Horace Greeley to Charles A. Dana, December 1, 1855

WASHINGTON, D. C., Dec. 1, 1855.

FRIEND DANA: I think ——— worth $150 per month. He has facilities at the west end which I have not and never can have, and living here is horribly dear for those who have to see people. By and by he may perfect his opportunities with Marcy & Co., and then you can stop him. For the present better pay $200 a month than lose him. I see him and confer with him several times a day; but it is best that the business should all go through one channel. So I wish you would write him accepting his terms. If you can easily repeat the hint I have given him, that we value facts more than opinions, it will be well. Everybody we employ to gather information seems to think he has the paper to edit, and I expect soon to have a notice from Dennis that, if we don’t change our course on some public question, he will be obliged to relieve himself of all responsibility in the premises by dissolving his connection with the Tribune.

I thank you for your reply to Dr. Bailey. He is eaten up with the idea of making Chase President.

I am doing what I can for Banks; but he won't be Speaker. His support of the Republicans against the K. N. ticket this fall renders it impossible. If we elect anybody it will be Pennington or Fuller. I fear the latter. Pennington is pretty fair, considering. He will try to twist himself into the proper shape, but I would greatly prefer one who had the natural crook.

Phelps to-night announced in Democratic caucus that two of the Missouri Whigs would vote their side. Glad of it.

The news from Kansas is helping us.

You ought to see the loving glances I get from Whitfield. We know each other first-rate, but are not introduced.  I think the House will organize on Monday; if not, Tuesday will fetch it.

I hate this hole, but am glad I have come. It does me good to see how those who hate the Tribune much, fear it yet more. There are a dozen here who will do better for my eye being on them. Schouler is particularly cordial.

As to old McRea, I think, we may as well let him have his $10 a week for a few weeks yet, though I can't use him. I wouldn’t mind his being a genius, if he was not a fool. He has no idea of keeping his mouth shut, but tells everybody he is connected with the Tribune, but doesn’t go its isms, etc. He annoys me to the amount of $10 per week at least; but let him wait a little.

Yours,

H. G.

C. A. DANA, Esq.

SOURCE: Horace Greeley, Greeley on Lincoln: With Mr. Greeley's Letters to Charles A. Dana and a Lady Friend, p. 87-9

Gerrit Smith

As long as Andersonville shall live in the world's memory, (and can its sins and sorrows ever be forgotten?) so long shall it warn men not to trample upon nor forget the rights of their fellow-men. By the way, the guilt of Andersonville rests not alone on the South. The North has countenanced and justified the Southern contempt and denial of the rights of the black man. Nor was this by Democrats only. The Republican Party, though not so extensively, was also involved in the guilt. The doctrine that the black man has no rights, is still virtually subscribed to, not only by the mass of the Democrats, but by multitudes of Republicans also. Many a Northern church is still defiled by it. The religion and politics, the commerce and social usages of the North are all to be held as having a part in fashioning the policy which rules at Andersonville; the policy of ignoring the rights of prisoners of war, and of starving and murdering them. Moreover, many a prisoner there, if his sufferings have sufficiently clarified his vision for it, is able to see that he is himself chargeable with a responsible part in the production of those sufferings; — ay, that he is “hoist with his own petard.” In his political or ecclesiastical party, and elsewhere also, he has contributed to uphold the southern policy of excluding the black man from all rights; and consequently, as events have proved, of excluding himself too from them.

SOURCES: Octavius Brooks Frothingham, Gerrit Smith: A Biography, p. 264-5

Gerrit Smith to the Chairman of the Jerry Rescue Committee, August 27,1859

[August 27, 1859.]

For many years I have feared, and published my fears, that slavery must go out in the blood. My speech in Congress on the Nebraska Bill was strongly marked by such fears. These fears have grown into belief. So debauched are the white people by slavery, that there is not virtue enough left in them to put it down. . . . The feeling among the blacks, that they must deliver themselves, gains strength with fearful rapidity. . . . No wonder is it that in this state of facts which I have sketched (the failure of the Liberal Party, the Free Soil Party, the Republican Party, to do anything for the slaves) intelligent black men in the States and Canada should see no hope for their race in the practice and policy of white men. No wonder they are brought to the conclusion that no resource is left to them but in God and insurrections. For insurrection then we may look any year, any month, any day. A terrible remedy for a terrible wrong! But come it must unless anticipated by repentance, and the putting away of the terrible wrong.

It will be said that these insurrections will be failures — that they will be put down. Yes, but, nevertheless, will not slavery be put down by them? For what portions are there of the South that will cling to slavery after two or three considerable insurrections shall have filled the whole South with horror? And is it entirely certain that these insurrections will be put down promptly and before they can have spread far? Will telegraphs and railroads be too swift for even the swiftest insurrections? Remember that telegraphs and railroads can be rendered useless in an hour. Remember, too, that many who would be glad to face the insurgents, would be busy in transporting their wives and daughters to places where they would be safe from that worst fate which husbands and fathers can imagine for their wives and daughters.

SOURCE: Octavius Brooks Frothingham, Gerrit Smith: A Biography, p. 240-1

Journal of Amos A. Lawrence, October 21, 1859

Cold. Henry Wilson came to see me about Brown. He thinks it will have a very bad effect on the Republican party; thinks all such attempts must fail always. Brown's conversations are all given in the newspapers by telegraph. He is a brave man, and if he is hanged he will die a martyr to his hatred of slavery.

SOURCE: William Lawrence, Life of Amos A. Lawrence: With Extracts from His Diary and Correspondence, p. 131

George S. Denison to Salmon P. Chase, June 28, 1862

New Orleans, June 28th, 1862.

Sir: I have collected the information which you wished to receive by a private letter. The persons about whom you particularly enquired were Thos. H. Hewes, J. P. Harrison, Benj. F. Flanders, and Randell Hunt.

Thomas Hewes was born in this city — is about 35 years old — a lawyer — was in California seven or eight years — returned home in 1860. Went to Texas for a few months — returned to this City and opened an office in partnership with James B. Eustis, brother of Slidell's secretary. He was inclined to be a Union man at first, but afterwards became a strong secessionist, and with his father who was from the first an active and bitter rebel, worked hard for the rebel government.

Young Hewes used to be dissipated, but in California he married and reformed. It is said that he has recently returned to former bad habits. He is regarded as a man of talent and is much liked by his acquaintance. He left this city when the fleet arrived and has not yet returned.

James P. Harrison came to this city from Natches, Miss., about sixteen years ago, a lawyer of good standing. In this city he has been in business as a merchant, being one of the firm of Payne and Harrison. He is a respectable and able man. He was a “Co-operationist”, but became an active rebel, and with his House strongly supported the rebel government. Being a man of high standing he had great influence for evil. When the fleet arrived he left the city and has not yet returned.

Benjamin F. Flanders is a native of New Hampshire, but has lived in Louisiana many years. He was the Secretary and Treasurer of the Opelousas railroad. He is much respected, and is regarded as an able, honest man. He is a good business man, and has much influence. He has been invariably a thorough Union man, and was so obnoxious to the ruling powers, that he was sent out of the “Confederacy” into Kentucky a few months ago, his family being left at their residence in this city. All the Union men I have met in this city (and they are many) speak of Mr. Flanders in the highest terms. Mr. Flanders returned to this city a few days ago. I have seen him, and the opinion formed of him before making his acquaintance, is confirmed. Rev. Mr. Duncan recently in Washington, made application of the N. O. post office. I saw him here a few days ago, and was told by him that Mr. Flanders made application to be surveyor of this Port. When you think best to appoint a Surveyor, I do not think a more deserving and capable man than Mr. Flanders can be found, nor one whose appointment would give greater satisfaction to Union men here. In politics he is with the Republican party.

Mr. Randell Hunt is probably known to you,¹ and I shall not say anything of him except in reference to the present troubles. Mr. Hunt was an able and active opponent of secession from the first, and did all he could to prevent it. It is believed by all, that his opinions are entirely unchanged, but since the beginning of the war, he has been perfectly passive. He has never gone over to secession, and Union men here have the greatest confidence in him, though he does not come out a declared Union man even now. His position is embarrassing, for his brother Judge Hunt (Theodore G. Hunt) is a colonel in the Confederate army and is now in active service in Virginia. I have seen Mr. Hunt several times but without opportunity of talking on political subjects. I delivered to him your letter, and offerred to forward any letter to you. Enclosed is the reply to your letter.

Dr. M. F. Bonzano, whom you made Special Agent for the N. O. Mint, has given me great assistance. He possesses great scientific knowledge, and mechanical skill — is perfectly honest and thoroughly devoted to the government. He is strongly opposed to the institution of slavery, and out of limited means, has purchased and emancipated several negroes during the last few years. As a man of learning, he has few superiors, and all his statements and suggestions will be of value to you.

The labor devolving upon me is great, but our success exceeds my expectations. It will take some weeks, at least, to organize every department of the Custom House, and teach the inexperienced employees. I am determined to accomplish three principal objects, viz:—

1. To appoint to office such men and of such political opinions, that the Government (through its officials) can present here a strong nucleus for a Republican party.

2. To recover, or assist in recovering all property and duties (paid to others than the government) and settle up all old business.

3. To suppress smuggling and other abuses and to establish a good character for this heretofore notorious Custom House.

The name of the Deputy Collector (furnished from the New York Custom House by Mr. Barney) is William C. Gray. I am glad to mention to you the name of such a man. He knows his business thoroughly and is entirely devoted to the interests of the Government. From early morning until night he (as well as myself) is at the Custom House and nothing escapes his vigilance or care.

The city is very healthy and there is no indication aw yet, of an epidemic this year.

I shall take the liberty of writing private letters to you occasionally whenever I can give information which I may think you would like to receive.

_______________

¹ Mr. Chase and Mr. Hunt married sisters, daughters of James C. Ludlow of Cincinnati. Miss Sarah Ludlow was Mr. Chase's third wife and was married to him November 6, 1846. Warden gives (366-367) a letter of Chase's to Mrs. Hunt November 30,1860. Schuckers (199-200) gives the same letter with some verbal changes as one sent to Mr. Hunt. Warden, Schuckers, and Professor Hart spell Mr. Hunt's first name “Randall.”

SOURCE: Diary and correspondence of Salmon P. Chase, Annual Report of the American Historical Association for the Year 1902, Vol. 2, p. 306-9

George L. Stearns to William L. Robinson of Boston, December 24, 1860

[December 24, 1860]

I am well satisfied that the Southern Party determined to secede, to see if they could not break up the Republican Party, which they hoped to do by a Northern Panic. They expected to break our banks, paralyze our industry, fail our merchants, and starve our operatives. That this was and is their game is evident by their constant endeavors, both in public and private, to induce the Northerners to make some proposition as a bribe to induce them to remain in the Union.

They have failed. Their plan is exposed, and the effect will be to consolidate the Republican Party more closely than it could be done by any other means. Neither will they be able to secede or break up the Union. It is confessed by the leaders of the Southern Party, they have now lost control of the movement. It is now in the hands of the masses and they tremble before the storm they have raised. If any proof of this was wanting, the fact that eminent Southern men of strong conservative tendencies are now most inveterate Fire-eaters, advocating extreme measures that their private judgment condemns, is conclusive on this point.

Here the leaders are sad; they see the signs of recuperation at the North and the daily depreciation and distress at the South; therefore they are anxious for a compromise. But they will not get it. First, because a compromise is not possible in the nature of things; and secondly, because the Republican Party are fully determined not to make one. An effective compromise is not possible when the parties have no faith in each other, and this is the case with the Northern and Southern parties.

Do you ask, What shall we do? I answer, Keep quiet*

I told you a short time since that no act of Congress or resolution of a convention could be of any avail to settle this controversy. That is in the hands of the Lord. To-day I believe it more firmly than ever.

_______________

* This watchword explains Sumner's attitude during the winter of 1861. Perhaps it originated with Sumner.

SOURCE: Preston Stearns, The Life and Public Services of George Luther Stearns, p. 238-40

Robert Mallory in the United States House of Representatives, July 5, 1862

I shall redeem my implied pledge to the House not to take up much of their time upon this matter.  I merely wish to put myself right in regard to a statement made to my venerable colleague [Charles A. Wickliffe] who just addressed the house.

I cordially concur in most of the sentiments expressed by my colleague in regard to this letter of General Hunter, which a few days since was read from the Clark’s desk.  Neither he nor any other man can condemn in severe terms than I do the whole spirit of that letter and its whole style.  No man can disapprove more strongly the system of arming slaves, which that general has sought to inaugurate in the South, as shown by his letter to the Secretary of War.  I believe, as my colleague does, and as I hope many gentlemen of the Republican party in this House believe, that it is contrary to the rules that should govern a civilized nation in conducting a war.

I shrink from arming the slave, using him to shoot down white men, knowing his depraved nature as I do.  I would as soon think of enlisting the Indian, and of arming him with the tomahawk and scalping knife, to be let loose upon our rebellious countrymen, as to arm the negro in this contest.

But I recollect, and I shall continue to do as long as I live, the scene which occurred in this Hall when that memorable letter was read at the Clerk’s desk.  Many things have been said here, many statements have gone the rounds of the public press about the indecorum and disorder which prevail in this Hall, that, in my opinion were calumnies upon the character of this House; but none of them can overdraw the picture which was presented here the other day when that letter was read.  The scene was one of which I think this House should forever be ashamed.

We were here in the consideration of questions the most solemn and grave that ever claimed their attention of an American Congress.  Grave consideration, calm and deliberate reflection, should have characterized the proceedings of this body on that occasion.  But, sir, when that letter was read at the Clerk’s desk, a spectator in the gallery would have supposed we were witnessing the performance of a buffoon or of a low farce actor upon the stage.  And the reading of the letter on that occasion, containing, as it did, sentiments calculated to shock humanity, written in a style showing the contempt of the writer for this House, was received with loud applause and boisterous manifestations of approbation by the Republican members of the House.  I never witnessed a scene more deeply mortifying.  I shall not lose the memory of it while I live.  It was a scene, in my opinion, disgraceful to the American Congress.

SOURCE: United States. Congress. The Congressional Globe: Containing the Debates and Proceedings of the Second Session of the Thirty-Seventh Congress, book, 1862; Washington D.C.. (digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metadc30813/: accessed October 2, 2017), University of North Texas Libraries, Digital Library, digital.library.unt.edu; crediting UNT Libraries Government Documents Department., July 5, 1862, p. 3,124-5

William Penn Clarke

WILLIAM PENN CLARKE was born in Baltimore, Maryland, October 1, 1817. At the age of fourteen he went to Gettysburg, Pennsylvania, and learned the printing business. In 1838 he came west on foot at the age of twenty-one and reaching Cincinnati established a daily newspaper, and later became editor of the Logan Gazette, in Ohio. In 1844 he went farther west and located at Iowa City where he was admitted to the bar in 1845. He was a ready writer and contributed frequently to the newspapers on the slavery issue, being a “free-soiler” in politics. He attended the Pittsburg National Convention which took the preliminary steps toward the organization of the Republican party in 1856, acting as one of the secretaries. At the National Republican Convention in 1860, Mr. Clarke was one of the delegates from Iowa and was chosen chairman of the delegation. He soon after purchased the State Press at Iowa City and took an active part in the antislavery contest leading to the Kansas war. As a member of the National Kansas Committee he sent a company of men to aid the citizens of that Territory in expelling the “Border Ruffian” invaders. He was for many years the keeper of a station on the “underground railroad” and was fearless in aiding fugitive slaves to freedom, cooperating with John Brown during his operations in Iowa. Mr. Clarke prepared the original ordinances for the government of Iowa City. He was reporter of the decisions of the Iowa Supreme Court for five years. As an influential member of the Constitutional Convention of 1857 he acted as chairman of the committee on judiciary. Early in the Civil War Mr. Clarke was appointed paymaster in the army, serving until 1866. He was then chosen chief clerk in the Interior Department at Washington, resigning when Andrew Johnson began his war on the Republican party, and returning to the practice of law in Washington, he died February 7, 1903.

SOURCE: Benjamin F. Gue, History of Iowa from the Earliest Times to the Beginning of the Twentieth Century, Volume 4, p. 52-3

Diary of John Beauchamp Jones: May 17, 1863

The last few days have been cool and dry; fine weather for campaigning. And yet we hear of no demonstrations apparently, though I believe Lee's army is moving.

Mr. Lamar, of Savannah (formerly president of the Bank of the Republic, New York), writes that he and others are organizing an Exporting and Importing Company, and desires the government to take an interest in it. So far the heads of bureaus decline, and of course the Secretary will do nothing. But the Secretary has already engaged with Mr. Crenshaw in a similar enterprise, and so informed Mr. Mason, at London.

About 10 A.M., some 2500 men of all arms arrived at “double quick,” having left Ashland, eighteen miles distant, at 5 o'clock this morning. That was brisk marching. The guns were sent down on the railroad. The government has information that Gen. Keyes, with a full division of infantry and a brigade of cavalry, had marched up to West Point, to threaten Richmond. The troops, however, which arrived from Ashland, had been taken from the batteries here, and did not belong to Gen. Lee's army.

Messrs. Davenport & Co., Mobile, charge Gen. Buckner with permitting 1000 bales of cotton to be shipped to New Orleans.

The president of the Fredericksburg Road states, in a letter to the Secretary, that, after the battle, by military authority, the cars were appropriated by the Federal officers (prisoners), while our wounded soldiers had to remain and await the return of the trains.

Hon. Mr. Dargin, of Alabama, writes to the Secretary, to procure from the President a disavowal of the “organship” of the Enquirer, as that paper, under the belief that it speaks for the government, is likely to inflict much mischief on the country. He alluded to the bitter articles against the Democrats and peace men of the North, who would soon have been able to embarrass, if not to check the operations of the Republican war party. He says now, that they will write against us, and deal destruction wherever they penetrate the land.

SOURCE: John Beauchamp Jones, A Rebel War Clerk's Diary at the Confederate States Capital, Volume 1, p. 326-7

Diary of John Hay: June 24, 1864

To-day a Resolution came from the Senate asking information about War and Treasury Orders concerning exportation of arms to Mexico. I did not like to act without consulting Seward, so took the papers to him, asking if it would be well to send copies to Secretaries of War and Treasury or not. He said, — “Yes! send the Resolution to the Secretary of War; a copy to the Secretary of the Treasury; asking reports from them, and then when the reports are in, ———

“Did you ever hear Webster's recipe for cooking a cod? He was a great fisherman and fond of cod. Some one once asking him the best way to prepare a cod for the table, he said: — ‘Denude your cod of his scales — cut him open carefully — put him in a pot of cold water — heat it until your fork can pass easily through the fish — take him out — spread good fresh butter over him liberally, — sprinkle salt on the butter — pepper on the salt — and — send for George Ashman and me.’”

“When the Reports are in, let me see them!”

He got up, stumped around the room enjoying his joke, then said: — “Our friends are very anxious to get into a war with France, using this Mexican business for that purpose. They don't consider that England and France would surely be together in that event. France has the whip hand of England completely. England got out of the Mexican business into which she had been deceived by France, by virtue of our having nothing to do with it. They have since been kept apart by good management; and our people are laboring to unite them again by making war on France. Worse than that, instead of doing something effective, if we must fight, they are for making mouths and shaking fists at France, warning and threatening and inducing her to prepare for our attack when it comes.”

Carpenter, the artist, who is painting the picture of the “Reading the Proclamation,” says that Seward protested earnestly against that act being taken as the central and crowning act of the administration. He says slavery was destroyed years ago; the formation of the Republican party destroyed slavery; the anti-slavery acts of this administration are merely incidental. Their great work is the preservation of the Union, and, in that, the saving of popular government for the world. The scene which should have been taken was the Cabinet Meeting in the Navy Department when it was resolved to relieve Fort Sumter. That was the significant act of the Administration: — the act which determined the fact that Republican institutions were worth fighting for. . . . .

SOURCES: Abstracted from Clara B. Hay, Letters of John Hay and Extracts from Diary, Volume 1, p. 210-12. See Michael Burlingame & John R. Turner Ettlinger, Editors, Inside Lincoln’s White House: The Complete War Diary of John Hay, p. 211-2 for the full diary entry.

Diary of John Hay: Tuesday, December 24, 1863

I dined to-day with S. S. Cox. He spoke of Greeley’s foolish  Chase explosion the other night at Wendell Phillip’s Cooper Institute meeting, and said Chase was working night and day. He has gotten nearly the whole strength of the New England States. If there is any effort made in Ohio he can be beaten there.  He has little strength in his own State.

I asked him whom his party would nominate.

C. “Gen'l McClellan! We will run McClellan. He is our best ticket. He lost some prestige by his Woodward letter. But it was necessary. He never would have gotten the nomination without it.”

“You don't agree with the Herald on Grant?”

C. “Grant belongs to the Republicans. We can't take him after his letter to Washburne. But for that, we might have taken him. The Republicans won't take him either. They have got his influence, and have no further use for him.”

“If I were a soldier I should much prefer commanding the U. S. Army for life, to four years in the Executive Mansion. I think Grant would.”

“So would McClellan, I know."

I met him again to-night in the Theatre. He says he is getting tired of Washington. He wants to spend a few years in Europe. He will go, if McClellan is next President; — thinks he will anyhow. Says it is delightful to be in the minority; you are not bored by your people for office. — “Glad you like it!” quoth I. “We will try to keep you so.”

SOURCES: Clara B. Hay, Letters of John Hay and Extracts from Diary, Volume 1, p. 143-4; for the entire diary entry see Tyler Dennett, Editor, Lincoln and the Civil War in the Diaries and Letter of John Hay, p. 143-4

Diary of John Hay: Sunday, November 8, 1863

The President tells me that Meade is at last after the enemy and that Grant will attack to-morrow.

Went with Mrs. Ames to Gardiner’s gallery and were soon joined by Nico and the President. We had a great many pictures taken. Some of the Pres^t the best I have seen. Nico and I immortalised ourselves by having ourselves done in group with the Pres^t.

In the evening Seward came in. He feels very easy and confident now about affairs. He says New York is safe for the Presidential election by a much larger majority, that the crowd that follows power have come over; that the copperhead spirit is crushed and humbled. He says the Democrats lost their leaders when Toombs and Davis and Breckinridge forsook them and went south; that their new leaders, the Seymours, Vallandighams and Woods, are now whipped and routed. So that they have nothing left. The Democratic leaders are either ruined by the war, or have taken the right-about, and have saved themselves from the ruin of their party by coming out on the right side. . . .

He told the Democratic party how they might have saved themselves and their organisation, and with it the coming Presidential election — by being more loyal and earnest in support of the administration than the Republican party — which would not be hard, the Lord knows!

SOURCES: Clara B. Hay, Letters of John Hay and Extracts from Diary, Volume 1, p. 118-9; For the whole diary entry see Tyler Dennett, Editor, Lincoln and the Civil War in the Diaries and letters of John Hay, p. 117-8.

William H. Seward to Abraham Lincoln, March 15, 1861

Department of State

Washington, 15th March, 1861.

The President submits to me the following question, namely, “Assuming it to be possible to now provision Fort Sumter, under all the circumstances, is it wise to attempt it?”

If it were possible to peacefully provision Fort Sumter, of course I should answer that it would be both unwise and inhuman not to attempt it. But the facts of the case are known to be, that the attempt must be made with the employment of a military and marine force, which would provoke combat, and probably initiate a civil war, which the Government of the United States would be committed to maintain through all changes to some definite conclusion.

History must record that a sectional party practically constituting a majority of the people of the fifteen Slave States, excited to a high state of jealous apprehension for the safety of life and property, by impassioned, though groundless appeals, went into the late election with a predetermined purpose, if unsuccessful at the polls, to raise the standard of secession immediately afterwards, and to separate the Slave States, or so many of them as could be detached from the Union, and to organize them in a new, distinct, and independent confederacy: that party was unsuccessful at the polls. In the frenzy which followed the announcement of their defeat, they put the machinery of the State Legislatures and conventions into motion, and within the period of three months, they have succeeded in obtaining ordinances of secession by which seven of the Slave States have seceded and organized a new Confederacy under the name of the Confederated States of America. These States finding a large number of the mints, customhouses, forts and arsenals of the United States situate within their limits, unoccupied, undefended, and virtually abandoned by the late Administration, have seized and appropriated them to their own use, and under the same circumstances have seized and appropriated to their own use, large amounts of money and other public property of the United States, found within their limits. The people of the other Slave States, divided and balancing between sympathy with the seceding slave States and loyalty to the Union, have been intensely excited, but, at the present moment, indicate a disposition to adhere to the Union, if nothing extraordinary shall occur to renew excitement and produce popular exasperation. This is the stage in this premeditated revolution, at which we now stand.

The opening of this painful controversy, at once raised the question whether it would be for the interest of the country to admit the projected dismemberment, with its consequent evils, or whether patriotism and humanity require that it shall be prevented. As a citizen, my own decision on this subject was promptly made, namely, that the Union is inestimable and even indispensable to the welfare and happiness of the whole country, and to the best interests of mankind. As a statesman in the public service, I have not hesitated to assume that the Federal government is committed to maintain preserve and defend the Union, peaceably if it can, forcibly if it must, to every extremity. Next to Disunion itself, I regard civil war as the most disastrous and deplorable of national calamities, and as the most uncertain and fearful of all remedies for political disorders. I have therefore made it the study and labor of the hour, how to save the Union from dismemberment by peaceful policy and without civil war.

Influenced by these sentiments, I have felt that it is exceedingly fortunate that, to a great extent, the Federal government occupies, thus far, not an aggressive attitude, but, practically, a defensive one, while the necessity for action, if civil war is to be initiated, falls on those who seek to dismember and subvert this Union.

It has seemed to me equally fortunate that the Disunionists are absolutely without any justification for their rash and desperate designs. The administration of the Government had been for a long time virtually in their own hands, and controlled and directed by themselves, when they began the work of revolution. They had therefore no other excuse than apprehension of oppression from the new and adverse administration which was about to come into power

It seemed to me farther, to be a matter of good fortune that the new and adverse administration must come in with both Houses of Congress containing majorities opposed to its policy, so that, even if it would, it could commit no wrong or injustice against the States which were being madly goaded into revolution. Under the circumstances, Disunion could have no better basis to stand upon than a blind unreasoning popular excitement, arising out of a simple and harmless disappointment in a Presidential election – that excitement, if it should find no new aliment, must soon subside and leave Disunion without any real support. On the other hand, I have believed firmly that every where, even in South Carolina, devotion to the Union is a profound and permanent national sentiment which, although it may be suppressed and silenced by terror for a time, could, if encouraged, be ultimately relied upon to rally the people of the seceding States to reverse, upon due deliberation, all the popular acts of legislatures and Conventions by which they were hastily and violently committed to Disunion.

The policy of the time, therefore, has seemed to me to consist in conciliation, which should deny to the Disunionists any new provocation or apparent offence, while it would enable the Unionists in the slave states to maintain, with truth and with effect, that the claims and apprehensions put forth by the Disunionists, are groundless and false.

I have not been ignorant of the objection that the Administration was elected through the activity of the Republican party, that it must continue to deserve and retain the confidence of that party while conciliation towards the Slave States tends to demoralize the Republican party itself, on which party the main responsibility of maintaining the Union must rest.

But it has seemed to me a sufficient answer first, that the Administration could not demoralize the Republican party without making some sacrifice of its essential principles when no such sacrifice is necessary or is any where authoritatively proposed; and secondly, if it be indeed true that pacification is necessary to prevent dismemberment of the Union and civil war, or either of them, no patriot and lover of humanity could hesitate to surrender party for the higher interests of country and humanity.

Partly by design, partly by chance, this policy has been hitherto pursued by the last Administration of the Federal government and by the Republican party in its corporate action. It is by this policy thus pursued, I think, that the progress of dismemberment has been arrested after the seven Gulf States had seceded, and the Border States yet remain, although they do so uneasily, in the Union.

It is to a perseverance in this policy for a short time longer that I look as the only peaceful means of assuring the continuance of Virginia, Maryland, North Carolina, Kentucky, Tennessee, Missouri and Arkansas, or most of those States, in the Union. It is through their good and patriotic offices that I look to see the Union sentiment revived and brought once more into activity in the seceding States, and through this agency those states themselves returning into the Union.

I am not unaware that I am conceding more than can reasonably be demanded by the people of the Border States. They could, speaking justly, demand nothing. They are bound by the federal obligation to adhere to the Union without concession or conciliation just as much as the people of the Free States are. But in administration we must deal with men, facts and circumstances not as they ought to be, but as they are.

The fact then is that while the people of the Border States desire to be loyal, they are at the same time sadly though temporarily demoralized by a sympathy for the Slave States which makes them forget their loyalty whenever there are any grounds for apprehending that the Federal Government will resort to military coercion against the seceding States, even though such coercion should be necessary to maintain the authority or even the integrity of the Union. This sympathy is unreasonable, unwise and dangerous, and therefore cannot, if left undisturbed, be permanent. It can be banished, however, only in one way, and that is by giving time for it to wear out and for reason to resume its sway. Time will do this, if it be not hindered by new alarms and provocations.

South Carolina opened the revolution Apprehending chastisement by the military arm of the United States, she seized all the Forts of the United States in the harbor of Charleston, except Fort Sumter, which, garrisoned by less than one hundred men, stands practically in a state of siege, but at the same time defying South Carolina and, as the seceding States imagine, menacing her with conquest. Every one knows, first, that even if Sumter were adequately reinforced, it would still be practically useless to the Government, because the administration in no case could attempt to subjugate Charleston or the State of South Carolina.

It is held now only because it is the property of the United States and is a monument of their authority and sovereignty. I would so continue to hold it so long as it can be done without involving some danger or evil greater than the advantage of continued possession. The highest military authority tells us that without supplies the garrison must yield in a few days to starvation, that its numbers are so small that it must yield in a few days to attack by the assailants lying around it, and that the case in this respect would remain the same even if it were supplied but not reinforced. All the military and naval authorities tell us, that any attempt at supplies would be unavailing without the employment of armed military and naval force. If we employ armed force for the purpose of supplying the fort, we give all the provocation that could be offered by combining reinforcement with supply.

The question submitted to me then, practically, is, Supposing it to be possible to reinforce and supply Fort Sumter, is it wise now to attempt it, instead of withdrawing the garrison. The most that could be done by any means now in our hands, would be to throw 250 to 400 men into the garrison with provisions for supplying it for six months. In this active and enlightened country, in this season of excitement with a daily press, daily mails and incessantly operating telegraph, the design to reinforce and supply the garrison must become known to the opposite party at Charleston as soon, at least, as preparation for it should begin. The garrison would then almost certainly fall by assault before the expedition could reach the harbor of Charleston. But supposing the secret kept, the expedition must engage in conflict on entering the harbor of Charleston, suppose it to be overpowered and destroyed, is that new outrage to be avenged or are we then to return to our attitude of immobility? Shall we be allowed to do so? Moreover, in that event, what becomes of the garrison?

Suppose the expedition successful– We have then a garrison in Fort Sumter that can defy assault for six months. What is it to do then? Is it to make war by opening its batteries and attempting to demolish the defences of the Carolinians? Can it demolish them if it tries? If it cannot, what is the advantage we shall have gained? If it can, how will it serve to check or prevent Disunion? In either case, it seems to me that we will have inaugurated a civil war by our own act, without an adequate object, after which reunion will be hopeless, at least under this administration, or in any other way than by a popular disavowal, both of the war and of the administration which unnecessarily commenced it. Fraternity is the element of Union. War the very element of disunion. Fraternity, if practiced by this administration, will rescue the Union from all its dangers. If this administration, on the other hand, take up the sword, then an opposition party will offer the olive branch and will, as it ought, profit by the restoration of peace and Union.

I may be asked, whether I would in no case and at no time, advise force – whether I propose to give up everything. I reply, no, I would not initiate a war to regain a useless and unnecessary position on the soil of the seceding States. I would not provoke war in any way now. I would resort to force to protect the collection of the revenue, because this is a necessary as well as a legitimate union object. Even then, it should be only a naval force that I would employ, for that necessary purpose– While I would defer military action on land until a case should arise when we would hold the defence. In that case, we should have the spirit of the country and the approval of mankind on our side. In the other, we should peril peace and Union, because we had not the courage to practice prudence and moderation at the cost of temporary misapprehension. If this counsel seems to be impassive and even unpatriotic, I console myself by the reflection that it is such as Chatham gave to his country under circumstances not widely different.

William H. Seward

SOURCE: Abraham Lincoln Papers at the Library of Congress, Washington, D.C.

David Davis to Abraham Lincoln, Sunday Evening, August 5, 1860

Harrisburg, Pa

=Sunday Evening—

Augt 5, 1860

Dear Lincoln

— I reached Fort Wayne about 12 oclk Thursday night, & met Mr Williams at the Depot having previously Telegraphed him to meet me there– He went on with me to the next station & we talked over Indiana politics pretty thoroughly= The Breckenridge movement headed by Bright & Fitch he says, is in Earnest, & the State will go for you, no matter what the result of the October Election may be– He thinks Col. Lane will be elected, but of this he is not so entirely hopeful– The Breckenridge men have not put up a State Ticket, as you know in Indiana-- Mr Williams thinks that the naming of the Breckenridge Electoral Ticket in Indiana (a movement more formidable than in Illinios) will so far demoralize the party – as to increase greatly our chances for carrying the State in October–

Friday at 3 oclk reached Pittsburg, and remained over until 9 at night – I saw Mr Erret & Mr Williams of the Gazette– Genl Purviance not at home– Everything in Pittsburg and that region of the State, is just as we could desire it.—

The Republican vote will be immensely increased, in the West & Northwest—

– I found the opinion there as to the Central Committee pretty much as we had received it from others– I also ascertained that a meeting was appointed of some 18, or 20 of our friends – to meet in Phild. Tuesday Evening. Which I intend to attend– I expected to go to Baltimore tonight, but finding that Col Curtin will be in an adjoining County to night-morrow, I have concluded to stay & go & see him– This deranges my plans somewhat– I spent the entire day of yesterday – with Genl Cameron, & my interview has been pleasant & eminently satisfactory– He is certainly a genial, pleasant, and kind hearted man, & many prejudices that I have heretofore entertained have been removed—

– I found him, exceedingly anxious to have your views on the subject of the tariff, & that he wanted them so as to be able to assure the people of the State that they were Satisfactory to him.

Pennsylvania has been deceived so often on the subject of the Tariff, that it is not surprising that they are fearful & sensitive about it—

I explained to him, that what your views had been all your life, & that if you had entertained other views when you embarked in life that you would have had Douglas's position in the State & that the reason your speeches were not published, was, that there were no reporters in those days

I then took out your notes, and commenced reading them, stating that you wished me to present them to him– He requested me to leave them with him, & he would hand them to me at Phild– I have seen him to day, & he says he has read the notes carefully and they are abundantly satisfactory to him– Genl Cameron, says, that there is not a shadow of doubt of your carrying Pennsylvania – that you will carry it by a large majority – that Curtin will be elected – that the Bell movement amounts to nothing in the State, and that outside of Philadelphia it is literally nothing– He says that there is a lack of confidence with McClure, but that they will get along with that harmoniously

Genl Cameron also says that they do not want any money in the state – that they can raise all they need – but that if money is furnished that the amount will be magnified, & parties in the State will be jealous if they dont get some

He has also a pride not to receive money – thinks it humiliating that Pa. should receive money from NY. & Boston– He advised agt our receiving any in Illinois from abroad– more hereafter

yr frd

D Davis —

SOURCE: Abraham Lincoln Papers at the Library of Congress, Washington, D. C.

Senator William H. Seward to Thurlow Weed, April 29, 1859

Washington, April 29, 1859.

Dear Weed, — The southern and western politicians have habits and usages different from ours. They come upon me with a directness which confounds me. I have two or three subjects submitted by them which I propose to you now, because in the hurry of preparing my business for departure for Europe I must save time. You can keep this letter at hand and refer to it at leisure.

Many southern gentlemen express to me a wish that the national convention may be held somewhere on the border. Without expressing any opinion about it as an abstract question, I think our friends ought to know that it was understood at Washington that Humphrey Marshall intends to go over to the Democrats. If Louisville should be suggested as the place, the committee would of course consider Mr. Marshall's position in connection with the subject. It might have a bearing against such a selection.

The Baltimore “———” is in trouble. Mayor Swayne, Judge Lee, Mr. Cole, and others there want to have the paper reorganized and brought into the position of an organ in that State and for the country south of the Potomac, of the Republican party. They had Simon Cameron over there a week or two ago to confer. They think they will need some funds from the North, but I am satisfied that if they only had the benefit of your advice and Cameron's, they would be able to subscribe all the funds they want, and would promptly do so. Cameron and I promised them that we would ask you to meet him there. Cameron knows them all, and he will go at any time.

Speaking of Cameron, I promised him when he left Washington to spend a day or so with him on my way home. He took me to his house, told me all was right. He was for me, and Pennsylvania would be. It might happen that they would cast the first ballot for him, but he was not in, etc. He brought the whole legislature of both parties to see me, feasted them gloriously, and they were in the main so generous as to embarrass me.

I have Stetson's letter to you. Corwin is uneasy and fidgety; but persons who live in Ohio have excuses. They are inheritors of a noble reversion, and they would like to extinguish the present estate without being able or willing to pay its cost. He wrote me a month ago, inclosing a pitiful piece of twaddle from a correspondent of the “Express,” saying that he was against me as everybody else was. He contradicted the allegation, and said that the Cincinnati “Gazette” would contain an authorized denial. . . .

You will find John S. Pendleton, of Virginia, bold enough and well disposed for anything. The man in the District of Columbia is Henry Addison, now Mayor of Georgetown. He is wise, honest, indomitable and unreserved. You may send him safely anywhere.

Yours faithfully,

William H. Seward.

SOURCE: Harriet A. Weed, Editor, Life of Thurlow Weed Including His Autobiography and a Memoir, Volume 2, p. 256-7

David Wilmot to Abraham Lincoln, July 11, 1860

Towanda July 11th. 1860.

Hon. A. Lincoln.

Dear Sir:

Your note of the 4th inst reached me on the 9th.

I wrote you from Chicago, saying I should return home by way of Phila., and that if I observed or heard anything worthy of note, I would write you from that City. My stay in Phila. was more brief than I anticipated – one day only and as I learned nothing of interest, I did not write you.

Your note of the 22d of May was directed to me at Phila. and did not come to hand untill a few days since. I was thinking of writing you when I recd. your last favor.

I see nothing discouraging in the condition of affairs in this State: indeed to me everything looks hopeful and promising. From the day of your nomination, I have had but little doubt of our success in this State. Since the clear development of Mr Buchanan's policy, there has been an overwhelming majority of our people opposed to his Administration. I believed they would generally write in support of any of the prominent candidates before our Convention, except Govs. Seward & Chase. These gentlemen had occupied positions of such mark in the conflicts of the past ten years, that the Conservative & American elements in this State were irrevocably committed against them; but would support other men of equally advanced republican positions, but who had not been held up before them for years, in so unfavorable a light

The division of the democracy of this State is formidable, and I believe irreconcilable. Forney can be of much greater service in moving against a Coalition or Union, than he could possibly be in supporting our ticket. He stands now a recognized & influential leader of the Douglass forces; in the other contingency, he would have been denounced as a traitor, and his influence greatly weakened. At this time Douglass is in the ascendent in this State over Breckenridge, but the latter will gain from this time to the Election. There is no starch in the Northern democracy, and unless the weakened democrats of the North, & especially of Penna, the most servile of the race, shall see, as they will, that Breckenridge is to losing the South, they will flock by the thousands to his standard. They dare not seperate themselves from the South. They understand the danger of such a position, and that away from the South, there is no democratic party.

I cannot feel a doubt of the result. The confusion of Bable has fallen upon the counsels of the Enemies of Freedom. They are doomed through their great iniquities, and by the inexorable moral law of Heaven, to defeat, shame & humiliation. The moral and political power of the party of Slavery is broken, and no patched up arrangements of its leaders, were such a thing possible, can save it from its just doom. The Democracy must turn from its errors, and receive its virtue and strength at the formation of its principles, before it can have the power to retain another political victory. In truth all that remains of democracy in this country, is embodied in the Republican party

I have written you a long and I fear tedious letter

I hope to see you in the fall

very respectfully yours

D. Wilmot

SOURCE: Abraham Lincoln Papers at the Library of Congress, Washington, D. C.

Hawkins Taylor to Abraham Lincoln, December 27, 1859

Keokuk Dec 27^th 1859

My Dear Sir

Our State Convention comes off soon probably too Soon for the appointment of delegates to the National Republican Convention. As the National Convention is so convenient I am truly sorry that our Convention was appointed so early, there may be great changes in public sentiment between now and next June. I do not expect to be a delegate to the Convention. I do not know how many delegates we may have but th[ere] will probably be one to each Judicial District appointed who will be appointed from our district it is hard to say. There is probably more than half the Political talent in the State in our Judicial District still I will fill my part in the appointment of Delegates at the State Convention and if alive and well I will be at the National Convention and I hope able to exert some influence and the Question is who is the Right Man to bear the Republican Banner In my opinion he should be Conservative yet thoroughly honest and above evry thing else a man of Iron Nerve And evry Kick a Republican. Let him say to the South keep your Slaves if you want to. You shall be fully protected in all your Constitutional Rights, but you must let all free Territory alone except as free setlers while it remains a Territory. You shall have all the Appointments both at home & abroad that your White population entitle you to but not one more. You must let the mails of the Country alone

In a word behave your selves as other people have to do and you Shall be treated as other people are

The candidate should be thoroughly in favor of the Homestead Bill and the Great Central National Road to the Pacific and a Good Tariff Man in feeling. With such a man there no danger of defeat. But without such a man victory would be a defeat worse than defeat itself

I would rather see you the candidate than any other man, but I am willing to see Camron & You the candidates or I am willing to see Bates and some Pensylvany Man the candidates. I have some doubts of Bates. I fear that there is too much “Old Line Whig” about him and besides I would rather see both the Candidates taken from Free States so that we could Show the conservative portion of the South that the Republican party can be a National & conservative party when in power and the Fire Eaters that they can & will be Hung by a Republican administration if they do not behave them selves. I hope & trust that Douglass is politically dead for the next four years at least so far as being a Candidate for President is concerned It is not worth while to disguise the fact he is Strong stronger than any other Man that could be nominated It would be next to impossible to keep him from getting Iowa & all of the Western States, over almost any body And very largely over such candidates as Seward, Chase, Banks, or any such men. The West will not vote for any but a Western Man against a Western Man. We Want and must have free Lands And a Pacific Road and if the National Republican Convention do not give us such a man they need not make a nomination with any hope of success, unless the Locos nominate Some fireeater Which they are sure not to do. They will give us a Third addition of the Polk & Pierce Dodge or I am mistaken

Write me fully when you receive this I am very anxious to hear from you before our State Convention

Yours truly

Hawkins Taylor

Hon. A. Lincoln

SOURCE: Abraham Lincoln Papers at the Library of Congress, Washington, D. C.

William Cullen Bryant to Abraham Lincoln, December 25, 1860

New York Dec. 25, 1860

My dear Sir,

The rumor having got abroad that you have been visited by a well known politician of New York who had a good deal to do with the stock market and who took with him a plan of compromise manufactured in Wall Street, it had occurred to me that you might like to be assured of the manner in which those Republicans who have no connection with Wall Street regard a compromise of the slavery question. The feeling of decided aversion to the least concession was never stronger than it is now. The people have given their verdict and they do not expect that either their representatives in Congress or their politicians out of Congress will attempt to change or modify it in any degree. The restoration of the Missouri Compromise would disband the Republican Party. Any other concession recognizing the right of slavery to protection or even existence in the territories would disgust and discourage the large majority of Republicans in the state and cool their interest in the incoming administration down to the freezing point. Whatever else be done the slavery question, so far as it is a federal question must remain as it is or the Republican party is annihilated. Nor will any concession of the sort proposed satisfy the South. South Carolina cannot be hired to return to the Union by any thing short of the removal of all restraints on the African slave trade. To do that would convert at once into friends of the Union, a class of the Southern politicians who are now doing a great deal to foment the discontents of the South and might effect what the Wall Street managers hope to bring about by restoring the Missouri line, and give protection to slavery South of it.

You will excuse me if I say a word concerning the formation of the Cabinet. I am glad to hear that it is decided to have regard to the in its composition, to that part of the Republican party which is derived from the old democratic party. It would be most unfortunate if the Cabinet were to be so constituted as to turn the policy of the administration into the old whig channels. To instance a single branch of that policy – the policy of restraints upon trade for the advantage of the manufacturers. We of the old democratic party who are the friends of free trade are perfectly willing that this should be regarded as an open question, but we shall be placed in immediate antagonism to the administration, the moment this is made a part of its governing policy. A bigot to protection placed at the head of the Treasury department would at once open a controversy on that question which would be carried on with zeal, perhaps with heat.

You will I know excuse these suggestions. If not vile they are at least disinterested. I have not, that I know of the remotest interest in politics except that our country should be governed with wisdom and justice, and with the allowance of the largest liberty in all things consistent with good order. You will receive perhaps from me letters in favor of persons desiring some office under the federal government or see my signature to recommendations got up by them or their friends. I pray you, in all these cases to believe, that no personal favor will be conferred on me, in any possible instance by bestowing the desired office on the person whom I may recommend. What I say for them should be taken as my opinion of their fitness and nothing more.

I am, dear Sir,

very truly yours

W. C. Bryant.

P. S. In regard to the slave trade, the zeal for its restoration arises from its profitableness. Large capitals are invested in it and it is the most lucrative of all branches of commerce.

W. C. B.

SOURCES: Abraham Lincoln Papers in the Library of Congress, Washington, D.C.

John M. Forbes to Senator William P. Fessenden, November 15, 1862

Boston, November 15, 1862.

My Dear Sir, — Your note received. I must differ from you about the President. He has been in the hands of a vacillating, undecided man like Seward!

With your decided opinions, if you were once in the cabinet, he and all the political aspirants there would form into line and march to your music. Even Chase would be glad to see some one else put at the head to take the responsibility. His opinions are firm enough, but he lacks your uncompromising directness of will. The only possible doubt is your health, and you may as well die at the head of the nation a few months hence, after saving it, as at the head of the Senate a few years hence, fighting the compromisers and rebels combined.

A prominent New York man ascribes, in a private letter, the late failure there¹ to Seward and his friends, and says the President ought to know and act upon it. He adds, “The accession of Mr.W. P. F. would delight me.” He [my correspondent] is a man who, perhaps, next to you, ought to be there himself, though known at the bar rather than in public life.

_______________

¹ Referring to the defeat of the Republican party in New York, and the election of Seymour, the Democratic candidate for governor. — ED.

SOURCE: Sarah Forbes Hughes, Letters and Recollections of John Murray Forbes, Volume 1, p. 338

William Cullen Bryant to Abraham Lincoln, January 22, 1861

New York January 22, 1861.

My dear Sir.

At the risk of being deemed somewhat troublesome, yet with the greatest respect and deference, I take the liberty of addressing you once more on the subject of your cabinet appointments.

I believe you do not differ with me in regard to the importance of giving Mr. Chase a place in the Cabinet, as one whose wisdom, rigid integrity and force of character would make him a most safe counsellor and efficient coadjutor of the Chief Magistrate, not to speak of the need of his presence as a counter poise to another member, who, to commanding talents, joins a flexible and in[d]ulgent temper, and unsafe associations. The appointment of Mr. Chase would give a feeling of security and confidence to the public mind which the rascalities of Mr. Buchanan's cabinet have made exceedingly sensitive and jealous, and would, it seems to me, settle the point in advance that the new administration will be both honored and beloved. For some time to come the federal government must depend largely upon its credit for its resources, and how potent is the effect of placing an honest and economical man at the head of the Treasury Department, is shown by an example now before our eyes. General Dix, with all his mistakes, is a man of unquestioned integrity, and his appointment as Secretary of the Treasury has already greatly raised the credit of the government brought so low by the misconduct of Cobb.

Now, according to what I learn from Mr. Opdyke, who has just returned from Ohio, it is nearly certain that Mr. Chase would not take a place in the Cabinet, unless it were offered him early. He is not inclined to do it at all, preferring a seat in the Senate, but this preference he would forego; yet there are, I am told, some personal reasons, as well as others connected with the choice of his successor in the Senate, that will, if the offer be delayed, induce him to remain where he is. I am not a judge of the force of these reasons; it is enough that they exist.

The only motive for delay is the hope of pacifying Mr. Cameron and his friends. It is thought here, by some who know him to be very tenacious of his purposes, that there is no probablility of doing this effectually, whether the offer to Mr. Chase be postponed or not. If, however, it be possible to satisfy him, it is to be considered, whether it will not be as easily done after Mr. Chase shall have been fixed upon as now, and whether the hope of obtaining better terms may not lead Mr Cameron to affect to spurn any reconciliation, as long as the appointment which he expected is kept open. One thing, however, is perfectly clear, that by failing to secure the services of Mr. Chase in the Treasury Department, both the country and the Republican party will lose infinitely more than the incoming administration can possibly suffer from the enmity of Mr. Cameron and his adherents.

I leave this subject here, that I may say a single word on another. From Mr Opdyke, I learn, that in a letter written to you some weeks since, on the subject of “protection,” I did not make myself fully understood. It seemed to me that I had clearly expressed my meaning when I said, that those who thought with me were “willing that this should be an open question.” I wished merely to express a hope that the administration would not throw its entire influence on the side of protection. The Republican party not being agreed among themselves on this point, the cabinet policy as it seemed to me, should be so moderated, not to disaffect the friends of free trade.

I am, dear Sir,

truly yours

W. C. Bryant.

Hon. A. Lincoln.

_______________

[An earlier draft of this letter can be found in Parke Godwin’s, A Biography of William Cullen Bryant, Volume 1, p. 150-2 included below:]

New York, January 21, 1861: At some risk of being deemed troublesome, yet with the greatest respect and deference, I take the liberty of addressing you once more on the subject of the Cabinet appointments. I believe you do not differ with me in regard to the importance of giving Mr. Chase a place in the Cabinet, as one whose wisdom, rigid integrity, and force of character would make him a most safe counsellor and efficient co-operator, not to speak of the need of his presence there as a counterpoise to the one who joins to commanding talents a flexible and indulgent temper of mind and unsafe associations.

The appointment of Mr. Chase would give a feeling of security and confidence to the public mind which the rascalities of Mr. Buchanan's Cabinet have made exceedingly sensitive and jealous, and would, it seems to me, settle the point in advance that the new administration will be both honored and beloved. The Government will be compelled, for the next four years, to depend somewhat for resources upon its credit, and how important it is to have an honest and economical man at the head of the Treasury Department is shown by an example now before our eyes. The appointment of General Dix as Secretary of the Treasury, who, with all his mistakes, is a man of incorruptible honesty, had already greatly raised the credit of the Government, brought so low by the misconduct of Cobb.

Setting out with this position, I proceed to remark that, from what I learn through Mr. Opdyke, who has just seen Mr. Chase, it is not certain that Mr. Chase would take a place in the Cabinet unless it were offered to him early. He is not inclined to do it at all, preferring a seat in the Senate; and there are, I am told, some personal reasons, and others, connected with the choice of his successor in the Senate, that will, if the offer were delayed, induce him to remain where he is. I am not a judge of the force of these reasons, but am only certain that they exist. The only occasion for delaying is the hope of satisfying Mr. Cameron and his friends. It is thought by some who know him to be very tenacious of his purposes, that there is no probability of doing this effectually, whether the appointment of Mr. Chase be delayed or not. If, however, it be possible to satisfy him, it is to be considered whether it will not be as easy to do it after the offer be made to Mr. Chase as now, and whether the hope of obtaining better terms for him will not induce Mr. Cameron to affect to spurn any reconciliation as long as the appointment which he expects is kept open. One thing, however, is perfectly clear — that, by losing the chance of securing the services of Mr. Chase in the Treasury department, both the country and the Republican party will lose infinitely more than the administration could possibly suffer from the enmity of Mr. Cameron and his adherents.

I leave this subject here, that I may say a single word upon another. I learn from Mr. Opdyke that, in a letter written to you some time since on the subject of “protection,” I did not make myself fully understood. I thought I had clearly expressed my meaning when I said that those who thought with me were “willing that this should be an open question.” I wished merely to express a hope that the administration would not throw its entire influence on the side of protection. The Republican party, not being agreed among themselves in regard to this matter, the [cabinet] policy, it seems to me, should be extremely moderate, and not calculated to disaffect either side.

SOURCES: Abraham Lincoln Papers in the Library of Congress, Washington, D.C.; Parke Godwin, A Biography of William Cullen Bryant, Volume 1, p. 150-2