lincoln, yo\\\\. I., p. 55,\\nand Hapgood s Lincoln, p. 64 to 71, and Nicolay Hay s Lincoln. Vol. 1., p. 192", "height": "2744", "width": "1777", "jp2-path": "reallincoln00minor_0019.jp2"}, "20": {"fulltext": "12 The Real Lincoln.\\nbred Virginia farmer or planter, and he argued that from this\\nlast source came his power of analysis, his mental activity,\\nhis ambition, and all the qualities that distinguished him from\\nthe other members of the Hanks family, and he\\nbelieved that his better nature and finer qualities came from\\nthis broad-minded, unknown Vifginian.\\nWas Lincoln a Christian\\nAs to Lincoln s attitude towards religion, Holland in his\\nLincoln, says (page 286), that twenty out of the twenty-three\\nministers of the different denominations of Christians, and a\\nvery large majority of the prominent members of the churches\\nin his home (Springfield, Illinois) opposed him for President.\\nHe says (page 241) jyjgn ^jjq knew him through-\\nout all his professional and political life, have said that,\\nso far from being a religious man, or a Christian, the less\\nsaid about that the better. He says of Lincoln s first recorded\\nreligious utterance, used in closing his farewell address to\\nSpringfield, that it was regarded by many as an evidence\\nboth of his weakness and of his hypocrisy and was\\ntossed about as a joke old Abe s Last.\\nHapgood s Lincoln (page 291 et scq.) records that the pious\\nwords with which the Emancipation Proclamation closes were\\nadded at the suggestion of Secretary Chase, and so do Rhodes\\nand Usher, and Rhodes shows him plainly an infidel if not an\\natheist.* Of his words that savor of religion, Lamon says, in\\nhis Lincoln (page 503) If he did not believe in it, the masses\\nof the plain people did, and no one was ever more anxious to\\ndo what was of good report among men. Lamon further says\\n(page 197), that after Mr. Lincoln appreciated the\\nviolence and extent of the religious prejudices which freedom\\nof discussion from his standpoint would be sure to rouse\\nagainst him, and the immense and augmenting power of the\\nchurches, (page 502) he indulged freely in indefi-;\\nnite expressions about Divine Providence, the justice of God,\\n\u00e2\u0099\u00a6Rhodes History nf the United States (Vol. II., p. 312) and he adds When\\nLincoln entered political life he became reticent upon his religious opin-\\nions. Usher in Reminiscences of Lincoln (p. 91).", "height": "2744", "width": "1777", "jp2-path": "reallincoln00minor_0020.jp2"}, "21": {"fulltext": "W^as Lincoln a Christian? 13\\nthe favor of the Most High, in his published documents, but\\nhe nowhere ever professed the slightest faith in Jesus as the\\nSon of God and the Saviour of men. (Page 501 et seq.) He\\nnever told any one that he accepted Jesus as the Christ, or\\nperformed one of the acts which necessarily followed upon\\nsuch a conviction (page 487). When he went to church at\\nall, he went to mock, and came away to mimic. On page 157\\nand thereafter Lamon tells minutely of the writing and the\\nburning of a little book, written by Lincoln with the purpose\\nto disprove the truth of the Bible and the divinity of Christ,\\nand tells how it was burned without his consent by his friend\\nHill, lest it should ruin his political career before a Christian\\npeople. He says that Hill s son called the book infamous,\\nand that the book was burnt, but he never denied or regretted\\nits composition; on the contrary, he made it the subject of\\nfree and frequent conversations with his friends at Springfield,\\nand stated with much particularity and precision the origin,\\narguments and object of the work.\\nHerndon describes the essay or book as an argument\\nagainst Christianity, striving to prove that the Bible was not\\ninspired, and therefore not God s revelation, and that Jesus\\nChrist was not the Son of God. Herndon says that Lincoln\\nintended to have the essay published, and further says that\\nLincoln would come into the clerk s office where I and some\\nyoung men were writing, ^mj would bring a Bible\\nwith him; would read a chapter and argue against it.\\nA letter of Herndon s, published in Lamon s Lincoln (page\\n492 et scq.), says of Lincoln s contest with the Rev. Peter Cart-\\nwright for Congress in 1848 (page 404): In that contest he\\nwas accused of being an infidel, if not an atheist; he never\\ndenied the charge; would not; would die first, because he\\nknew it could be and would be proved.\\nOn pages 487 to 514 Lamon s Lincoln records numerous\\nletters from Lincoln s intimate associates, and one from his\\nwife, that fully confirm the above testimony as to his attitude\\nof hostility to religion.\\nHerndon s Lincoln (Vol. III., p. 39 et seq. and 439 et seq.),ji,nd Lamon s Lin-\\ncoln (p. 492).", "height": "2744", "width": "1777", "jp2-path": "reallincoln00minor_0021.jp2"}, "22": {"fulltext": "14 The Real Lincoln.\\nLincoln s Jokes and Stories,\\nHolland s Lincoln says of the indecency of his jokes and\\nstories: It is useless for Mr. Lincoln s biographers to ignore\\nthis habit; the whole West, if not the whole country (he is\\nwriting in 1866) is full of these stories, and there is no doubt\\nat all that he indulged in them with the same freedom that he\\ndid in those of a less objectionable character.\\nAgain he says (page 251): Men who knew him\\nthroughout all his professional and political life have\\nsaid that he was the foulest in his jests and stories of any man\\nin the country.\\nComprehensive as this indictment is, it is fully sustained\\nby testimony submitted below from Morse, Hapgood, Piatt,\\nRhodes, Lamon and most shocking testimony of all from\\nHerndon.\\nNorman Hapgood, the latest biographer of Lincoln (of 1900),\\nand Morse, the next latest (of 1892), confirm the revelations\\nand the ghastly ejcposures about Lincoln that will be de-\\nscribed below as recorded by Lamon and by Herndon. Morse\\nsays that a necessity and duty rested on those biographers to\\nrecord these truths, as they both claim, and Hapgood says,\\nHerndon has told the President s early life with refreshing\\nhonesty and with more information than any one else. Gen-\\neral Donn Piatt records an occasion when he heard Lincoln\\ntell stories, no one of which will bear printing. Lamon adds\\nto all this his testimony that this habit of Lincoln was re-\\nstrained by no presence and no occasion, and Piatt refers to\\nhim as the man who could open a Cabinet meeting called to\\ndiscuss the Emancipation Proclamation by reading aloud Arte-\\nmus Ward, and refers to Gettysburg as the field that he\\nshamed with a ribald song, making reference to a song that\\nLincoln asked for and got sung on the Gettysburg battlefield,\\nthe day he made his celebrated address there. This behavior\\nhas been much discussed by his eulogists, and defended as a\\nrelief necessary for a nature so sensitive and high-wrought.f\\n*Morse s Lincoln {Vol. I., pp. 13 and 192 et seq.); B.a,pgooA s Lincoln (Pre-\\nface p. 8).\\nLamon s Lincoln (p. 430), and Reminiscenees of Lincoln (p. 486 et seq., and p.\\n481 et seq., and p. 455).", "height": "2744", "width": "1777", "jp2-path": "reallincoln00minor_0022.jp2"}, "23": {"fulltext": "Lincoln^ s Jokes and Stories. 15\\nWas ever so sublime a thing ushered in by the ridiculous?\\nsays Rhodes. (Vol. IV., page 161.)\\nHerndon gives in his first volume (at page 55 and there-\\nafter) a copy of a satire written by Lincoln,- The First Chronicle\\nof Rcuhcn, and an account of the very slight provocation under\\nwhich Lincoln wrote it, and in two foot notes describes the\\nexceedingly base and indecent device by which Lincoln brought\\nabout the events which gave opportunity for this satire; and\\nHerndon adds some verses written and circulated by Lincoln\\nwhich he considers even more vile than the Chronicle. Of\\nthese verses Lamon says, It is impossible to transcribe them,\\nin his Liiicohi (pages 63 and 64). Decency does not permit The\\npublication of the Chronicle or the verses here.\\nIn neither of A. K. McClure s books, Lincoln and Men of the\\nWar Time, published in 1892, or Our Presidents, Etc., published\\nin 1900, does he offer any contradiction of the revelations,\\nand ghastly disclosures that Lamon and Herndon had pub-\\nlished to the world so long before, but McClure does say in the\\nearlier of the books, in the preface (page 2), The closest men\\nto Lincoln, before and after his election to the presidency, were\\nDavid Davis, Leonard Swett, Ward H. Lamon and William H.\\nHerndon. Letters of the two first named are among the\\nletters referred to above, published by Lamon as evidence of\\nLincoln s attitude toward religion.\\nIf any would take refuge in the hope that the responsibili-\\nties of his high office raised Lincoln above these habits of\\nindecency and godlessness, they are met by authentic stories\\nof his grossly unseemly behavior as President, by the evidence\\nof Lamon, the chosen associate of his lifetime, that his indul-\\ngence in gross jokes and stories was restrained by no presence\\nand no occasion, and by a letter of Nicolay, his senior private\\nsecretary throughout his administration, which states that he\\nperceived no change in Lincoln s attitude toward religion after\\nhis entrance on the presidency.*\\nLamon s Lnico/n (p. 4S0 and pp. 4S7 to 504). The Cosmopolitan, of Marcli,\\n1901, says that Nicolay probably was closer to the martyred President than\\nany other man. xhat he knew Lincoln as President and as man\\nmore intimately than any other man. Rhodes is everywhere zealous", "height": "2744", "width": "1777", "jp2-path": "reallincoln00minor_0023.jp2"}, "24": {"fulltext": "16 The Real Lincoln.\\nEstimates of Lincoln Entertained by the Greatest Repub-\\nlicans of his Day and by the Greatest of his Associates\\nin his Public Careen\\nThe evidence thus far submitted concerns chiefly the per-\\nsonal character of Lincoln, and his private career. Let us\\nproceed to consider evidence to show that his character and\\nconduct of public affairs provoked the bitterest censure from\\na very great number of his co-workers in his achievements,\\namong whom may be named Greeley, Thaddeus Stevens, Sum-\\nner, Trumbull, Zach. Chandler, Fred. Douglas, Beecher,\\nWendell Phillips, Wilson, Hamlin and Seward; while the most\\nbitter and contemptuous and persistent of all Lincoln s critics\\nwere Chase, Secretary of the Treasury and Chief Justice, and\\nStanton, known ever since as his great War Secretary.\\nBen Perley Poore, in Reminiscences of Lincoln (page 248),\\nshows Beecher s censures of Lincoln, and so do Beecher s\\neditorials in the Independent of 1862, and Rhodes History of\\nthe United States (page 462), which shows, too (page 463),\\nthat Senator Wilson, of Massachusetts, was among Lincoln s\\nopponents for re-election in 1864.\\nHapgood quotes Wendell Phillips about Lincoln: Who is\\nthis huckster in politics? Who is this County Court lawyer?\\nMorse gives severe censures of Lincoln by Wendell Phillips.\\nMcClure records bitter reprobation of him by Thaddeus\\nStevens. Ida Tarbell calls Sumner, Wade, Winter Davis and\\nChase malicious foes of Lincoln, on the authority of one\\nto defend Lincoln, but he thinks fit to record the foUowing (History of the\\nUnited .Stages, Vol. IV., p. 471, note and p. 518), prefacing it with the state-\\nment that the World was then the organ of the best element of the Demo-\\ncratic party that the Neiv York World, of June 19th. 1864. called Lincoln an\\nignorant, boorish, third-rate, backwoods lawyer, and reported that the\\nspokesman of a delegation sent to carry the resolutions of a great religious\\norganization to the President, publicly denounced him as disgracefully\\nunfit for the high office and tliat a Republican Senator from New York\\nwas reported to have left tlie President s presence because his self-respect\\nwould not permit him to stay and listen to tlie language he employed.\\nRhodes further sets down a tradition tliat Andrews, tlie great WarGover-\\nnor of Massacliusetts, when pressing a matter he had at lieart, went away\\nin disgust at being put off by the President with a smutty story.", "height": "2744", "width": "1777", "jp2-path": "reallincoln00minor_0024.jp2"}, "25": {"fulltext": "Estimates of Lincoln. 17\\nof Lincoln s closest intimates, Leonard Swett, and makes the\\nremarkable and comprehensive concession that about all the\\nmost prominent leaders were actively opposed to\\nLincoln, and mentions Greeley as their chief. McClure s\\nLincoln shows the hostility to Lincoln of Sumner, Trumbull and\\nChandler, and of his Vice-President, Hamlin.\\nFremont, who eight years before had received every Repub-\\nlican vote for President, charged Lincoln with incapacity\\nand selfishness, with disregard of personal rights, with\\nviolation of personal liberty and liberty of the press, with\\nfeebleness and want of principle, and says: The ordinary\\nrights under the Constitution and laws of the country have\\nbeen violated and he further accuses Lincoln of managing\\nthe war for personal ends.\\nHolland shows Fremont, Wendell Phillips, Fred Douglas\\nand Greeley as leaders in the very nearly successful effort to\\ndefeat Lincoln s second election. The call for the convention\\nfor that purpose, held in Cleveland May 31, 1864, said that the\\npublic liberty was in danger that its object was to arouse\\nthe people, and bring them to realize that, while we are\\nsaturating Southern soil with the best blood of the country\\nin the name of liberty, we have really parted with it at home.\\nMcClure s Lincohi, recording the hostile attitude toward\\nLincoln of the leading members of the Cabinet, makes a con-\\ncession (page 54) comprehensive as Miss Tarbell s above:\\nOutside of the Cabinet the leaders were equally discordant\\nand quite as distrustful of the ability of Lincoln to fill his\\ngreat office. Sumner, Trumbull, Chandler, Wade, Winter Davis\\nand the men to whom the nation then turned as the great\\nrepresentative men of the new political power, did not conceal\\ntheir distrust of Lincoln, and he had little support from them\\nat any time during his administration, and McClure says\\nagain (page 289 et scq.): Greeley was a perpetual thorn in\\nLincoln s side ^nd almost constantly criticised him\\nboldly and often bitterly. Greeley labored (page 296)\\nHapgood s Lincoln 164 j; Morse s Lincoln (Vol. I., p. 177); McClure s\\nLincoln (p. 117 and p. 259 and p. 54 et scq. and p. 104) Ida Tarbell, in McClure s\\nMagazine for 1899 (p. 277) and for July, 1899 (p. 218 cl scq.), and Holland s Lin-\\ncoln (p 259 et seq.", "height": "2744", "width": "1777", "jp2-path": "reallincoln00minor_0025.jp2"}, "26": {"fulltext": "18 The Real Lincoln.\\nmost faithfully to accomplish Lincoln s overthrow in his great\\nstruggle for re-election in 1864. See Morse s Lincoln (Vol. II.,\\npage 193). And Edward Everett Hale s new book, Lowell, Etc.\\n(page 178 ct seq.) shows that even the circumstances of Lin-\\ncoln s death did not for a day abate Greeley s reprobation.\\nThe careful reader will not fail to observe that Lincoln s\\nfirst term of four years was at this time nearly over, so that all\\nthis bitter censure from his associates was based on full knowl-\\nedge of him.\\nSeward has been much criticised and accused of rare pre-\\nsumption for a letter that he wrote to the President as Secre-\\ntary of State, one month after his first inauguration, because\\nthe letter manifested a sense of superiority, and condescend-\\ningly offered his advice and aid and leadership. It is possible\\nthat Seward did feel some of the contempt for Lincoln that\\nHiis brethren in the Cabinet, Chase and Stanton, never ceased\\nto express freely for Lincoln and very frequently showed to his\\njface throughout their long terms of office, as will be shown.\\nLike them. Governor Seward was a man of the highest social\\nstanding, and of large experience in the highest public func-\\ntions. The Lincoln that so many now call a hero and a saint\\nIs exceedingly different from the Lincoln that the people who\\ncame in contact with him knew up to the time of his death,\\nas is frankly avowed further on in this sketch by Adams and\\nPiatt, and reluctantly conceded by Crittenden and Rhodes.\\nWhat he was capable of in personal habits, manners and\\nmorals has been shown in the account of the First Chronicle\\nof Reuben, and his submission to humiliations such as have\\nbeen described is not unaccountable.\\nFew were more ardent Abolitionists than Seward, as shown\\nin Bancroft s late Life of him, but he was no tiro in statecraft,\\nand the policy he so authoritatively suggested was to change\\nthe question before the public from one upon slavery for a\\nquestion upon union or disunion.\\nLincoln at once adopted that policy, and by means of it\\nhe precipitated the war. Its astuteness in distracting men s\\nminds from the matter of slavery has been much commended.\\nGeneral Butler says that as late as July, 1861, no one in power", "height": "2744", "width": "1777", "jp2-path": "reallincoln00minor_0026.jp2"}, "27": {"fulltext": "Estimates of Lincoln. 19\\nwas in favor of emancipation. This letter of Seward s did not\\ncome to light for years, and Seward might well say as he did,\\nthat Lincoln had a cunning that was genius.\\nMcClure s Lincoln (page 150 et seq.) says: Stanton had been\\nin open and malignant opposition to the administration only\\na few months before. (This was in January, 1862.) Stanton\\noften spoke of and to public men, military and civil, with a\\nwithering sneer. I have heard him scores of times thus speak\\nof Lincoln and several times thus speak to Lincoln.*\\nAfter Stanton s retirement from the Buchanan Cabinet, when\\nLincoln was inaugurated, he maintained the closest confi-\\ndential relations with Buchanan, and wrote him many letters\\nexpressing the utmost contempt for Lincoln. These\\nletters, given to the public in Curtis Life of\\nBuchanan, speak freely of the painful imbecility of Lincoln,\\nthe venality and corruption which ran riot in the government,\\nand McClure goes on: It is an open secret that Stanton\\nadvised the revolutionary overthrow of the Lincoln govern-\\nment, to be replaced by General McClellan as Military Dictator.\\nThese letters, published by Curtis, bad as they are,\\nare not the worst letters written by Stanton to Buchanan.\\nSome of them are so violent in their expression against Lin-\\ncoln that they have been charitably withheld from\\nthe public. t Whitney, in his On Circuit with Lincoln (page\\n424), tells of these suppressed letters. See, too, his pages 422\\nto 424 et sr and Ben Perley Poore, in Reminiscences of Lincoln\\n(page 223) and Kasson in Reminiscences of Lincoln (page 381),\\nall in confirmation of Stanton s estimate and treatment of\\nLincoln. Hapgood s Lincoln refers (page 164) to Stanton s\\nbrutal absence of decent personal feeling towards Lincoln,\\nand tells of Stanton s insulting behavior when they met five\\nyears earlier, of which meeting Stanton said that he had\\nMcClure s Lincoln (p. 150 etseq. and p. 155). Yet to a man of President\\nBuchanan s character and standing Stanton showed an excess of defer-\\nence; for Mr. Buchanan complained, in a letter to his niece. Miss Harriet\\nLane, (See Curtis si/fe f)/ Mr//ajian. Vol. II., p. 533) that Stanton, ^hen In\\nhis cabinet. was always on my side and flattered nie ad nauseam.\\nt HapRood s Lincoln (p. 254), Gorham s Life of Stanton (Vol. I p. 213).", "height": "2744", "width": "1777", "jp2-path": "reallincoln00minor_0027.jp2"}, "28": {"fulltext": "20 The Real Lincoln.\\nmet him at the bar and found him a low, cunning clown.\\nMcClure says of Stanton: He had little respect for Lincoln s\\nfitness for the presidency.\\nOf Chase, McClure says, in his Lincoln (page 8) Chase\\nwas the most irritating fly in the Lincoln ointment. Ida\\nTarbell says: But Mr. Chase was never able to realize Mr.\\nLincoln s greatness. Nicolay and Hay s Lincoln says about\\nChase: Even to complete strangers he could not write with-\\nout speaking slightingly about the President. He kept up this\\nhabit to the end of Lincoln s lifs. But his attitude\\ntowards the President, it is hardly too much to say, was one\\nwhich varied between the limits of active hostility and benevo-\\nlent contempt. Yet none rate Chase higher than Nicolay and\\nHay do for character, talent and patriotism. Ehodes says Chase\\ndealt censure unrestrained to the President s conduct of the\\nwar. t\\nHow Far Did the North and the West Approve the War\\nand Emancipation\\nThe impression upon the minds of thousands of people\\nabout the War between the States may be formulated as fol-\\nlows: That at the firing upon Fort Sumter, the people of the\\nNorthern States rose with one mind and for the four years\\nof the war ungrudgingly poured forth their treasure and shed\\ntheir blood to re-establish the Union and to free the slaves.\\nLet us consider how much foundation there is for this popular\\nimpression.\\nIn order to show the enormous difficulties overcome by their\\nhero, Lincoln, in accomplishing his two notable achievements,\\nhis eulogists have furnished much evidence that goes to show\\nBen Perley Pooreln Heminincences of Lincoln (p. 223). Ida Tarbell in\\nMcClure s MagazinetoT March, 1899, tells the story of this earliest manifesta-\\ntion of Stanton s contempt for Lincoln. Morse s Lincoln says (Vol. I., p. 327\\nthat Stanton carried his revilings of the President to the point of coarse\\npersonal insults, and refers to his (p. 326) habitual insults.\\nMcClure s Lincoln (p. 156, and besides pp. 180, 151, 155 and p. 9; Ida Tar-\\nbell In McClure s Magazine for January, 1899, Nicolay and Hay s Lincoln (Vol.\\nIX., p. 389, Vol. VI., p. 264), and elsewhere. Rhodes History of the United\\nStates (Vol. IV., p. 205).", "height": "2744", "width": "1777", "jp2-path": "reallincoln00minor_0028.jp2"}, "29": {"fulltext": "War and Emancipation. 21\\nthat both the coercion of the South and the emancipation of\\nthe negroes were accomplished against the will of the Demo-\\ncratic party and of no small part of the Republican party in\\nthe North and the West, and their evidence to that effect will\\nnow be submitted.\\nAs Abolition had been talked of long before the coercion\\nof the South was thought of, it seems best to consider, first,\\nthe question. How far did the North and the West approve\\nemancipation?\\nLet us examine the testimony on this question before and\\nafter Lincoln became President.\\nIf the Fugitive-Slave laws seem to any shameful, Andrews,\\nlong president of Brown University, bitterest of Abolitionists,\\nconcedes that those laws were passed by a Congress that had\\na decided majority of Northern men, and Lincoln repeatedly\\npledged himself to their execution and put such a pledge into\\nhis Inaugural. Andrews records that Abolition was opposed\\nby an overwhelming majority of the Northern people and\\nthe Western people, not only down to the war, but during the\\nwhole of it, and as long as opposition to it was at all safe.\\nBitter as his reprobation of thiS public sentiment is, he frankly\\nconcedes it, and says that between 1830 and 1840 there was\\nhardly a place of any size where anyone could advocate emanci-\\npation, and that by 1850 there were few places where an\\nAbolitionist might not safely speak his mind that in 1841\\nthere were but two advocates of it in Congress, f Charles\\nFrancis Adams Life records (page 29) that Garrison was\\nmobbed in Boston in 1835 for being an Abolitionist. See, also,\\npage 33 and page 58. Page 105 and thereafter shows how\\nill-esteemed and shabby the Republican party in Washington\\nwas as late as 1859. In Edward Everett Hale s lately published\\nbook, James Russell Lowell, Etc. he names v age 22 et\\nseq.) a class-mate who was, he thinks, the only Abolitionist in\\nHarvard College in 1838, and says Boston as Boston hated\\nHolland s Lincoln (p. 347).\\nAndrews History of the United States (Vol. II,, p. 15). It describes besides\\nthe destruction of charitable scliools for negroes and even of their homes,\\nby people regarded as the most respectable classes of society in Connecticut\\nand elsewhere in New England and the prohibition by law of schools for\\nnegro children. See heading of Chapter IX. in John A. Logan s Oreat\\nConspiracy.", "height": "2744", "width": "1777", "jp2-path": "reallincoln00minor_0029.jp2"}, "30": {"fulltext": "22 The Real Lincoln.\\nAbolitionism, and the stevedores and longshoremen\\nhated a nigger that Dr. Palfrey, once of the Divinity\\nFaculty of Harvard, like most men with whom he lived, had\\nopposed Abolition with all his might, his voice and his pen,\\nand he adds that the conflict at the outset was not a crusade\\nagainst slavery. The Rev. Henry Ward Beecher said in an\\naddress to the people of Manchester, England,* that in the\\nNorth Abolitionists were rejected by society\\nblighted in political life that to be called an Abolitionist\\ncaused a merchant to be avoided as if he had the plague;\\nthat the doors of confidence were closed upon him in the\\nchurch. Holland s Lincoln (page 67) says that in 1830 the\\nprevailing sentiment of Illinois was in favor of slavery\\nthe Abolitionist was despised by both parties. And\\nGeorge William Curtis f reproaches his own people as follows:\\nWe betrayed our own principles, and those who would not\\nbetray them we reviled as fanatics and traitors; we made\\nthe name of Abolitionist more odious than any in our annals\\n(Vol. I., page 28). If a man died for liberty, as\\nLovejoy did at Alton, he was called a fanatical fool. Of the\\nsame death the editor of the book says (Vol. I., page 130), and\\nthe country scowled, and muttered Served him right. j\\nCurtis goes on, The Fugitive-Slave law was vigorously en-\\nforced in Ohio and other States. Volume I. (page 75 et scq.)\\nquotes the declaration of Edward Everett as Governor of\\nMassachusetts, that discussion that leads to insurrection is\\nan offence against the Commonwealth, and quotes Daniel\\nWebster that it is an affair of high morals to aid in\\nenforcing the Fugitive-Slave law. He quotes (Vol. I., page\\n88) a speech in 1859 of Stephen A. Douglas that fully justified\\nslavery, and he quotes him as saying (page 51), If you go\\nover into Virginia to steal her negroes, she will catch you and\\nput you in jail, with other thieves. In the same spirit of\\nscornful denunciation as the above, Curtis sets forth (Vol. I.,\\nSee a collection of his speeches In the P)-alt Library, Baltimore, ma.r ked\\n53866-2557.\\nHis Orations (Vol. I., p. 146).\\nt Lovejoy was an Abolitionist who was killed by a mob in Alton. Illinois,\\nin 1836.", "height": "2744", "width": "1777", "jp2-path": "reallincoln00minor_0030.jp2"}, "31": {"fulltext": "Wa7- and Emancipation. 23\\npages 80 to 82) the purpose the North entertained not to inter-\\nfere with slavery. In other free States men were flying for\\ntheir lives; were mobbed, seized, imprisoned, maimed, mur-\\ndered And all this was as late as 1850. The\\nSouthern policy (Vol. I., page 130 et seq.) seemed to conquer.\\nThe church, the college, trade, fashion, the vast political\\nparties, took Calhoun s side. in Boston, in Philadel-\\nphia, in New York, in Utica, in New Haven, and in a hundred\\nvillages, when an American citizen proposed to say what he\\nthought of a great public question, he was insulted,\\nmobbed, chased and maltreated. The Governor of Ohio\\n(Vol. I., page 131) actually delivered a citizen of that State\\nto the demand of Kentucky to be tried for helping a slave to\\nescape. Volume I. (page 132) gives Seward s picture of the\\nentire unanimity of the Washington government both at home\\nand abroad in supporting the Southern side, and says (page\\n139), Fernando Wood and the New York Herald were the\\ntrue spokesmen of the confused public sentiment of the city\\nof New York, when one proposed the secession of the city and\\nthe other proposed the adoption of the Montgomery Constitu-\\ntion that is, the Constitution of the Confederate States,\\nwhich was adopted at Montgomery, Alabama. And Curtis\\ngoes on: If the city of New York in February, 1861, had vo|ed\\nupon its acceptance, it would have been adopted. At page\\n174, Curtis says, referring to the enlistment of negro soldiers,\\nbut I remember that four years ago there were good\\nmen among us who said, If white hands can t win this fight,\\nlet it be lost. Does not Curtis here concede that white\\nhands did not win the fight? Whether he does or not, did\\nnot Lincoln in his Emancipation Proclamation concede that\\nwhite hands could not or would not win the fight, and did\\nnot Lincoln frequently say afterwards in defence of his auto-\\ncratic action, that but for his emancipating and arming the\\nnegroes the fight would not have been won? And finally\\ndid the wnite hands of the great North and West lack\\nnumbers or wealth or courage to win the fight, if it had been\\ntheir tcill?\\nThe popular will about emancipation was accurately\\nmeasured by the vote that Fremont got, running as Free-Soil", "height": "2744", "width": "1777", "jp2-path": "reallincoln00minor_0031.jp2"}, "32": {"fulltext": "24 The Real Lincoln.\\ncandidate, only four years before Lincoln s election. His votes\\nfrom the whole United States were only 146,149. Schouler s\\nHistory of the United States (pages 214 et seq.) records\\nthat General B. F. Butler offered his Massachusetts brigade to\\nput down any negro insurrection, and that few, North or\\nSouth, during the first year of the war, sought, or approved\\nemancipation. General B. F. Butler* says: If we had beaten\\nat Bull Run, I have no doubt the whole contest would have\\nbeen patched up by concessions to slavery, as no one in power\\nthen was ready for its abolition. Lincoln himself said in his\\nfamous letter to Greeley in the Tribune, If I could save the\\nUnion without freeing any slave I would do it.\\nHardly any testimony on the question. How the Border\\nStates regarded emancipation could be better than Lincoln s\\nown, which we have. When a delegation urged him to emanci-\\npate the negroes by a proclamation, he expressed the appre-\\nhension t that, if he should do as they wished, fifty thousand\\nrifles from the Border States, then serving in the army of the\\nUnion, might go over to the opposing side; and Ida Tarbell\\ntells us in McClitre s Maoazine for May, 1899, that Lincoln said\\nthat, if he should enlist negroes in his army, two hundred\\nthousand muskets that he had put into the hands of Border-\\nSt*te men would be turned against the Union army.\\nThe Issue Changed from Slavery to Saving- the Union.\\nFollowing, if not guided by, Seward s advice showed above,\\nLincoln disclaimed any purpose of emancipation, but most\\nastutely used the firing on Fort Sumter to rouse the war spirit.\\nThe word astutely is aptly applied, for the flag had been\\nfired on in the same place two months earlier an exceedingly\\nimportant fact which has been very strangely ignored, but\\ncannot be denied. The steamer Star of the West had been\\nsent two months earlier with food and two hundred recruits\\nto relieve Fort Sumter, and while flying the great flag of a\\n*Butler\\\\s Book (p. 293), and Phillips Brooks wrote almost exactly the\\nsame In a letter, October, 1862, Life and Letters, by Allen.\\n\u00e2\u0080\u00a2hNicolay and Hay s Lincoln,\\nt Nicolay and Hay s Lincoln (Vol. VIII., p. 96 et seq.)", "height": "2744", "width": "1777", "jp2-path": "reallincoln00minor_0032.jp2"}, "33": {"fulltext": "The Issue Changed. 2-5\\ngarrison, was fired on, hit twice, and driven away\u00e2\u0080\u0094 retired\\na little ignominiously, Morse reports it*\u00e2\u0080\u0094 and he adds that\\nSenator Wigfall jeered insolently: Your flag has been in-\\nsulted, redress it if you dare. George William Curtis f de-\\nplores that they were unable or unwilling to avenge a mortal\\ninsult to our own flag in our own waters upon the Star of the\\nWest. Ropes and Channing+ give a like description of the\\noccurrence. Russell writes to the London Times from America:\\nr lt is absurd to assert that the sudden outburst\\nv/hen Fort Sumter was fired upon was caused by the insult\\nto the flag. Why, the flag had been fired on long before\\nSumter was attacked jj^d been torn down from\\nthe United States arsenals and forts all over the South and\\nfired upon when the Federal fiag was flying from the Star of\\nthe West. He says, too, secession was an accomplished fact\\nmonths before Lincoln came into ofllce, but we heard no talk\\nof rebels and pirates till Sumter had fallen. The\\nNorth was perfectly quiescent. Rhodes says that Chase called\\nit an accomplished revolution, when Lincoln entered on the\\npresidency.\\nThis flring on the flag on the Star of the West produced\\nno sensation at all, but was accepted by the whole country\\nas an accompaniment of the secession of the States.\\nWe have learned afresh of late the meaning of the words\\nused above, to rouse the War .Spirit. A very respectable\\npart of the wisdom and virtue of this country deplore and\\nreprobate the war now waging by the United States, and yet\\nthey do make and can make no opposition, but support the\\nwar just as those do who approve it most warmly. We know\\nnow that a war, once begun, sweeps into its support, not only\\nthe regular army, the navy, the Treasury, but volunteer organi-\\nzations and the youth of the country, who think they must\\nrespond to any national call for arms.\\nMorse s Lincoln (Vol. I., p. 196;.\\nOrations (Vol. I., p. 141).\\nI Ropes Story of the Civil War (Pt. I., p. 45. Channinq s Short Hi^torn of the\\nUnited States {p. 3\\\\Z).\\n^5 Russell s Diary North and South (p. 72 et seq., and p. 131 et seg.)\\nII Rhodes History of the United States (Vol. III., p. 543).", "height": "2744", "width": "1777", "jp2-path": "reallincoln00minor_0033.jp2"}, "34": {"fulltext": "26 The Real Lincoln.\\nHow Far Did the North and the West Approve Forcing\\nBack the South Into the Union\\nThe authorities we quote have put on record ample proof\\nof a widespread conviction in the North and the West in\\n1861 that the use of force to retain States in the Union was\\nnot only inadmissible under the Constitution, but abhorrent\\nto the principles on which their political institutions rested.\\nRussell in his BUtnj (page 13) quotes Bancroft, the his-\\ntorian, afterwards Minister to England, for the opinion in 1860\\nthat the United States had no authority to coerce the people\\nof the South; which opinion, Bancroft told Russell, was widely\\nentertained among the most prominent men of all classes in\\nthe North; and Russell reports the same opinion as prevailing\\nin March, 1861 (page 14 ct seq.) in New York and in Washing-\\nton and that there was little sympathy with and no respect\\nfor (page 15) Lincoln. He found Senator Sumner and Secre-\\ntary Chase disposed to let the Southern States go out with\\ntheir slavery.\\nThe Life of Charles Fnmeis Adams, Lincoln s Minister to\\nEngland, says (page 49 et seq.) that up to the very day of\\nthe firing on the flag, the attitude of the Northern States, even\\nin case of hostilities, was open to grave question, while that of\\nthe Border States did not admit of a doubt that\\nMr. Seward, the member of the President s Cabinet in charge\\nof foreign affairs, both in his official papers and his private\\ntalk, repudiated not only the right, but the wish even to use\\narmed force in subjugating the Southern States against the\\nwill of a majority of the people, and declared that the President\\nwillingly (page 151) accepted as true the cardinal dogma of\\nthe seceding States, that the Federal Government had no\\nauthority for coercion; ^11 this time (page 150)\\nthe Southern sympathizers throughout the loyal States\\nwere earnest and outspoken.\\nGeneral B. F. Butler records that Henry Dunning, Mayor\\nof Hartford, called the City Council together to consult if\\nmy troops should be allowed to go through Hartford on the", "height": "2744", "width": "1777", "jp2-path": "reallincoln00minor_0034.jp2"}, "35": {"fulltext": "Forcing Back the South. 27\\nway to the war. He was a true, loyal man, but did not believe\\nin having a war. He was a patriot to the core.\\nMorse s Lincoln (Vol. I., p. 231) makes the following re-\\nmarkable statement: Greeley and Seward and Wendell\\nPhillips, representative men, were little better than seces-\\nsionists. The statement sounds ridiculous, yet the proof\\nagainst each comes from his own mouth. The Tribune had\\nretracted none of those disunion sentiments of which examples\\nhave been given. f\\nEven so late as April 10, 1861, Sev/ard wrote officially to\\nCharles Francis Adams, Minister to England, Only an im-\\nperial and despotic government could subjugate thoroughly\\ndisaffected and insurrectionary members of the State. On\\nApril 9th the rumor of a fight at Sumter being spread abroad,\\nWendell Phillips said, Here are a series of States girding the\\nGulf who think that their peculiar institutions require that\\nthey should have a separate government; they have a right to\\ndecide that question without appealing to you and to me\\nStanding with the principles of 76 behind us, who\\ncan deny them the right? Abraham Lincoln has no\\nright to a soldier in Fort Sumter you cannot go\\nthrough Massachusetts, and recruit men to bombard Charleston\\nand New Orleans. Morse is comprehensive in his statement\\nof the position taken by the Republicans, saying of Lincoln s\\nearly days in Washington: None of the distin-\\nguished men, leaders of his own party whom Lincoln found\\nabout him at Washington, were in a frame of mind to assist\\nhim efficiently. Andrews deplores the fact that coolness\\nand absurd prejudice against coercing largely possessed even\\nthe loyal masses, and that (Vol. II., page 95) throughout the\\nNorth the feeling was strong against all efforts at coercion.\\nMcClure says: Even in Philadelphia nearly the\\nwhole commercial and financial interests were arrayed against\\nLincoln at first. .t Woodrow Wilson s DiviMon and Reunion\\nButler s Book (p. 29^); Ropes Slory of the Civil War (Pt. I., p. 14 et seq);\\nMorse s Lincoln (Vol. 1, p. 190). and Greeley s American Confiict (p. 91 et seq.)\\nMorse and others quote, from Greeley s editorials in his Tribune, repeated\\nbitter censures of forcing the seceded States back into the Union.\\nt Morse s Lincoln (Vol. I., p. 223 and p. 4) 3/cClure s Our Prrside7tts (p. 177).", "height": "2744", "width": "1777", "jp2-path": "reallincoln00minor_0035.jp2"}, "36": {"fulltext": "28 The Real Lincoln.\\nsays (page 214) that President Buchanan agreed with his\\nAttorney-General that there was no constitutional means or\\nwarrant for coercing a State (as indeed his last message\\nshows beyond doubt), and adds that such for the time seemed\\nto be the general opinion of the country.\\nFor months after the secession of South Carolina, while the\\nother States were successively passing ordinances of secession\\nand seizing the forts, arsenals, etc., within their boundaries,\\nthe government at Washington, President, Cabinet, Supreme\\nCourt and Congress, took not one step toward coercion, nor\\ndid either house of Congress listen to a suggestion of emanci-\\npation. These Senators and Representatives were from the\\nNorth and the West only, and we may surely conclude that,\\nat so critical a period they ascertained and carried out the\\nwill of their constituents. See the testimony of Butler s Book,\\nthat during the whole War of the Rebellion the government\\nwas rarely ever aided, but usually impeded by the decisions\\nof the Supreme Court, so that the President was obliged to\\nsuspend the writ of Habeas Corpus in order to relieve himself\\nfrom the rulings of the court. This is stated by General\\nButler quite seriously and not, as might possibly be supposed,\\nin any satirical mood. Ropes Sfori/ of the Cirll War (pt. I.,\\npage 19) says: It is true that during the winter of 1860\\nCongress took no action whatever looking toward preparation\\nfor the conquest of the outgoing States. From page\\n355 to 553 of the first volume of Greeley s Aineriean Conflict\\nthere is little but a record of the opposition to coercion of the\\nSouth in the loyal States. Pages 357 et seq. and 354 et seq.\\nshow the action of the Legislatures of New Jersey and Illinois,\\nboth nearly unanimous, in the same direction. See, also (Vol.\\nI., page 380 et seq.) the very strong support given to the amend-\\nment of the Constitution proposed by one whom Greeley called\\nthe venerable and Union-loving Crittenden of Kentucky,\\nwhich amendment guaranteed ample protection to slavery, and\\nit could have been passed in Congress but for the fact that\\nthey knew the South thought the time for compromise was\\npast.\\nGreeley describes (page 387 et seq.) a tremendous demon-\\nstration against the war made by New York State in February,", "height": "2744", "width": "1777", "jp2-path": "reallincoln00minor_0036.jp2"}, "37": {"fulltext": "Forcing Back the South. 29\\n1861, in which her leaders promised about all the South could\\nask. In this, as in the New York State Democratic Conven-\\ntion, which he describes as probably the strongest and most\\nimposing assembly of delegates ever convened in the State\\n(page 392 et scq.), Greeley records expressions of the purpose,\\nnot only not to coerce, but to aid the South in case of war,\\nwhich expressions were heard with applause; and in a speech\\nof James S. Thayer, it was alleged that these views had been\\nasserted in the last election by 333,000 votes in New York.\\nGreeley further makes the following very remarkable state-\\nment: That thi oughout the Free States eminent and eager\\nadvocates of adhesion to the new Confederacy by those States\\nwere widely heard and heeded. For more evidence to the same\\neffect of the feeling of the North and the West, ee McCall s\\nLife of TJiad. Stcrens (pages 122 to 132 ct scq., page 211 ct scq.\\nand page 219 ct ,scq.). The Life of /liiiiiiibal Hamlin, Lincoln s\\nVice-President, quotes Hamlin (page 459): If we had had a\\ncommon union in the North and a common loyalty to the\\ngovernment, we could have ended this Civil War months ago,\\nbut this aid and comfort the rebels had received from the\\nNorthern allies\\nThe advocacy of views strongly adverse to the war and to\\nemancipation did not cease in the North and the West when\\nthe war began, dangerous as it soon became to advocate them.\\nImprisonment without trial, trials by court-martial, sentences\\nto confinement in prisons or fortresses remote from home and\\nfriends, did reduce at last to silence all but the boldest even\\nMissourians, Kentuckians and Marylanders; and similar\\nmethods of repression were used in States remotest from the\\nscenes of the war. Russell s DUny (page 198) mentions the\\nnews that members of the Maryland Legislature\\nhave been seized by the Federal authorities. This is of date\\nSeptember 11, 1861. See Dunning s Es.wys on the Ciril War, etc.\\n(Pages 19, 21 ct scq.)\\nRhodes Eistory of the Tiiitcd l^tatcs (Vol. IV., page 155)\\ndescribes minutely the imprisonments at different times and\\nplaces of two men of Indiana (Olds and Walk), who, he says,\\nenjoyed before, then, and thereafter the highest respect and\\nconfidence of their neighbors and constituents, and were", "height": "2744", "width": "1777", "jp2-path": "reallincoln00minor_0037.jp2"}, "38": {"fulltext": "30 Tlic Real Lincoln.\\nhonored by them the more for their sufferings, and Dunning\\ninstances these as samples of much other such treatment of\\nthose who opposed the war and emancipation.\\nGorham s Life of Stanton quotes a proclamation of Stanton\\nas Secretary of War issued in justification of Lincoln s usurpa-\\ntion of despotic power over liberty and life, which sets forth\\n(Vol. I., page 264 ct scq.) that he found treason everywhere\\nin Senate, House of Representatives, the Cabinet,\\nthe foreign Ministers, land and naval forces,\\nrevenue, post office, territorial govern-\\nments and Indian reserves, judges, governors, legislators,\\neven in the most loyal regions; secret societies with\\nperverted sympathies furnishing men and money to\\nthe insurgents, fortifications, navy-yards, arsenals\\nbetrayed or abandoned to the insurgents, voluntary\\nenlistment ceasing, c.\\nIn New York State, Governor Horatio Seymour had enor-\\nmous backing in his open opposition, as partly shown above,\\nto the war before it began, and in opposition to it and emanci-\\npation, so far as was possible, to the end. Schouler s Ilistori/\\nof the United ^States (page 417 ct seq.) concedes that the State\\nof New York was obstructive to the President s wishes a\\nmode of expression which is significant and records that Sey-\\nmour said in his Inaugural as Governor that the conscription\\nact was believed by one-half the people of the loyal States a\\nviolation of the supreme constitutional law. For his view\\nof the purpose for which that act was procured, see Nicolay\\nand Hay s Lincoln (Vol. VI., page 22 et seq.), which alleges that\\nboth Governor Seymour and Archbishop Hughes, not only\\nmade friendly addresses to the mob that was forcibly stopping\\nthe draft in New York city, but manifested a measure of\\nsympathy with its purpose; that Seymour in his address called\\nthe war the imgodly conflict that is distracting the land,\\nand said that the purpose of the draft was to stuff ballot\\nboxes with bogus soldier votes. Yet they concede that, in\\nspite of all this, Seymour was (Vol. VI., pages 9 to 26) then\\nand to his death the most honored Democratic politician in\\nthe State. And this is shown beyond all question by the fact\\nthat, after the war was over he was selected by the National", "height": "2744", "width": "1777", "jp2-path": "reallincoln00minor_0038.jp2"}, "39": {"fulltext": "Forcing Back the South. 31\\nDemocratic party as its candidate for the Presidency. They\\nattest also unstintedly Seymour s integrity and patriotism.\\nIn the State of Ohio, Vallandigham s following in his re-\\nsistance was so strong that he was banished by order of\\nPresident Lincoln a penalty not before known to the country,\\nand not for deeds done, but for words spoken, to use the\\nlanguage in which it was denounced by John Sherman, and\\nthese were words that had been spoken in public debate and\\nreceived with wild applause by thousands of his constituents.*\\nIn Indiana Governor Morton got from Lincoln, through\\nStanton, aid by which he usurped every function of the govern-\\nment of the State, entirely overruling the will of the people;\\nconclusive evidence of which makes up a large part of the first\\nvolume of Foulke s Life of (lorcnior Morton, published as late\\nas 1899; nor is it recorded in censure of Morton. Chapter\\nXXII. is headed I am the State, and begins, Morton accom-\\nplished what had never before been attempted in American\\nhistory. For two years he carried on the government of a\\ngreat State solely by his own personal energy, raising money\\nwithout taxation on his own responsibility and distributing it\\nthrough bureaus organized by himself. French s Life of Morton\\nsays (page 423) that at the commencement of the year 1863\\nthe secret enemies of the government j^^fj\\nsucceeded in the election of an Indiana Legislature, which\\nwas principally composed of men sworn to oppose to the\\nbitter end the prosecution of the war, with the purpose of\\nencouraging the enemies of American liberty in their work of\\nrebellion and destruction. Nicolay and Hay s Lincoln^ con-\\nfirms the above account of Indiana, and says that, but for\\nGovernor Morton the Indiana Legislature would have recog-\\nnized the Confederacy and dissolved the federal relation with\\nthe United States. They givej: a full account of the dis-\\nSherman s Recollections (Vol. I., p. 323), and Holland s Lincoln (p. i71 etseq.).\\nwho tells, too, of the bitter reprobation this provoked in New York.\\nNicolay and Hay tell (Vol. VII., p. 328) about the same story of Vallandig-\\nham and of tlie resentment (p. 341) in New York.\\n\u00e2\u0080\u00a2h(Vol. Yin. I,. Set seg.)\\nUYol. Yin., p. 29 etseg.)", "height": "2744", "width": "1777", "jp2-path": "reallincoln00minor_0039.jp2"}, "40": {"fulltext": "o2 The Real Lincoln.\\nloyalty in the North and the West, and say, too,* that in\\nthe Western States the words Democrat and Copperhead\\nbecame after January, 1863, practically synonymous, and a\\ncognomen applied as a reproach was assumed with pride.\\nProfessor Channing, of Harvard, says-.f In the Mississippi\\nValley hundreds of thousands of men either sympathized with\\nthe slave-holders or cared nothing about the slavery dispute.\\nGeorge S. Boutwell says -t With varying degrees of intensity\\nthe Democratic party of the North sympathized with the South,\\nand arraigned Lincoln and the Republican party for all that\\nthe country was called to endure. During the entire period\\nof the war New York, Ohio and Illinois were doubtful States,\\nand Indiana was kept in line only by the active and desperate\\nfidelity of Oliver P. Morton. Secretary Wells, of Lincoln s\\nCabinet, says {Atlantic Monthly, Vol. XVI., page 266) The\\nDemocrats were in sympathy with the rebels and\\nopposed to the war itself.\\nProbably few will question that the Border States disap-\\nproved the coercion of the South and emancipation, but see\\nthe following: Ropes says, and though Maryland, Kentucky\\nand Missouri remained in the Union,]] yet the feeling of a con-\\nsiderable part of the people in those States in favor of the\\nnew movement was so strong aided as it was by the convic-\\ntion that their States would have seceded but for the active\\ninterference of the United States Government ^that the South-\\nern cause received substantial aid from each of them. How\\nconsiderable a part of the people it was may be inferred\\nfrom the fa ct that a proclamation from the War Department\\nwas addressed to Marylanders to declare regret for having to\\nkeep so large a number of their fellow citizens in prisons, and\\nthat public policy did not admit of their being brought to trial\\nor allowed to know the charges on which they were arrested;\\n(Vol. IV., p. 234).\\nf Channing s Short History nf the United States (p. 314).\\nt Abraham Lincoln Tributes from his Associates (p. 85 et sefj.)\\nSee letter of Morton to Stanton reporting a formidable effort of citizens\\nand soldiers of Indiana to withdraw from tlie Union. Rhodes History of\\nthe United State? (Vol. IV., p. 223).\\nII Missouri seceded, October 31, 1861, and Kentucky seceded, November 20\\n1861.\u00e2\u0080\u0094 Note by Editor.", "height": "2744", "width": "1777", "jp2-path": "reallincoln00minor_0040.jp2"}, "41": {"fulltext": "Forcing Back the South. 33\\nand the lately published Recollections of Charles A. Dana record\\nwith complacency (page 236 et seq.) among his experiences as\\nAssistant Secretary of War, the arrest in one day of ninety-\\nseven of the leading people in Baltimore and their imprison-\\nment in Washington, mostly in solitary confinement.\\nEverywhere there were men who made more or less bitter\\nprotest or resistance against such subversion (by methods\\nknown only to the Sultan or the Czar), of what Americans had\\nbeen taught to call the conditions of freedom a free press,\\nfree speech, the writ of Habeas Corpus, and Trial by Tury. In\\nCincinnati, in Chicago, in Boston and elsewhere, demonsti a-\\ntions toward violent resistance very alarming to the Adminis-\\ntration at Washington were suppressed with the strong hand\\nbefore coming to a head. Gilmore s Personal Recollections of\\nLincoln, speaks (page 199) of the wide Western Conspiracy\\nso opportunely strangled in Chicago, and devotes a chapter to\\nit. John A. Logan s Great Conspiracy (page 557) records a\\ngathering at Springfield, Illinois (Lincoln s home), June 13,\\n1863, of nearly one hundred thousand Vallandigham, Anti-War,\\nPeace, Democrats, which utterly repudiated the war. See, also,\\npage 559 et seq. For account of avowed hostility to Lincoln\\nin Philadelphia, New York and Boston, and of opposition in\\nNew Jersey that made the State disgraceful, see Allen s\\nLife and Letters of Phillips Brooks, Vol. I., page 448. Of Massa-\\nchusetts, we learn the following from General B. F. Butler*\\nMassachusetts had the disgrace of a draft, intensified by the\\ndisgrace of a draft-riot, which had to be put down by force of\\narms. General Rosecrans reported to Washington the existence\\nin the Western States of secret orders of men bound by oath\\nto co-operate with the Confederates to the number of four\\nhundred thousand men. Nicolay and Hay say that three hun-\\ndred and fifty thousand was an exaggerated estimate of their\\nnumbers.\\nWhen the storm was rising there came from the Democratic\\nleaders in the loyal States as distinct asseverations of the\\nwrongs the South was enduring, as full assurances that the\\nButler s Book (p. 306).\\n3", "height": "2744", "width": "1777", "jp2-path": "reallincoln00minor_0041.jp2"}, "42": {"fulltext": "34 The Real Lincoln.\\nSouth had the right to withdraw from the partnership, as full\\ndenial of any possible right in the Federal Government to use\\ncoercion, as any Southern leader ever set forth; with further\\nassurances that the Democrats of the North and the West\\nwould fight on the Southern side in any appeal to arms.\\nThe extreme Abolitionists also bitterly opposed the war.\\nTheodore Roosevelt s Cronnccll, just from the press, says (page\\n103), that at the close of the war the Garrison or\\ndisunion Abolitionists had seen their cause triumph,\\nnot through, but in spite of their efforts. And Gorham s Life\\nof Stanton (page 163 et seq.) says: The Republicans\\nwere divided into two classes, one which desired separation,\\netc., and (Vol. I., page 193) tells of a new element,\\nheaded by prominent Republican leaders like Greeley and\\nChase, who thought that a union of non-slave-holding States\\nwould be preferable to any attempt to maintain by force the\\nUnion with the slave-holding States. Observe liow exactly\\nthese conclusions agreed with the conclusions to which the\\nSouthern leaders had come.\\nA letter of Chase quoted in his Life by Warden (page 363\\net seq.) says: It is precisely because they anticipate abolition\\nas the result that the Garrison Abolitionists desire disunion.\\nSchouler says of Garrison, Phillips and their immediate fol-\\nlowers:* They were the avowed disunionists on the Northern\\nside.\\nIn spite of the support of the war forced on the Democracy,\\nas above described, they made a steady struggle in the courts,\\nin Congress, and in the State governments to keep down the\\nwar to constitutional limits as far as possible, and to such\\nconditions as might leave room for reconciliation in the future.\\nVallandigham s and Seymour s conduct furnish examples, and\\nGeneral McClellan s is another example. For years no pains\\nwere spared to cry down General McClellan in vindication\\nof Lincoln s dealings with him, but evidence of the truth\\nhas been too strong. Even Nicolay and Hay have to\\nconcede to McClellan the very highest praise for pure patriot-\\nism, and the concessions have grown greater with each\\nsucceeding historian till Rhodes, one of the ablest, deplores\\n*Scliouler s History of the United States (Vol. VI., p. 225).", "height": "2744", "width": "1777", "jp2-path": "reallincoln00minor_0042.jp2"}, "43": {"fulltext": "Forcing Back the Soiith. 35\\nthe fact that Lincoln could not see McClellan as we see him,\\nand that Lincoln deferred the capture of Richmond and the\\ndownfall of the Confederacy for two years by removing McClel-\\nlan from command of the army.* Ropes passes hardly less\\nsevere censure on Lincoln for his dealings with McClellan, f and\\nRhodes and Ropes are very hostile critics of McClellan. See\\nJohn Fiske s Elississlppi Talley in the Civil War (page 148 ct\\nseq.), and his quotation of censure of Lincoln to the same\\neffect from the Count of Paris. See Ida Tarbell in McClure s\\nMagazine for May, 1899, pages 192 to 199 et seq.\\nIn this connection there are some unconscious betrayals of\\nthe real estimate of Lincoln that was entertained by a number\\nof his most ardent eulogists. Six of his eulogists have thought\\nit worth while, if not necessary, to declare very expressly their\\nbelief that Lincoln did not purposely betray General McClellan\\nand his army in the Seven-Days battles before Richmond. J\\nMcClellan, in his celebrated dispatch after his retreat re-\\nproached Stanton with this atrocious crime, and so worded\\nthe dispatch that he imputed the same guilt to Lincoln.\\nMcClure s Lincoln, c. (page 102) and Nicolay and Hay s\\nLincoln (pages 441, 442 and 451) deplore that McClellan should\\nhave believed Lincoln capable of it, both conceding to McClel-\\nlan the most exalted character, ability and patriotism.\\nOf Lincoln s dealing with McClellan, McClure says: Many\\ncharged, as did McClellan, that he had been, with his army,\\ndeliberately betrayed by the Secretary of War, if not by\\nLincoln.\\nWhen Lincoln refused to hear at all, or see, the Southern\\ncommissioners Clement Clay and James P. Holcombe unless\\nthey could show written authority from Jefferson Davis to\\n\u00e2\u0099\u00a6Rhodes History of the United States (Vol. IV., p. 109, and p. 106 ctscg., and\\np. 117).\\ni Ropes Story of the Civ il^ War {T?t. II., p. 132 et seg., p. 442 e? seg., and p\\n41Z etseg.)\\nX McClure s Lincoln {p. 207) Holland s Lincoln (p. 53 et seg.) Ropas Story of\\nthe Civil War (Pt. II., pp.116, 171, and in another place, Rhodes History of\\nthe United Siates (Vol. IV., p. 550 et seg.); Hon. George S. Boutwell, in\\nTributes from his Associates (p. 69); Schouler s History of the United States (p.\\n193 et seg.)\\n5 McClure s Lincoln, etc. (pp. 208, 248), and Nicolay and Hay s Lincoln (Vol.\\nVI., p. ISQetseg.)", "height": "2744", "width": "1777", "jp2-path": "reallincoln00minor_0043.jp2"}, "44": {"fulltext": "6 The Real Lincoln.\\nmake unconditional surrender, Greeley, who had procured their\\ncoming to negotiate a cessation of the war, protested against\\nLincoln s action as follows in a letter written him in July,\\n1864:* Our bleeding, bankrupt, almost dying country longs\\nfor peace, shudders at the prospect of fresh conscriptions, of\\nfurther wholesale devastations, and new rivers of human blood;\\nand there is a widespread conviction that the Government and\\nits supporters are not anxious for peace and do not improve\\nproffered opportunities to achieve it.\\nGreeley further intimates (page 482) the possibility of a\\nNorthern insurrection. Charles A. Dana, Lincoln s Secretary\\nof War, says in his h rcollcvtions of the Cicil War, that in April,\\n1862, Greeley was for peace. Nicolay and Hay (Vol. IX.,\\npages 184 to 200) describe the transaction above as Horace\\nGreeley s Peace Mission. The Life of Hamlin (page 437) says\\nGreeley called the above letter the prayer of twenty millions\\nof people.\\nGeneral U. S. Grant, in trying to show that he had not\\nthe enormous advantage that he is usually said to have had\\nin the far greater number of people from whom he drew his\\narmy, makes serious concessions as to the indifference of the\\npeople at large in the loyal States to the cause he fought\\nfor, and the bitter hostility to it of a vast number of them.\\nHe says of the Southern army, in his Memoir (Vol. II., page\\n500 et seq) No rear had to be protected. All the troops in the\\nservice could be brought to the front to contest every inch\\nof the ground threatened with invasion. The press of the\\nSouth, like the people who remained at home, was loyal to the\\nSouthern cause. Again (page 502): In the North the press\\nwas free to the point of open treason, troops were\\nnecessary in the Northern States to prevent prisoners from\\nthe Southern army being released by outside force, armed and\\nset at large The copperhead press magni-\\nfied rebel successes and belittled those of the Northern army.\\nIt was, with a large following, an auxiliary to the Confederate\\narmy. The North would have been much stronger with a\\nhundred thousand of these men in the Confederate ranks and\\n\u00e2\u0099\u00a6Holland s itncoZn (p. 478).", "height": "2744", "width": "1777", "jp2-path": "reallincoln00minor_0044.jp2"}, "45": {"fulltext": "Attitude of Union Soldiers. 37\\nthe rest of their kind thoroughly* subdued it would\\nhave been an offence, directly after the war, and perhaps it\\nwould be now (Grant s Memoir is dated 1886) to ask any able-\\nbodied man in the South who was between the ages of fourteen\\nand sixty at any time during the war whether he had been\\nin the Confederate army. He would assert that he was, or\\naccount for his absence from the ranks. See, too, page 35.\\nAttitude of Union Soldiers Toward Coercion and Eman-\\ncipation.\\nOn this we get a strange enlightenment in the account\\ngiven by Russell in his Diary (page 155 et seq.) of his meeting\\nthe Fourth Pennsylvania Regiment going home from the Bull\\nRun battlefield to the sound of the cannon that opened the\\nbattle. A note on page 553 of Greeley s American Confiiet de-\\nscribes the same from General McDowell s official report of\\nthe battle of Bull Run how on the eve of the battle the Fourth\\nPennsylvania Regiment of Volunteers and the battery of\\nartillery of the Eighth New York Militia, whose term of ser-\\nvice had expired, insisted on their discharge, though the\\nGeneral and the Secretary of War, both on the spot, tried hard\\nto make them stay five more days ^nd the next\\nmorning, when the army moved into battle, these troops moved\\nto the rear to the sound of the enemy s guns. Greeley goes\\non to say: It should here be added that a member of the\\nNew York Battery aforesaid who was most earnest and active\\nin opposing General McDowell s request and insisting on an\\nimmediate discharge, was at the next election, in full view\\nof all the facts, chosen sheriff of the city of New York\\nprobably the most lucrative office filled by popular election in\\n*In the debate in the House of the 20th Februarj 1901, when Mr. Lentz\\nof Ohio, said tliat if soldiers in the Philippines are ordered to kill prisoners,\\nthey are justified in deserting, Mr. Cannon, of Illinois, said that in his\\nlifetime lie had heard more eloquent men than tlie gentleman from Ohio\\nencourage desertion. When the life of the nation was at stake, said he.\\nraen all over the North stood behind the firing line and encouraged deser-\\ntion. During the Civil War I thought if 8,000 or 10,000 of the\\ncopperheads had been shot we would not have been troubled with deser-\\ntion. iJoiiimore Sun of 21st February, 1901.", "height": "2744", "width": "1777", "jp2-path": "reallincoln00minor_0045.jp2"}, "46": {"fulltext": "38 The Real Lincoln.\\nthe country- Russell gives the reason why General Patterson\\ndid not bring his army from the upper Potomac to help General\\nMcDowell at Bull Run, that* out of twenty-three regiments\\ncomposing his force, nineteen refused to stay an hour after\\ntheir time. Can any explanation be suggested but that these\\nsoldiers and their friends at home reprobated the task to\\nwhich they were ordered?\\nMcClure s Lincoln says (page 56): When he (Lincoln)\\nturned to the military arm of the government, he was appalled\\nby the treachery of the men to whom the nation should look\\nfor its preservation. Scarcely any were so devoted to the\\nflag; none knew so well the seriousness of the step as the\\nofficers of the regular army, but, notwithstanding, three hun-\\ndred and thirteen (nearly one-third) resigned. General Keifer\\nsays that about March, 1861, disloyalty among prominent\\narmy officers was for a while the rule. General Scott, com-\\nmander of the army, recommended that the erring sisters be\\nallowed to depart in peace. Much pity has been spent on\\nMajor Anderson, cut off from supplies and bombarded in Fort\\nSumter, but one of Lincoln s eulogists has to rejoice now that\\nhe was spared the pain of reading the reproaches contained in\\na letter written him by Major Anderson, censuring him for\\nproposing to use force. The letter miscarried. We have other\\nletters of Major Anderson s, showing that he, like Scott and\\nSeward, and the rest, thought coercion out of the question.\\nNicolay and Hay say the Union army showed the strongest\\nsympathy with its always immensely popular general, McClel-\\nlan, in his bold protests against emancipation, and that there\\nwas actual danger of revolt in the army against the emancipa-\\ntion proclamation when General Burnside turned over the\\ncommand of his army of one hundred and twenty thousand\\nmen to General Hooker in Virginia, f In Warden s Life of Gluisc\\n(page 485 ct srq.) a letter of September, 1862, from Chase to\\nJohn Sherman, says: I hear from all sources that nearly all\\nthe officers in Buel s army, and that Buel himself, are pro-\\nslavery in the last degree.\\n*My Diary, North and South (p. 179). Channing s Short History of the\\nUnited States (p. 308 et seg.)\\nt Keifer s Slavery and Four Years of War (p. 171) Nicolay and Hay s Lincoln\\n(Vol. I., p. 185).", "height": "2744", "width": "1777", "jp2-path": "reallincoln00minor_0046.jp2"}, "47": {"fulltext": "Proclamation of Emancipation. 39\\nGrant, in his Memoir (Vol. II., page 323), says tliat during\\nAugust, 1864, right in the midst of these embarrassments,\\nHalleck informed me that there was an organized scheme on\\nfoot to resist the draft, and suggested that it might become\\nnecessary to withdraw troops from the field to put it down.\\nNicolay and Hay (Vol. VI., page 3) tell of violent resistance to\\nthe draft in Pennsylvania.\\nHow did the North and the West Receive the Proclama-\\ntion of Emancipation\\nNicolay and Hay s Lincoln (Vol. II., page 261) records great\\nlosses in the elections in consequence of the proclamation, as\\ndo Schouler and Holland (page 457). Butler s Book (page 536)\\nquotes Seward s reports in letters to his wife, that the results\\nwere deplorable, and that the returns were ominous that\\nin all but strong Republican States the opposition was\\ntriumphant and the administration party defeated. Ida Tar-\\nbell, in McGlure s Magazine for January, 1899 (page 165), says:\\nMany and many a man deserted in the winter of 1862-1863\\nbecause of the emancipation proclamation. He did not believe\\nthe President had the right to issue it, and he refused to fight.\\nLincoln knew, too, that the Copperhead agitation had reached\\nthe army, and that hundreds of them were being urged by\\nparents and friends hostile to the administration to desert.\\nPage 162 shows that Lincoln himself comprehended the failure\\nto respond to the emancipation or to support the war that\\n(page 163) New York, Pennsylvania, Ohio, Indiana, Illinois\\nand Wisconsin reversed their vote, and the House showed gi-eat\\nDemocratic gains. McClure s Lincoln, c. (page 112 et seq.)\\nsays: There was no period from January, 1864, until the 3d\\nof September, when McClellan would not have defeated Lincoln\\nfor President.\\nCharles A. Dana, in his Recollections of the Ciril War (page\\n180 et seq.) says: The people of the North might themselves\\nhave become half rebels if this proclamation had been issued\\ntoo soon, and that two years before, perhaps, the conse-\\nquences of it might have been our entire defeat. How per-\\nsistent the opposition continued to be may be judged con-", "height": "2744", "width": "1777", "jp2-path": "reallincoln00minor_0047.jp2"}, "48": {"fulltext": "40 The Real Lincoln.\\nclusively by the fact that Lincoln s emancipation proclamation\\nfailed, as late as June, 1864, to get the two-thirds vote neces-\\nsary to fix it in the Constitution, and had to go over to the\\nnext session, when the war was practically ended.\\nBut the crowning proof of the attitude of a very large part\\nof the people of the North and the West is the platform and\\nthe nominee adopted by the Democratic party for the presi-\\ndential election of 1864, near the end of the war. It advocated\\nthe abandonment of the war,*and the nominee was McClellan,\\nan avowed opponent of emancipation. Such was the issue\\nadopted on which to appeal to the North and the West, and the\\nframers of it were called by Lincoln s Secretary of the Navyf\\nsome of the most astute and experienced statesmen of their\\nday. Nor was the appeal a failure, as has been so widely\\nheralded. It is Ida Tarbell, Nicolay and Hay, Butler, Schouler,\\nHolland, McClure, Lincoln himself, who have recorded that\\nthree months after his renomination they all despaired of his\\nre-election.\\nThe Method by which Disloyalty was Suppressed.\\nThe testimony above submitted seems ample to show that\\na vast part of the North and the West was disloyal to the\\nwar and to emancipation. Let us next consider the methods\\nby which this disloyalty was suppressed.\\nHow fully Lincoln used every method of a military despot\\nis best shown by an examination of a single chapter of a book\\njust from the press Bancroft s Life of William H. Seward. The\\nfollowing extracts from it need little comment. Lest any reader\\nshould suppose that the author of that book means to expose\\nor arraign Lincoln or his agent Seward for the arbitrary arrests\\nand imprisonments that he describes, be it understood that\\nBancroft does no more than mildly concede that Seward s\\nzeal in a good cause betrayed him into undue severities in the\\nloyal States. He says expressly (Vol. II., page 276): For\\nthe general policy as practiced in the Border States, there is\\nMcClure s Lincoln (p. 126 ct seg.)\\ni Welles Paper, The Opposition to Lincoln in ISO/,, in the The Atlantic Monthly\\n(Vol. XVI., dated 1878).", "height": "2744", "width": "1777", "jp2-path": "reallincoln00minor_0048.jp2"}, "49": {"fulltext": "Method hy Which Disloyalty Was Suppressed. 41\\nno occasion to apologize gut there were\\nsome serious abuses of ttiis arbitrary power in the far Northern\\nStates. Of Seward as Lincoln s Secretary of State he says\\n(Vol. II., page 264): Probably the detection of political of-\\nfenders and the control of political prisoners were the most\\ndistracting of all his career. After the suspension of the\\nwrit of Habeas Corinis, the Baltimore marshal of police, the\\npolice commissioners and other men of prominence were seized\\nand sent to a United States fort. Several members of the\\nLegislature that were expecting to push through an ordinance\\nof secession the next day were arrested in September, 1861,\\nand treated like other political prisoners.\\nSeward s system of arrest and confinement of the prisoners\\nis described as follows (Vol. II., page 259) Some of the fea-\\ntures bore a striking resemblance to the most odious institu-\\ntions of the ancient regime in France the BastiJc and the\\nLcttres de Cachet.\\nThe person suspected of disloyalty (Vol. II., page 261)\\nwas often seized at night, borne off to the nearest fort, deprived\\nof his valuables, locked up in a casemate generally\\ncrowded with men who had similar experiences if\\nhe wished to send for friends or an attorney, he was informed\\nthat the rules forbade visitors, that attorneys were entirely\\nexcluded, and that the prisoner who sought their aid would\\ngreatly prejudice his case. An appeal to Seward was the only\\nrecourse a second, third and fourth, all alike useless. The\\nSecretary was calm in the belief that the man was a plotter and\\nwould do no harm while he remained in custody. It was\\nfound best (Vol. II., page 262) to take prominent men far\\nfrom their homes and sympathizers The suspected\\nmen, notably Marylanders, were carried to Fort Warren or\\nother remote places jq most cases from one to three\\nmonths elapsed before definite action was taken by the depart-\\nment jf iiiQ arrest had been made without due cause,\\nno oaths or conditions of release were required. go,\\ntoo, if the alleged offence had been too highly colored by a\\nrevengeful enemy. See particulars of several cases (Vol. II.,\\npages 264 to 276), and especially one in which ex-President\\nPierce, who believed the South to be the aggrieved party,", "height": "2744", "width": "1777", "jp2-path": "reallincoln00minor_0049.jp2"}, "50": {"fulltext": "42 The Real Lincoln.\\nwas aimed at. Not one of the political prisoners (Vol. II.,\\npage 276) was brought to trial. As a rule, they were not even\\ntold why they were arrested. When the pressure for judicial\\nprocedure or for a candid discussion of the case became too\\nstrong to be resisted on plausible grounds, the alleged offender\\nwas released.\\nOf the well known story that Seward boasted to Lord Lyons\\nthat with his little bell he could imprison any citizen in any\\nState, and that no one but the President could release him,\\nBancroft says (Vol. II., page 280): If he made this remark,\\nit is of no special importance; it was a fact that he was almost\\nas free from restraint as a dictator or a sultan.\\nHolland s Lincoln shows (page 476 et srq.) that when Lincoln\\nkilled, by pocketing it, a bill for the reconstruction of the\\nUnion which Congress had just passed, Ben Wade and Winter\\nDavis, aided by Greeley, published in Greeley s Trihune of\\nAugust 5th a bitter manifesto. It charged that the President,\\nby preventing this bill from becoming a law holds the elec-\\ntoral vote of the rebel States at the discretion of his personal\\nambition, and that a more studied outrage on the authority\\nof the people has never been perpetrated. McClure s Lincoln\\ngives the same account. See, too, Schouler s Historn of the\\nUnited States (page 469).\\nUsher describes in I\\\\enii)iiscences of Lincoln (page 92 et seq.)\\nhow pretended Representatives from Virginia (besides those\\nfrom West Virginia) and from Louisiana were seated in Con-\\ngress. Schouler says that an address to the people by the\\nopposition in Congress accused Lincoln of the creation already\\nin August, 1864, of bogus* States. Gorham s Stanton (Vol. I.,\\nThe word bogus is borrowed from Brownson s iJevtew, which said, in\\nOctober, 1864, of the bill which VV^ade and Davis denounced Lincoln for\\npocketing, as follows: He suffered the Bill to fail, there is no doubt,\\nbecause it deprived him of the power to create rotten boroughs or Bogus\\nStates, to secure his re-election. The Sevirw reminds its readers of its own\\nstout support of the war and of emancipation, and charges that Lincoln is\\ntrue to neither but has had from the first no aim but to strengthen himself\\nand secure his re-election. Morse describes in a very interesting way\\n(Vol. II., p. 297) how Lincoln kept open the question whether the votes of\\nhis reconstructed States of Arkansas and Tennessee should be counted for\\nhim until the very day of the count, when the result was beyond doubt,\\nbut concedes that West Virginia was counted, with no better right than\\nthey. Nlcolay and Hay (Vol. IX., p. 436 et scg.) describe apologetically how\\nVirginia was made to figure in Washington as two loyal States.", "height": "2744", "width": "1777", "jp2-path": "reallincoln00minor_0050.jp2"}, "51": {"fulltext": "Livcubis Second Election. 43\\npage 177) shows how indispensable such fictitious States were\\nfor the changes that were made in the Constitution, in the\\nwords, no changes could be made without the assent of three-\\nfourths of the States, and fifteen of the thirty-one States were\\nslave States.\\nNicolay s Outbreak of the EcltclUon (page 475) says: The\\nevident desire of the people for peace was a subject of deep\\nsolicitude to the Administration. Morse (Vol. II., page 274)\\nshows the general despair of electing Lincoln in a letter to\\nLincoln of Raymond, chairman of the Republican National\\nExecutive Committee, August 22, 1864, which says: I hear\\nbut one report the tide is setting against us, speaking him-\\nself for New York and quoting Cameron for Pennsylvania,\\nWashburne for Illinois and Morton for Indiana, and so for\\nthe rest.\\nNicolay and Hay s Lincoln (Vol. IX., page 249) says that\\nby August, 1864, Weed, Raymond, every one, including\\nLincoln, despaired of his re-election. McClure s Ovr Presidents\\nsays (page 183) But in fact three months after his renomi-\\nnation in Baltimore his defeat by General McClelllan was\\ngenerally apprehended by his friends and frankly conceded\\nby Lincoln himself. Several of his biographers give copies of\\na memorandum sealed up by Lincoln and committed to one of\\nhis Cabinet for safekeeping, in which is recorded his convic-\\ntion that McClellan s election over him was certain, with a\\nstatement of his purposes how to act during the interval before\\nMcClellan would take the presidency. It is referred to by Welles\\nin his papers in the Atlantic Monthly under the heading, Oppo-\\nsition to Lincoln in 1864 (pages 266 and 366 et scq.) as Lin-\\ncoln s despondent note of August 23, 1864. McClure, too,\\nrefers to it in his Onr Presidents (page 183 et sc(i.) See, also,\\nRoosevelt s CroniireU (page 208).\\nLincoIn^s Second Election and His Majority.\\nIt was under the conditions above described that Lincoln s\\nsecond election came on. The management of it was committed\\nin large measure to the State Department, whose workings\\nhave been shown above, and to the War Department. The", "height": "2744", "width": "1777", "jp2-path": "reallincoln00minor_0051.jp2"}, "52": {"fulltext": "44 The Real Lincoln.\\ncanvass for the presidency by Democrats was difficult, for an\\norder of tlie War Department liad made criticism of tlie\\nadministration treason, triable by court-martial. Soldiers\\nruled at the polls. General B. F. Butler* gives full particulars\\nof the large force with which he occupied New York city, and\\nshows how completely he controlled its vote and its opposition\\nto the war that had lately been demonstrated in its great anti-\\ndraft riot. McCluret shows how the army vote was found\\nnecessary and secured. Chauncey M. Depew describes how\\nthe soldiers vote was polled made out by [the\\nsoldier] himself, certified by the commanding officer of his\\ncompany or regiment, and sent to some friend at his last\\nvoting place to be deposited on election day. Scores of\\nthousands of soldiers were furloughed to go home to vote.\\nMcClure describes how Lincoln was afraid to ask Grant to do\\nhim this service, but found Sheridan and other generals ready.\\nDepew says that without the soldier vote so managed, Lincoln\\nwould have failed to get the electoral vote of New York.\\nLincoln s re-election by an exceedingly large majority has\\nbeen triumphantly alleged and is adduced as proof that what\\nhe had done and was doing had the approval of the North and\\nthe West. That the vote of the electoral college should be\\nrecorded for Lincoln was quite inevitable in view of what the\\nwitnesses quoted in this sketch have recorded of the political\\nand military management of affairs, at election-time and long\\nbefore, in the Border States, in Indiana, Illinois, Ohio, and\\nNew York; in great cities like Chicago, New York and Boston,\\nand in the country at large, as far as Seward s little bell\\ncould reach. But with all the odds against McClellan that have\\nbeen shown the actual number of votes gotten by McClellan was\\nmore than eighty-one per cent, of the actual number of votes\\ngotten by Lincoln. The figures by which this percentage is\\nButler s Book (pp. 752 to 773), and Rhodes History of the United States (Vol.\\nIV., p, 330).\\nOur Presidents, etc. (p. 195 et seq.).\\nt Reminiscences of Lincoln (p. 22 et seq.)\\nMcClure s Lmco/n (p. ISG ft se;/.), and Whitney s On Circuit with Lincoln,\\n(p. 445).\\nI| Reminiscences of Lincoln (p. 430).", "height": "2744", "width": "1777", "jp2-path": "reallincoln00minor_0052.jp2"}, "53": {"fulltext": "Conclusions. 45\\nascertained were furnished in answer to a late application to\\nthe Peabody Library of Baltimore.\\nConclusions*\\nThis sketch makes no formulation of the conclusions as to\\nLincoln s character and conduct that might seem to be de-\\nducible from the evidence, except so far as some of the testi-\\nmony above given formulates them, but some further formu-\\nlations by the same witnesses will now be submitted.\\nThe Emancipation Proclamation has been described in song\\nand story, on canvas and in marble, as a joyous and exultant\\nannouncement of freedom to the slaves. See how differently\\nIda Tarbell describes it and its author, and she is almost a\\nworshipper of Lincoln. She says: At last (page 525 et seq.)\\nthe Emancipation Proclamation was a fact, but there was little\\nrejoicing in his heart, no exultation; indeed\\nthere was almost a groan in the words in which, the night after\\nhe had given it out, he addressed a party of serenaders\\nAnd she records that Lincoln himself said a few months later:\\nHope and fear contended over the new policy in uncertain\\nconflict. And she goes on: As he had foreseen, dark days\\nfollowed. There were mutinies in the army tj^g\\nevents of the fall brought him little encouragement. Indeed\\nthe promise of emancipation seemed to effect nothing but dis-\\nappointment and uneasiness; stocks went down; troops fell\\noff. In five great States Indiana, Illinois, Ohio Pennsylvania\\nand New York the elections went against him.\\nRhodes History of the United ^States is one of the latest\\nrecords in this matter. While he eulogizes Lincoln as ardently\\nas any, he speaks (Vol. IV., page 234 rf sc(j.) of the enormity\\nof the acts done under his authority, and says he stands\\nresponsible for the casting into prison of citizens of the United\\nStates to be counted by thousands (page 230) on orders as\\narbitrary as the Lcttres de Cachet of Louis XIV., when the\\nmode of procedure might have been, as in Great Britain in\\nher crisis (between 1793 and 1802), on legal warrants, and he\\npronounces (page 234) this extra-judicial procedure inex-\\npedient, unnecessary and wrong. See, also, Schouler s History", "height": "2744", "width": "1777", "jp2-path": "reallincoln00minor_0053.jp2"}, "54": {"fulltext": "46 The Real Lincoln.\\nof the United States (page 465). Rhodes Hlstonj of the United\\nStates gives unqualified commendation to the patriotic spirit\\nand proper jealousy for his country s liberty that prompted\\nSeymour s opposition to the President, and shows how very\\nfar it went. See pages 169 to 172 for proofs of Seymour s\\nresentment toward Lincoln and for Rhodes justification of it.\\nPage 171 (t seq. calls Lincoln a tyrant. Two letters of Governor\\nMorton of Indiana (Vol. IV., page 223 et scq.) and much other\\ntestimony show that Indiana was kept from acknowledging\\nthe Southern Confederacy only by force from Washington, and\\nthat Illinois was at the same time in nearly the same attitude.\\nWilliam A. Denning, president of Columbia University, says\\nin his Essays on the Civil IVV/r, dated 1898 (page 39 et seq.), that\\nPresident Lincoln s proclamation of September 24, 1862, was a\\nperfect plat for a military despotism, and that the very\\ndemonstrative resistance of the people to the government only\\nmade the military arrests more frequent, that (page\\n24 et seq.) Mr. Lincoln asserted the existence of martial law\\nthroughout the United States. He says thousands\\nwere so dealt with g^j^j that (page 46) the records\\nof the War Department contain the reports of hundreds of\\ntrials by military commissions with punishments varying from\\nlight fines to banishment and death. Lalor s Encyclopedia\\nsays the records of the Provost Marshal s office in Washington\\nshow thirty-eight thousand political prisoners, but Rhodes\\n(Vol. IV., page 230 et seq.) says the number is exaggerated.\\nThe ceremony of signing the proclamation is elaborately\\ndescribed by Holland,* and all his ardent admiration cannot\\nhide the President s unseemly behavior. Schoulerf records\\nSecretary Stanton s disgust, and Hapgood says Lincoln\\nsigned with some half-jocose remarks.\\nStanwood s History of the Presidency concedes (page 299\\net scq.) Lincoln s usurpations (that he may defend and justify\\nthem), by showing the vast opposition to him in the Northern\\nStates, and from many men whom Stanwood acknowledges to\\nhave been loyal in purpose. Holland s Linevln says (page\\nSee Holland s Lincoln (p. 329 et seg., and 392 et seg.)\\nSclioulPr s HiMor;/ of the United States (Vol. VI., p. 631); Hapgood s Lincoln\\n(p. 291 et seg.)", "height": "2744", "width": "1777", "jp2-path": "reallincoln00minor_0054.jp2"}, "55": {"fulltext": "Conclusions. 47\\n291) All these labors Lincoln was performing with the\\nknowledge Hiat seven States were in open revolt,\\nand that a majority throughout the Union had not the slightest\\nsympathy with him. Rhodes, in his History of the United States\\n(pages 407 to 423) records the force put by Lincoln on the\\nunwilling people of the Noi thern States to go on with the war,\\nand gives yet more abundant proof of their wish to stop it.\\nMcClure s Lincoln (page 292 et seq.) says: Nor was Greeley\\nalone in these views. Not only the entire Democratic party,\\nwith few exceptions, but a very large proportion of the Repub-\\nlican party, including some of its ablest and most trusted\\nleaders, believed that peaceable secession might reasonably\\nresult in early reconstruction.\\nWould Jefferson Davis, would Robert Lee have asked more\\nthan McClure here says the two great parties of the North and\\nWest agreed in believing ought to be done?\\nGodkin, of the Nation, said as follows in one of his recent\\neditorials: The first real breach in the Constitution was made\\nby the invention of the war potver to enable President Lincoln\\nto abolish slavery. No one would now say that this was not\\nat that time necessary, but it made it possible for any Presi-\\ndent practically to suspend the Constitution by getting up a\\nwar anywhere.\\nIda Tarbell, in describing the opposition to Lincoln, just\\nafter his nomination, in 1864, shows as follows the feeling of\\nthe people for him: The awful brutality of the war came\\nupon the country as never before. There was a revulsion of\\nfeeling against the sacrifice going on such as had not been\\nexperienced since the war began. All the complaints that\\nhad been urged against Lincoln broke out afresh;\\nthe draft was talked of as if it were the arbitrary freak of a\\ntyrant. It was declared that Lincoln had violated constitu-\\ntional rights, personal liberty, the liberty of the press,\\nthat, in short, he had been guilty of all the abuses of a military\\ndictatorship. Much bitter criticism was made of his treatment\\nof peace overtures; it was declared that the Confederates were\\nanxious to make peace and had taken the first steps, but that\\nLincoln was so blood thirsty that he was unwilling to use any\\nIda Tarbell, in McClure s Magazine for 1899 (p. 276 et seg.)", "height": "2744", "width": "1777", "jp2-path": "reallincoln00minor_0055.jp2"}, "56": {"fulltext": "48 Tlie Real Lincoln.\\nmeans but force, the despair and indignation of the\\ncountry in this dreadful time all centered upon Lincoln\\nthe Democrats argued that the war and all its woes were the\\nresult of his tyrannical and unconstitutional policy. The more\\nviolent intimated that he should be put out of the way.\\nIn considering further what his eulogists have called the\\napotheosis of Lincoln, we have the following as to his place\\nin men s minds before his death: He had been in Congress,\\nand Morse comments on the small achievements that saved\\nhim from being among the nobodies of the House. Adams\\nLife of Cliarlcs Fiviicis Adaiiis (page 181) says: Seen in the\\nlight of subsequent events, it is assumed that Lincoln in 1865\\nwas also the Lincoln of 1861. Historically speaking, there can\\nbe no greater error. The President, who has since become a\\nspecies of legend, was in March, 1861, an absolutely unknown,\\nand by no means promising, political quantity,\\nand Adams goes on, none the less the fact remains that when\\nhe first entered upon his high functions. President Lincoln\\nfilled with dismay those brought in contact with him\\nThe evidence is sufficient and conclusive, that, in this respect,\\nhe impressed others as he impressed Mr. Adams in their one\\ncharacteristic interview. And as late as 1873, ex-Minister\\nAdams Mrnioriail Address to the Legislature of Neio York on the\\noccasion of Seward s death, described (page 48 et seq.) Lincoln\\nas displaying when he entered on his duties as President,\\nmoral, intellectual and executive incompetency.\\nThe Honorable L. E. Crittenden records, in order to express\\nhis regret for it, the fact that* the men whose acquaintance\\nwith Lincoln was intimate enough to form any just estimate\\nof his character did not more fully appreciate his\\nstatesmanship and other great qualities that they\\n*But it was late in his public career that McClure s Lincoln (p. 123) says,\\nLincoln s desire for a renomination was tlie one thing uppermost in his\\nmind during the third year of his administration, and McClure s Our\\nPresidents {x 184), says, A more anxious candidate I have never seen\\nand, after an interview, I could liardly treat with respect his anxiety\\nabout his renomination. Rhodes (Vol. III., p. 368, in a note) records that\\nR. Fuller, a prominent Baptist preaclier, wrote Chase, 1 marked the Presi-\\ndent closely. He is wholly inaccessible to Christian appeals, and\\nhis egotism will ever prevent his comprehending what patriotism means.", "height": "2744", "width": "1777", "jp2-path": "reallincoln00minor_0056.jp2"}, "57": {"fulltext": "Conclusions. 49\\ndid not recognize him as tiie greatest patriot, statesman\\nand writer of his time. Rhodes concedes (Vol. IV., page 520\\net scq.) that his contemporaries failed to perceive his great-\\nness. General Donn Piatt presents very effectively his view\\nof how the change of the American world s feeling toward\\nLincoln, and of its estimate of him, came about. In Reminis-\\ncences of Lincoln, (page 21) he says: Lincoln was believed by\\ncontemporaries secondary in point of talent and Lincoln as\\none of Fame s immortals does not appear in the Lincoln of 1861,\\nwhom men likened to the original gorilla. He\\nsays* in his Biography of General Thomas (preface, page 16):\\nFictitious heroes have been embalmed in lies, and monuments\\nare being reared to the memories of men whose real histories,\\nwhen they come to be known, will make this bronze and\\nmarble the monuments of our ignorance and folly. And in\\nBeniiniscenccs of Lincoln he says (page 477) With us, when\\na leader dies, all good men go to lying about him, and, from\\nthe monument that covers his remains to the last echo of the\\nrural press, in speeches, sermons, eulogies and reminiscences,\\nwe have naught but pious lies. Poor Garfield\\nwas almost driven to suicide by abuse while he\\nlived. He fell by the hand of an assassin, and passed in an\\ninstant to the role of popular saints. Popular beliefs,\\nin time, come to be superstitions and create gods and devils.\\nThus Washington is deified into an impossible man and Aaron\\nBurr has passed into a like impossible monster. Through this\\nsame process, Abraham Lincoln, one of our truly great, has\\nalmost gone from human knowledge (the Reminiscences are\\ndated 1886). I hear of, him and read of him in eulogies and\\nbiographies, and fail to recognize the man I encountered for\\nthe first time in the canvass that called him from private life\\nto be President of the United States. Piatt then goes on to\\ndescribe a conference that he and General Schenck had with\\nLincoln in his home in Springfield. f I soon discovered that\\nthis strange and strangely-gifted man, while not at all cynical,\\nhutes from his Associates {-p. lil). Schouler s History of the United States,\\nuses without quotation marks the precise words of Piatt above quoted (Vol.\\nVI., p. 21).\\nReminiscences of Lincoln (p. 480).", "height": "2744", "width": "1777", "jp2-path": "reallincoln00minor_0057.jp2"}, "58": {"fulltext": "50 TJiC Real Lincoln.\\nwas a sceptic; his view of human nature was low jjg\\nunconsciously accepted for himself and his party the same low\\nline that he awarded the South. Expressing no sympathy for\\nthe slave, he laughed at the Abolitionists* as a disturbing\\nelement easily controlled, without showing any dislike to the\\nslave-holders. We were not (page 481) at a loss to get at the\\nfact and the reason for it, in the man before us. Descended\\nfrom the poor-whites of a slave State, through many genera-\\ntions, he inherited the contempt, if not the hatred, held by\\nthat class for the negroes. A self-made man, his\\nstrong nature was built on what he inherited, and he could no\\nmore feel a sympathy for that wretched race than he could\\nfor the horse he worked or the hog he killed, f In this he ex-\\nhibited the marked trait that governed his public life.\\nHe knew and saw clearly that the people of the free States\\nnot only had no sympathy with the abolition of slavery, but\\nheld fanatics, as Abolitionists were called, in utter abhorrence.\\nThen Piatt candidly repudiates the false pretensions that\\nare so often made to lofty, benevolent purpose in those who\\nconquered the rebellion, and ends as follows: We are quick\\nto forget the facts and slow to recognize the truths that knock\\nfrom [under] us our pretentious claims to high philanthropy.\\nAs I have said, abolitionism was not only unpopular v/hen the\\nwar broke out, but it was detested. i remember when\\nthe Hutchinsons were driven from the camps of the Potomac\\nArmy by the soldiers, for singing their Abolition songs, and I\\nremember well that for nearly two years of our service as\\nsoldiers we were engaged in returning slaves to their masters\\nwhen the poor creatures sought shelter in our lines.\\nMrs. Lincoln, wlio was present, said, The country will find how we\\nregard that abolition sneaky Seward. Rhodes History of the United States\\nsays (Vol. II., p. 325), Lincoln was not, however, in any sense of the word,\\nan abolitionist.\\nfHerndon s Liiicoln (Yol. V.,p. 74 etseq.), tells a story of Lincoln s bar-\\nbarous cruelty to a number of hogs that lie was driving. Hapgood s Lin-\\ncoln (-p. 2b et so i gives the story, without defense or apology, naming the\\nmen who helped liim, and specifying that Lincoln devised it and aided in\\nit with liis own hands.", "height": "2744", "width": "1777", "jp2-path": "reallincoln00minor_0058.jp2"}, "59": {"fulltext": "What This Sketch Would Teach. 51\\nWhat this Sketch Would Teach,\\nIn view of what this sketch presents, those who have\\nearned to rate Lincoln highest can hardly refuse to modify\\nheir estimate of him, and it was with the purpose to effect\\nsuch a change m men s minds, in the interest of truth, that\\nh.t T Zf. undertaken. But the search in Northern records\\nhas taught the writer another truth, and a more important one,\\nof Noi them prejudices by presenting no testimony but that of\\ntor hrwf P P^^^ ^^^1^*^^ ^-terials\\ntoi tins sketch. To win more patient hearing from people of\\nSouthern prejudices, it had been contemplated to put on the\\ntitle page as motto Fas est ah hoste docerl. But the search\\nloZ T^^^ enemies Of the\\nsecession T ^^^^PP^ ^d, deplored, bitterly censured\\nof t c/T P disapproved yet more coercion\\nIrTJ f/ emancipation of the negroes, while a vast\\nPait thought the South was asking what she had a right to\\nSo it is to forgetfulness of the sad quarrel-to love, not to\\nesentment or hate-that the lessons of this sketch wou d\\nlead IS readers. Those who taught that there was an irre-\\nfToJt;? V^ ^and-\\nthe Unued sJ!r Constitution of\\nIbove hat if T- I it not shown\\nabove that it wouki have been nearer the truth to sav that\\nhe North and the South were essentially of one aZd o,\\nlonl 2 ^^t -t least as a revolu\\ntionaiy right, withdraw from the Union, and whether the\\nnegroes should be emancipated?\\nset^orthTh T ^^t the facts were as\\nset foith above, rather than go on believing the story that has\\nspread so widely-that one side carried fire and s^o^d into\\nhe homes of the other as a punishment they believed The\\nsufferer well deserved? Can those who suffered great\\nThistoi? are lo ^rLo ^l", "height": "2744", "width": "1777", "jp2-path": "reallincoln00minor_0059.jp2"}, "60": {"fulltext": "APPENDIX,\\nADAMS, CHARLES FRANCIS, was Minister to England\\nduring Lincoln s whole administration. He was of the\\nfamily that had given two Presidents to the United\\nStates, and his father and his grandfather had been\\nMinisters to England before him.\\nANDREWS, E. BENJAMIN, once President of Brown Univer-\\nsity, is still prominent in educational work. He\\nshows in his History of the United i^tatcs (Vol. II., pages\\n64, 77, 81 ct scq.) that he is an ardent Abolitionist and an\\nadmirer of Lincoln.\\nBUTLER, GENERAL B. F., was made by Lincoln Major-Gen-\\neral and one of General Grant s corps commanders, and\\nwas Lincoln s first choice for Vice-President.\\nBBECHER, REV. HENRY WARD, was a strong Republican\\nand Abolitionist, and a very prominent supporter of the\\nwar.\\nBOUT WELL, GEORGE S., was in Congress from Massachu-\\nsetts, aided in organizing the Republican party in 1854,\\nand in procuring Lincoln s election, and was made by\\nLincoln the first Commissioner of the Internal Revenue.\\n(See name of Rice.)\\nBROOKS, PHILLIPS, Bishop of Massachusetts. For evidence\\nof his partisanship see a prayer he made in the streets\\nof Philadelphia on the downfall of the Confederacy. In\\nthe large page and a half there is not a reference to the\\nmiseries of the defeated nor an aspiration for the amend-\\nment of their condition, physical or spiritual. See his\\nLife and Letters, by Allen, Vol. I., page 531.\\nCHANDLER, ZACHARIAH, SENATOR, was one of the or-\\nganizers of the Republican party in 1854.\\nCHANNING, EDWARD, Professor of History in Harvard,\\nshows in his Short History of the United States (page 352)\\nan ardent admiration of Lincoln.", "height": "2744", "width": "1777", "jp2-path": "reallincoln00minor_0060.jp2"}, "61": {"fulltext": "Appendix. 53\\nCHASE, SALMON P., was Lincoln s Secretary of the Treasury\\ntill made by him Chief Justice.\\nCURTIS, GEORGE WILLIAM, lately editor of Harper s Wecldy,\\nwas a widely known scholar and author. The quotations\\nshow how he stood towards the war and Abolition.\\nCRITTENDEN, L. E., was Register of the Treasury. The\\nwords quoted show his attitude toward Lincoln.\\nDANA, CHARLES A., was long managing editor of the New\\nYork Trihuiir, took an important part in procuring Lin-\\ncoln s election, and was his Assistant Secretary of War.\\nDANA, RICHARD H., was a distinguished author and law-\\nwriter, was nominated by President Grant for Minister to\\nEngland, and was a representative of the best culture of\\nMassachusetts.\\nDAVIS, HENRY WINTER, was, though a Marylander, an\\nardent supporter in Congress of the war and of emanci-\\npation.\\nDAVIS, DAVID, is named by McClure in his Lincoln with\\nLeonard Swett, Ward H. Lamon and William H. Herndon\\nas one of the four men closest to Lincoln before and\\nafter his election. He was made by Lincoln one of the\\nSupreme Court Justices, and finally executor of his estate.\\nDAWES, HENRY L., represented Massachusetts in the House\\nfor nine sessions, beginning in 1857; succeeded Sumner\\nin the Senate, and continued there till he declined re-\\nelection in 1893.\\nDOUGLAS, FREDERICK, was one of the most honored and\\nrespected colored men during his long life, with every-\\nthing to prejudice him in favor of Lincoln.\\nDENNING, WILLIAM ARCHIBALD, in his Essai/si on flu; Ciril\\nWar and Rcconstrnction, pictures with merciless exulta-\\ntion (pages 247 to 252) the years of humiliation and tor-\\nture imposed on the South during the reconstruction.\\nDUNNING, B. O., was chaplain in the Union army. His words\\nquoted show his attitude.\\nEVERETT, EDWARD, had been Minister to England, and was\\nsuch another man as Richard H. Dana, ranking even\\nhigher.\\nFOULKE, WILLIAM DUDLEY, shows in his words quoted his\\npartisan attitude.", "height": "2744", "width": "1777", "jp2-path": "reallincoln00minor_0061.jp2"}, "62": {"fulltext": "54 The Real Lincoln.\\nFREMONT, J. C, ran against Buchanan as candidate for the\\nPresidency. As Major-General he proclaimed freedom\\nto the negroes in his command.\\nFRENCH, WILLIAM M., shows in his words quoted his parti-\\nsan attitude.\\nFISKE, JOHN, was lately shown by a publication of Dr.\\nHunter McGuire to be a prejudiced partisan of North\\nagainst South.\\nGILMORE, JAMES R. Appleton s Encyclopedia says that a\\nmission to Jefferson Davis made by Gilmore had the\\neffect of assuring the re-election of Lincoln.\\nGODKIN, E. L., was long and till lately the able and useful\\neditor of the JSdfioii, but is utterly intolerant as to all\\nthat concerns secession and slavery.\\nGORHAM, G. C, author of a late life of Stanton, which shows\\nhis partisan attitude.\\nGRANT, U. S., General and President, is obviously the most\\ntrustworthy of all witnesses in the matters about which\\nhe is quoted.\\nGREELEY, HORACE. McClure, in his Our Prcsidcvts ana How\\nWr Make Tltrm (page 243) calls Greeley one of noblest,\\npurest and ablest of the great men of the land, and says\\nin his Lincoln (page 225 ct scq.): Greeley was in closer\\ntouch with the active, loyal sense of the people than even\\nthe President (Lincoln) himself, and that Mr. Gree-\\nley s TrUiune was the most widely read Republican\\njournal in the country, and it was unquestionably the\\nmost potent in modelling Republican sentiment. It\\nreached the intelligent masses of the people in every\\nState in the Union. Gilmore s Recollections of Lincoln\\nhas a letter from Lincoln to Robert J. Walker, which\\nsays of Horace Greeley: He is a great power; having\\nhim firmly behind me will be as helpful to me as an army\\nof an hundred thousand men. Channing s 1iort History\\nof the United F!tafes calls Greeley one of the ablest men\\nof the time.\\nHAMLIN, HANNIBAL, was Lincoln s Vice-President.\\nHAPGOOD, NORMAN. His Abraham Lincoln is the latest\\nbiography, published in 1899. It shows the author s", "height": "2744", "width": "1777", "jp2-path": "reallincoln00minor_0062.jp2"}, "63": {"fulltext": "Appendix. 55\\nattitude of admiration in the first page of the preface,\\ndeclaring that he was unequalled since Washington in\\nservice to the nation, and quoting the verses\\nHe was the North, the South, the East, the West;\\nThe thrall, the master, all of us in one.\\nSee under names of Herndon and of Lamon his en-\\ndorsement of their revelations.\\nHAY, JOHN, now Secretary of State, came from Springfield\\nwith Lincoln, and was his private secretary, as Nicolay\\nwas, to his death. Their joint work, Abraham Lincoln,\\nin ten large volumes, makes the most favorable presen-\\ntation of Lincoln of all that have been made.\\nHERNDON, WILLIAM H. His Abraham Lincoln, dated 1888,\\nsets forth on the title page that Lincoln was for twenty\\nyears his friend and law partner, and says in the preface\\n(page 10): Mr. Lincoln was my warm, devoted friend;\\nI always loved him, and I revere his name to-day. He\\nquotes with approval and reaffirms Lamon s views as to\\nthe duty to tell the faults along with the virtues, and\\nsays in the preface (page 10) At last the truth will\\ncome out, and no man need hope to evade it and he\\nbetrays his sense of the seriousness of the faults he has\\nto record by calling them in the preface (page 9)\\nghastly exposures, and by saying in the preface (page\\n8) that to conceal them would be as if the Bible had con-\\ncealed the facts about Uriah in telling the story of King\\nDavid; and the very latest biographer, Hapgood, writing\\nwith all the light yet given to the world, says in his\\npreface (page 8) Herndon has told the President s\\nearly life with a refreshing honesty and with more in-\\nformation than any one else. Morse, the next latest\\nbiographer, also commends Herndon s dealing in this\\nmatter. See, in this Appendix under Swell s name how\\nHerndon s extraordinarily close relations with Mr. Lin-\\ncoln are shown, and see under Lamon s name how Hern-\\ndon s testimony and Lamon s have gone uncontradicted.\\nHOLLAND, J. G., was a popular author, and was long editor\\nof Seribner s Magazine. For his ardent admiration of\\nLincoln, see the last page of his Abraham Lincoln.", "height": "2744", "width": "1777", "jp2-path": "reallincoln00minor_0063.jp2"}, "64": {"fulltext": "56. The Heal Lincoln.\\nHUNTER, DAVID, was made Major-General by Lincoln, and\\nwas one of the most ardent Abolitionists.\\nKASSON, JOHN ADAMS, was a conspicuous Republican in\\nCongress, honored by Lincoln with important assign-\\nments at home and abroad in the Post-OfRce Department.\\nKEIFER, JOSEPH WARREN, was member of Congress from\\nOhio and Speaker of the House, and wrote Slavery and\\nFovr Tears of War, which book shows his partisan\\nattitude.\\nLAMON, WARD H.; published his Life of Lincoln in 1872. He\\nappears in the accounts of Mr. Lincoln s life in the West\\nas constantly associated in the most friendly relations\\nwith him. He accompanied the family in the journey to\\nWashington, and was selected by Lincoln himself (see\\nMcClure s Lincoln, page 46) as the one protector to\\naccompany and to guard him from the assassination that\\nhe apprehended so causelessly (see Lamon s Lincoln, page\\n513) in his midnight passage through Baltimore to his\\nfirst inauguration. He was made a United States Mar-\\nshal of the District in order (McClure s Lincoln, page 67)\\nthat Lincoln might have him always at hand. Schouler,\\nin his History of the United States (page 614) says that\\nLamon as Marshal made himself body-guard to the man\\nhe loved. Though Lamon recognizes and sets forth with\\ngreat clearness (page 181) his duty to tell the whole\\ntruth, good and bad, and especially (page 486 ct seq.)\\nto correct the statements of indiscreet admirers who\\nhave tried to make Lincoln out a religious man, and,\\nthough he indignantly remonstrates against such stories\\nas making his hero a hypocrite, the book shows an ex-\\nceedingly high estimate of the friend of his lifetime.\\nBoth Morse and Hapgood commend Lamon and Herndon\\nfor their revelations. The careful search in many\\nrecords for the material for this sketch has not found\\na single attempt to deny the truth of Herndon s testi-\\nmony, or of Lamon s. But the search did find a curious\\nproof of the strait to which some one has been driven\\nto conceal Lamon s testimony. In the Pratt Library in\\nBaltimore, Maryland, is a book with a title as follows:", "height": "2744", "width": "1777", "jp2-path": "reallincoln00minor_0064.jp2"}, "65": {"fulltext": "Appendix. 57\\nRccoUections of Abraham Lincoln, 1847-1865, by Ward Hill\\nLamon, edited by Dorothy Lamon, Chicago, A. E.\\nMcCIurg Co., 1895. Nowhere in this book of several\\nhundred pages is found an intimation of the lact that the\\nsame Ward Hill Lamon published in 1872 the Life of\\nLincoln quoted frequently in this sketch, or that he had\\npublished any book about Lincoln, and although these\\nRecollections do contain the avowal that appears in the\\nLife of Lincoln, that Lamon thinks it his duty to conceal\\nnone of the faults of his hero, every word is omitted of\\nthe revelations and ghastly exposures about Lin-\\ncoln s attitude towards morals and religion that are re-\\ncorded in Lamon s genuine book. Bancroft, in his very\\nlately published Life of Seicard, quotes (Vol. H., page 42)\\nLamon from this late book, making no reference to the\\ngenuine book, and a paper in the Baltimore Sun of\\nFebruary 25, 1901, does the same. See in this Appendix\\nwhat is said under the name of Herndon and Swett.\\nLOGAN, JOHN A., Major-General. His book about the war.\\nThe Great Conspiracy, shows throughout, as in its title,\\nhis partisan attitude.\\nMcCLURE, A. K. In his Lincoln and Men of the War-rime,\\nand in his Our Presidents and Hoiv We Male Them, the\\nauthor s intimate association with Lincoln is shown in\\nmany places (Lincoln, page 112 et seq.), and his attitude\\ntowards his hero may be measured by the following\\ntribute (page 5 et se(j.): He has written the most illus-\\ntrious records of American history, and his name and\\nfame must be immortal while liberty shall have wor-\\nshippers in our land.\\nMORSE, JOHN T., published in 1892 by Houghton, Mifflin\\nCo., his Lincoln, one of the American Statesmen Series.\\nIt shows throughout, but notably in the last four pages,\\nas ardent an admiration for Lincoln as any other biogra-\\nphy. It concedes (Vol. I., page 192) the truth of the\\nrevelations of Messrs. Herndon and Lamon and the\\nduty and necessity that rested on them to record these\\ntruths. Morse is next to the latest of the biographers.", "height": "2744", "width": "1777", "jp2-path": "reallincoln00minor_0065.jp2"}, "66": {"fulltext": "58 The Real Lincoln.\\nNICOLAY, JOHN G. (like John Hay), came with Lincoln from\\nSpringfield, and was his private secretai-y to the end.\\nPARIS, THE COUNT OF, was a volunteer in the Union army.\\nSee Volume IV., pages 2 to 7, for his partisan attitude.\\nPIATT, DONN, GENERAL, in Ix emuiiscciiccs of Lincohi (page\\n449), refers to Lincoln as the greatest figure looming\\nup in our history, and as one who wrought out for us\\nour manhood and our self respect. (See name of Rice.)\\nPHILLIPS, WENDELL. Appleton s Encyclopedia says he\\nbegan as Abolitionist leader in 1837 made a\\nfuneral oration over John Brown had the\\nAiiti-8lavcry standard for his organ.\\nPOORE, BEN PERLEY, was a distinguished editor, but best\\nknown as Washington correspondent; was major in the\\nEighth Massachusetts Volunteers. His book. The Gon-\\nsinracy Trial fur the Minder of Ahrahani Lincoln, shows\\nhis partisan attitude. (See name of Rice.)\\nRICE, ALLEN THORNDIKE, was long editor of the iVo/Y7(\\nAmerican Review, a leading Republican organ. As editor\\nof Reminiscences of Lincoln he became responsible, more\\nor less, for what is quoted in it from Piatt, Usher, Bout-\\nwell, Poore and Depew.\\nRHODES, JAMES FORD, is author of a six-volume Uistonj of\\nthe United States that (Vol. IV., page 50) eulogizes Lin-\\ncoln ardently.\\nROPES, JOHN CODMAN, author of the Story of the Civil War,\\nwhich eulogizes Lincoln.\\nROOSEVELT, THEODORE, now Vice-President.\\nRUSSELL, WILLIAM HOWARD. His My Diary, North and\\nSouth, published in the London Times, shows a bitter\\naversion to slavery, and almost everything he saw in\\nthe South, and he shows plainly his judgment that it was\\nthe right and duty of Lincoln to crush secession. George\\nWilliam Curtis says in his Orations (Vol. I., page\\n139) about Russell, that Europe sent her ablest corre-\\nspondent to describe the signs of the times, and that\\nRussell saw and gave a fair representation of the public\\nsentiment. Adams Life of Adams (page 151 et seq.)\\nspeaks of Russell s Diary as the views and conclusions", "height": "2744", "width": "1777", "jp2-path": "reallincoln00minor_0066.jp2"}, "67": {"fulltext": "Appendix. 59\\nof an unprejudiced observer through the medium of the\\nmost influential journal in the world.\\nSCHOULER, JAMES. His Uistorij of the United States (page\\n631 et seq.) shows that no biographer is more eulogistic\\nof Lincoln.\\nSHERMAN, JOHN, President McKinley s first Secretary of\\nState, was a very prominent Republican leader during\\nthe war, and served in the Union army with sword,\\ntongue, pen and purse, raising largely at his own expense\\na brigade known as Sherman s Brigade.\\nSEWARD, WILLIAM H., was Secretary of State during Lin-\\ncoln s whole administration, and accounted one of his\\nablest and most faithful supporters.\\nSTEVENS, THADDEUS, entered Congress in 1858, and from\\nthat time until his death was one of the Republican\\nleaders, and the chief advocate for emancipating .and\\narming the negroes.\\nSUMNER, CHARLES, was long Senator from Massachusetts,\\nand was a leader in support of the war and emancipation.\\nSWETT, LEONARD. See his very close relations to Lincoln,\\nshown under the name of David Davis in this Appendix.\\nSTANTON, EDWIN M., was often called Lincoln s Great War\\nSecretary. Appleton s Encyclopedia says: None ever\\nquestioned his honesty, his patriotism or his capability.\\nSTANWOOD, EDWARD. His History of the Presideneij is a\\nrecognized authority, with no Southern leanings.\\nTARBBLL, IDA, shows constantly in her histories the most\\nardent admiration for Lincoln.\\nTRUMBULL, LYMAN, declined to oppose Lincoln for the\\nnomination in 1860, and was one of the first to propose in\\nthe Senate the abolition of slavery.\\nUSHER, J. P.. was in Lincoln s Cabinet as Secretary of the\\nInterior.\\nWELLES, EDGAR THADDEUS, was Lincoln s Secretary of\\nthe Navy.\\nWINTHROP, ROBERT H., was eminent as a scholar and\\nstatesman, was ten years in the House, and then in the\\nSenate from Massachusetts.", "height": "2744", "width": "1777", "jp2-path": "reallincoln00minor_0067.jp2"}, "68": {"fulltext": "60 The Real Lincoln.\\nWHITNEY, HENRY CLAY, shows his exceedingly high esti-\\nmate of Lincoln in the last page of his On Gircuit tvitJi\\nLincoln.\\nWADE, BEN, was one of the most prominent Republican\\nleaders.\\nWILSON, WOO DROW, is a distinguished and popular professor\\nin Princeton. For his admiring attitude towards Lincoln\\nsee pages 216 and 217 of his Disunion and Rciuiion.", "height": "2744", "width": "1777", "jp2-path": "reallincoln00minor_0068.jp2"}, "69": {"fulltext": "LINCOLN.\\nBy President Tyler^ William and Mary College^ Williams-\\nburg:^ Va., Editor William and Mary College Quarterly\\nHistorical Magazine\\nI have uo disposition to criticise Mr. Lincoln harslily, but I\\nthink the Northern people malce a great mistake in trying to\\nmake a moral and intellectual hero of him. In doing so\\nthey provoke criticism.\\nI propose to say a few words about Mr. Lincoln in his aspect\\nas a ruler. Lincoln began the. war in 1861 under circumstances\\nthat seem to put his character for honor in question. To\\nGovernor Morehead, of Kentucky, he expressed his intention\\nof withdrawing the troops from Fort Sumter (Coleman s Life of\\nCrittenden). Seward, the Secretary of State, invited Judge\\nCampbell to a conference, and with full knowledge that he\\n(Campbell) would communicate the intelligence to the Con-\\nfederate commissioners, told him the same thing. There were\\nthree of these conversations in March, 1861, between Campbell\\nand Seward, and at each Seward was fully apprised by Camp-\\nbell of his assurances to the Confederate commissioners. On\\nthe 1st of April Campbell received from Seward the statement\\nin writing: I am satisfied the government will not undertake\\nto supply Fort Sumter without giving notice to Governor\\nPickens. There was a departure here from the pledge of the\\nprevious month, but as Seward accompanied the statement\\nwith the words that he did not believe any such attempt\\nwould be made, and that there was no design to reinforce Fort\\nSumter, Judge Campbell did not complain. On the 7th of\\nApril Judge Campbell addressed a letter to Seward on the\\nsubject of the rumors of the warlike preparations of the\\ngovernment, and asked him if the assurances he had given\\n\u00e2\u0099\u00a6Reproduced, in part, from Richmond Dispatch, February 11, 1900.", "height": "2744", "width": "1777", "jp2-path": "reallincoln00minor_0069.jp2"}, "70": {"fulltext": "62 The Real Lincoln.\\nwere well or ill-founded. In respect to Sumter Seward s\\nreply was: Faith as to Sumter fully kept wait and see.\\nOn the next evening notice was given to Governor Pickens\\nof the intention to supply Fort Sumter, peaceably, if per-\\nmitted; otherwise, by force and on the following day a\\npowerful squadron, with men and arms on board, sailed from\\nNew York to South Carolina. Lincoln s message to the Federal\\nCongress in July, 1861, referring to this subject, affords curious\\nreading. He admits that, in a military point of view, the\\nduty of the government had been reduced to the mere matter\\nof getting the garrison safely out of the fort; and yet, from\\npolitical consideration, it was deemed necessary to hold the\\nfort. Therefore, Mr. Lincoln in his message minimizes the\\npurposes of the government, and makes the military armament\\na mere errand of relief to give bread to a few brave and\\nhungry men merely to enable the government to retain\\nvisible possession of the fort.\\nWho Began the War\\nNow, if this was all that was intended, why were not the\\nsupplies sent by an unarmed vessel, incapable of making an\\nattack? In such a case, the peaceful character of the expedi-\\ntion could not have been mistaken. Firing upon an unarmed\\nvessel might have been retorted by Major Anderson in Fort\\nSumter, and the responsibility of the first shot might have\\nbeen, with greater show of reason, laid upon the Confederate\\nGovernment; but an armed expedition was prepared to accom-\\npany the supplies, and the facts justify the belief that it was\\nfor the object of forcing the Confederates to fire. Mr. Lincoln\\nknew that the Confederate Government did not want to fire\\non Fort Sumter, and he took deliberate measures to leave no\\nother alternative open to them; and yet he talks in his message\\nas if it were a mere matter of giving bread to a few brave\\nand hungry men. Notice was given, it is true, that the only\\nintention of the expedition was to supply Fort Sumter with\\nprovisions, but in the same breath the Confederates were in-\\nformed that arms and men might be landed after further notice.\\nIt is idle for Northern writers to say that the Lincoln gov-", "height": "2744", "width": "1777", "jp2-path": "reallincoln00minor_0070.jp2"}, "71": {"fulltext": "Who Began the War? 63\\nernment did not begin the war, for, as tlie great constitutional\\nwriter, Hallam, tias well said: The aggressor in a war\\nthat is, he who begins it is not the first who uses force, but\\nthe first who renders force necessary. As was intended,\\nsays Lincoln in the same mesage, notice was given. Now,\\nwhy this intention, unless Lincoln had been fully informed\\nby Seward of his conversations with Judge Campbell? For all\\nhonorable purposes the notice might as well have not been\\ngiven. The fleet was prepared before any notice was given,\\nand the notice that Governor Pickens finally received was\\nanticipated by the newspapers. Mr. John C. Ropes refers to\\nthese assurances of Mr. Seward as semi-ofiicial only. For\\none, I fail to see how an official can ever become a semi-\\nofficial, or how Mr. Lincoln, who retained Mr. Seward in\\noffice, after all the facts were known, can be considered in any\\nother light than as his backer and indorser.\\nIn fact, Lincoln s message, to which reference has been\\nmade, mirrors his character exactly. He was a man of un-\\ndoubted mental power, but the workings of his mind, instead\\nof proceeding upon broad planes of principle, wound in and\\nout in narrow ways, and tortuous lines, and his conclusions\\nhave much the effect of the handiwork of a necromancer, which\\namuses, but never convinces.\\nHis Subtleties.\\nThe subtleties of expression to which he resorts in his\\nattempt to justify, under the law, his unconstitutional acts,\\nwhile carrying on the war against the South, cannot stand\\nserious examination for a moment. When he asks, in his indi-\\nrect way, whether the President is not justified in violating\\nhis oath in respect to one law, if, in so doing, he keeps all the\\nlaws from going (unexecuted by others), and prevents the\\ngovernment from going to pieces, he invites the answer that\\nthe President might on the same principle violate all the\\nlaws, if, by so doing, he can keep all the laws from going un-\\nexecuted (by others), and the government from going to pieces!\\nWhen he says that if one State may secede, so may another,\\nand when all shall have seceded, none is left to pay the debts", "height": "2744", "width": "1777", "jp2-path": "reallincoln00minor_0071.jp2"}, "72": {"fulltext": "64 The Real Lincoln.\\nof the Union, the answer is that the States were as well able\\nto agree upon an adjustment of debts out of the Union as in\\nthe Union. The (Confederate) commissioners made known to\\nSev/ard their perfect willingness to assume their proper share\\nof all pecuniary responsibilities to creditors. When he says\\nthat the word sovereignty does not occur in any of the\\nState constitutions he quibbles on a word, for the constitutions\\nof Vermont, New Hampshire and Massachusetts contain the\\nwords, free and independent, and free, independent, and\\nsovereign, as descriptive of the political character of their\\npeople. When he says that the States never existed out of the\\nUnion, and were, therefore, not sovereign, the answer is that,\\nif there is anything in this argument, he must first show that\\nthere is something in the nature of Union which is contradic-\\ntory to separate State nationality. History records numerous\\ninstances of States leagued together for common purposes, and\\nthe international law writers have over and over asserted that\\nsovereign States may unite and present one national front to\\nthe world, without any of them losing that character of\\nsovereignty as defined by Lincoln a political community\\nwithout a political superior.\\nIndeed, one is compelled to think that Lincoln was laughing\\nin his sleeve at his own solemn absurdities, for the same\\nmessage contains a flat-footed sentence which shows that the\\nhonest idea he had in his mind at the time was the suppression\\nof the rebellion at any sacrifice. This sentence is as fol-\\nlows: These measures (calling out troops, blockading\\nSouthern ports, suspending the writ of Hahcas Corpus, etc.),\\nwhether strictly legal or not, were ventured upon under what\\nappeared to be a popular demand and a public necessity, trust-\\ning, then as now, that Congress would readily ratify them.\\nDestruction of Private Property.\\nTo be plain about it, a man must seek high and low to find\\nanything that is ennobling or refining in Lincoln s adminis-\\ntration. International law sets the finger of condemnation on\\nthe burning of towns, colleges, private houses, unnecessary\\ndestruction of private property, and the abuse and punishment", "height": "2744", "width": "1777", "jp2-path": "reallincoln00minor_0072.jp2"}, "73": {"fulltext": "Destruction of Private Property. 65\\nof nou-combatants. And yet, the generals of Lincoln, without\\nany rebuke from the President, perpetrated everywhere\\nthroughout the South the most flagrant violations of interna-\\ntional law\\\\ Major George B. Davis, Judge-Advocate of the\\nUnited States army, says, in his work on international law,\\nthat the policy of the United States during the rebellion,\\nin the matter of requisitions w as far from liberal. I should\\nthink so! Private property was taken everywhere without any\\nform of compensation. All non-combatants over sixteen years\\nof both sexes within the Federal lines were required either to\\ntake an oath of allegiance to the Federal Government or be\\nsent outside the lines; perhaps, to starve or die in the woods.\\nLincoln published, under his own proclamation, an act of Con-\\ngress, dated July 25, 1862, which denounced either death, or\\nsevere imprisonment, or confiscation, or a fine not exceeding\\n$10,000, on every person in both sections assisting in any way\\nin the existing rebellion. What would people at this time\\nthink of the Queen of Great Britain sanctioning such an\\nanathema against the Boers, or of President McKinley against\\nthe rebel Philippinos Much is said of Lincoln s practical\\nsagacity, but did he show it in the selection of Burnside,\\nMcDowell, Pope, and Hooker to lead his army in Virginia?\\nEven his emancipation policy was only a war measure,\\nthe example of which had been set a hundred years before\\nby the British Government. At that time the wicked policy\\nof freeing the slaves and arming them against their masters\\nhad been condemned in the Declaration of Vermont and by the\\npeople of the country generally. And now, in 1863, that a\\nservile war did not at once ensue, involving in indiscriminate\\nbutchery, men, women, and children in the South and the\\nrepetition of the scenes of horror which had once prevailed\\nin Haiti, was not at all due to the humanity of Lincoln.*\\nMr. Lincoln s virtual declaration of warand blockade was coupled witli\\ntwo acts vrhich cast a glaring- light on tiie often-vaunted humanity of the\\nNortli, and the personal tenderness of nature and freedom from vindictive\\npassion ascribed to the President. The latter ordered that Confederate\\ncommissions or letters of marque granted to private or public ships should\\nbe disregarded, and their crews treated as pirates. He also declared\\nmedicines of all kinds contraband of war. Both acts violated every rule\\nof civilized war, and outraged the conscience of Christendom. History of\\nthe United States, (hy Percy Greg, Vol. II., p. 182\u00e2\u0080\u0094 American Edition; Rich-\\nmond, Virginia\u00e2\u0080\u0094 West, Johnson Co., 1892).\u00e2\u0080\u0094 [JS ote by the Editor],", "height": "2744", "width": "1777", "jp2-path": "reallincoln00minor_0073.jp2"}, "74": {"fulltext": "6() The Real Lincoln.\\nHis Humanity*\\nNor can the cold facts of history see any humanity in\\nLincoln s policy as to the prisoners taken on both sides. The\\nstory of these poor men was a sad one. For much of their\\nsuffering in Confederate prisons the refusal of the Lincoln\\ngovernment to permit the cartel of exchange is undoubtedly\\nresponsible. There was, moreover, absolutely no excuse for\\nthe government of the Union, in the midst of plenty, for\\nstarving and maltreating the unfortunate Confederates who\\nfell into their hands. Governor Morehead, of Kentucky, is a\\nwitness to the fact that the horrors of Fort Warren, even in\\nBoston harbor, were such that prisoners were driven mad.\\nIn concluding, I wish to say that if Northern writers are\\ndetermined to set up a standard of character and rectitude\\nfor the South, let them be wiser in their selection of their\\nideals. While there can be no doubt that the South has entirely\\neclipsed the North in the production of moral heroes (witness\\nWashington, Jefferson, Madison, Monroe, Calhoun, Davis.\\nJackson and Lee), yet there are many men in the history of the\\nNorth noted for the singular purity and excellence of their\\nlives, whose example we will be proud to point out to our\\nchildren.\\nt.ofC.", "height": "2744", "width": "1777", "jp2-path": "reallincoln00minor_0074.jp2"}, "75": {"fulltext": "", "height": "2744", "width": "1777", "jp2-path": "reallincoln00minor_0075.jp2"}, "76": {"fulltext": "S I2\\nm.", "height": "2744", "width": "1777", "jp2-path": "reallincoln00minor_0076.jp2"}, "77": {"fulltext": "", "height": "2744", "width": "1777", "jp2-path": "reallincoln00minor_0077.jp2"}, "78": {"fulltext": "", "height": "2744", "width": "1777", "jp2-path": "reallincoln00minor_0078.jp2"}, "79": {"fulltext": "", "height": "2744", "width": "1777", "jp2-path": "reallincoln00minor_0079.jp2"}, "80": {"fulltext": "", "height": "2744", "width": "1777", "jp2-path": "reallincoln00minor_0080.jp2"}}