References in parenthesis are from Abraham Lincoln: His Speeches And Writings by Basler, Roy
Lincoln was never a peace-time president. All his work between the first and second inaugural and beyond represented strife. Throughout 1861 and 1865, he faced numerous challenges that affected his position on slavery, which changed over time. From the outset of his presidency, Lincoln maintained that slavery was “founded on both injustice and bad policy.” Yet, he recognized that the Constitution did not grant Congress the power to abolish it. Slaves were considered property under the law, and Lincoln would not break a law to abolish slavery. He was not in the camp of Abolitionists for their “doctrines [tended] rather to increase than abate its evils” (Basler, 552). The question of how to arrive at emancipation is answered between 1861 and 1865. For Lincoln, the primary purpose was to preserve the Union, but it eventually evolved into a staunch commitment to emancipation, influenced by political pressures, international impact, legal and Constitutional justifications, military necessity, and finally, moral concerns.
In his 1838 Lyceum Address, Lincoln foresaw the potential self-inflicted demise of American democracy, stating, “If destruction be our lot, we must ourselves be its author and finisher. As a nation of freemen, we must live through all time, or die by suicide.” This prophetic statement made decades before the Civil War, emphasized his belief in the delicate nature of the Union and the characteristic dangers of disregarding the law. Lincoln's insistence on adherence to legal and constitutional norms reflected his understanding that the republic's survival was contingent upon its citizens' commitment to uphold its foundational principles of constitutional law, Unity, and liberty to all. He emphasized the role of the current generation in carrying forward the “political edifice of liberty and equal rights” established by the Founders, suggesting a continuous duty for future generations (Basler, 77). This perspective foreshadowed his later efforts to preserve the Union. It highlighted his deep-seated belief in the importance of multi-generational responsibility for maintaining the principles of liberty upon which the United States was founded.
Preserving the Union was Lincoln’s only goal when he became president. Before his inauguration, Lincoln delivered a farewell speech in Springfield, Ill., on February 11, 1861. He compared the upcoming challenge to that of George Washington as the first president. Lincoln declared he faced “a task before [him] greater than that which rested upon Washington.” (Basler, 568)
The political and social atmosphere was dire. Seven Southern states had already declared their secession from the Union, largely because of the perceived threat that a Republican administration would pose to their “property”—a political term largely understood to mean slaves—and their way of life. In the First Inaugural Address, Lincoln endeavored to reassure these states, stating, “Apprehension seems to exist among the people of the Southern States that by the accession of a Republican Administration, their property, and their peace, and personal security, are to be endangered” (Basler, 580). He emphasized that he had no lawful right to interfere with the institution of slavery where it existed and declared his sole intention to preserve the Union.
Lincoln outlined three key reasons against secession in the First Inaugural Address: the Union is perpetual, it was formed to create a more perfect Union, and no state can legally leave without unanimous agreement from all states. He also highlighted that the intertwined economies of the North and South meant their separation could cause significant turmoil and hinder national progress. Furthermore, in his July 4, 1861, Special Message to Congress, Lincoln noted that the entire nation had purchased the land occupied by the seceding states, reinforcing the permanence of the Union (Basler, 605).
Lincoln’s commitment to the Union and his direct appeals to the South were designed to alleviate fears and affirm his resolve to reunite the nation. He frequently invoked divine guidance, asserting, “If the Almighty Ruler of nations, with His eternal truth and justice, be on your side...that truth and that justice will surely prevail” (Basler, 587). Lincoln’s frequent references to God reflected his personal convictions and resonated with the American public, potentially endearing him to many during these trying times.
By the end of his first year in office, Lincoln had concluded that “the last ray of hope for preserving the Union peaceably expired at the assault upon Fort Sumter,” the pivotal event that started the war (Basler, 630). Despite this, the Union forces were progressing well in the South as of August 1862. Around this time, in response to Horace Greeley’s public critical letter, which cast him as an abolitionist, Lincoln clarified that his “paramount object…[was] to save the Union,” not to save or destroy slavery (Basler, 652). This assertion came just before he would introduce the preliminary Emancipation Proclamation, marking a significant shift in his administration's approach to the war and slavery.
Slavery was set up in the Constitution as a political necessity because it already existed at the time of the founding. The founders believed it would eventually go away, but with the repeal of the Missouri Compromise and the Kansas-Nebraska Act, the slave states now believed it to be a “sacred right” and should be extended under the guise of the democratic principle of “the right of self-government.” Lincoln made a clear distinction back in 1854 “between the EXISTING institution, and the EXTENSION of it” so that no one would misunderstand him (Basler, 283). Where slavery already existed, it was protected by law, but the expansion of it was not what the founders intended and was fatal to the Union. Despite abhorring slavery for its "monstrous injustice" (Basler, 291), he acknowledged that the Constitution did not permit its outright abolition and had focused solely on saving the Union.
The Southern States appealing to foreign powers for aid, were ultimately unsuccessful. In his 1861 annual message to Congress, he mentioned that the Confederate states, in trying to break apart the Union further, had failed to gain significant foreign support by offering economic incentives. Lincoln indicated that these nations did not forsake their moral and foreign duties for economic gain. They had not supported the rebellious states as much as the rebels expected. Lincoln argued that if foreign nations were driven solely by economic interests, they would find it more advantageous to support the Union and help end the rebellion than to back the Confederacy. By July 4th, 1861, Lincoln assured Congress that foreign powers everywhere respected the sovereignty and rights of the United States (Basler, 601). As Lincoln faced new situations with foreign nations during the war, these interactions likely began to shape his future and broader war aims, including the potential abolition of slavery and demonstrating to the world that Americans were fighting for a good cause.
Lincoln addressed the concerns of the Southern states directly in his First Inaugural Address on March 4, 1861. His insistence on the Union's indivisibility was intertwined with his belief that the Constitution allowed and required him to act to preserve it. His actions during the Civil War were a testament to his astuteness in addressing border states’ concerns and his moral convictions, which were guided by this belief.
In his July 4, 1861, Special Session message to Congress, Lincoln stated his preference for exhausting all peaceful measures before using force, as demonstrated by his response to the attack on Fort Sumter, which he viewed as a direct threat to the Union's authority (Basler, 595, 597). In the first inaugural address, he emphasized that conflict would only occur if provoked by others. His aim was clear: maintain the Union, uphold the Constitution without misconceptions, and reason whether a democracy could sustain its integrity without compromising its people's liberties (Basler, 598). Seeing the rebellion as a fundamental threat to democracy, Lincoln believed his presidential duty under the Constitution's “take care” clause necessitated war to preserve the Union.
As the war intensified, political pressures rained hard on the nation. There were dire threats to national security, prompting Lincoln to suspend the writ of habeas corpus, a constitutional right against unlawful imprisonment. In the Special Message to Congress on July 4, 1861, Lincoln justified his decision to suspend it to maintain and preserve the government. He presented a rhetorical question to bring home his point: “Are all the laws but one to go unexecuted, and the Government itself go to pieces, lest that one be violated?” (Basler, 601). This question reflected his belief that, in times of rebellion, the executive must sometimes take extraordinary measures to ensure national security. He was careful and “unwilling to go beyond the pressure of necessity in the unusual exercise of power” (Basler, 624). In all his reasoning, he continually looked at the bigger picture, maintaining a balance of law while trying to save the Union.
The war escalated, and Lincoln sought ways to weaken the Confederacy while trying to maintain support from the border states and the conservative Northerners. In an April 16, 1862, letter to Congress, Lincoln, and his ever-present attention to fairness, praised the Act abolishing slavery in the nation's capital for incorporating compensation for slave owners and colonization options for freed slaves. He expressed gratitude that the law addressed these key principles. In July of the same year, Lincoln spoke to the border states, asking them to consider gradual emancipation.
In the 1862 annual message to Congress, Lincoln proposed emancipation with compensation. In contrast to the extension of slavery, this was part of a broader plan to end slavery without abruptly disrupting the Southern economy. His plan suggested that the states adopt gradual emancipation, with the federal government compensating slave owners. “The plan would, I am confident, secure peace more speedily, and maintain it more permanently, than can be done by force alone” and would cost much less economically and in blood (Basler, 687). He proposed the plan be made into law. Unfortunately, many in the border states and in Congress were indifferent or hostile to the idea of emancipation, even with compensation.
Earlier in September 1861, Lincoln responded to Major General John C. Fremont’s proclamation of martial law and emancipation of slaves in Missouri, a border state with divided loyalties. Fremont’s order, which included confiscating and emancipating Confederate supporters’ slaves, was criticized by Lincoln in a letter to O. H. Browning. Lincoln argued that the move was “not within the range of military law, or necessity” and raised concerns about setting a dangerous precedent in such a volatile area (Basler, 613). He contended that while a commanding officer could temporarily seize land for military use, this did not extend to making permanent decisions about property rights or changing the status of slaves. Such measures, he believed, should only last as long as the military necessity.
Lincoln expressed his urgent opposition in his letter to Browning, saying he could not “assume this reckless position [of Fremont’s], nor allow others to assume it on [his] responsibility” (Basler, 613). For Lincoln, this independent decision was equivalent to a dictatorship, where a leader, under the role of military necessity, permanently alters the law, thus undermining the democratic foundations of the nation. Lincoln’s adherence to these principles showed his commitment to constitutional limits even in the darkest times. While he was vehemently against this dictatorial role of Fremont, it had an effect on his rational thoughts and would later open his mind to options besides just preserving the Union.
Meanwhile, Union forces were actively disrupting the institution of slavery in the rebelling states, which raised legal and constitutional questions. Lincoln responded to complaints about the Union Army's interference in the master-slave relationship in his letter to Cuthbert Bullitt on July 28, 1862. He justified these actions as a "military necessity” for obtaining men and resources vital for the war effort (Basler, 649). This thinking foreshadowed his broader application of military necessity in justifying the preliminary Emancipation Proclamation, which he would issue a few months later, in September 1862.
As the war progressed, Lincoln’s primary aim remained the preservation of the Union, yet the issue of slavery and the idea of “Liberty to all” (Basler, 513) increasingly shaped his thoughts. With resistance from Southern and border states, Lincoln saw a chance to align the nation with the moral principles the Founders envisioned. This vision profoundly influenced him. Well before the Emancipation Proclamation, Lincoln recognized the moral corruption of slavery, grounded in his understanding that the Declaration of Independence proclaimed that "all men [were] created equal." However, interpretations varied—some believed this applied to all humans, regardless of race, while others, particularly in the Southern states, believed it pertained only to white men. Lincoln pondered whether a government that protects rights should extend its protection to slaves. What about the consent of the governed? Are some humans not fully human? If so, they must all give consent. Should military force ensure that all men are protected in their liberty? These questions weighed heavily on Lincoln and fueled the initial Emancipation Proclamation, issued on September 22, 1862, freeing slaves in the rebellious Confederate states by January 1, 1863. The final version of the proclamation was issued on that same day in January 1863. The day, long hoped for from the inception of the nation, had finally come. Lincoln, in his deep desire to uphold the Union, had to stretch the Constitution to encompass the liberty principle for all men. This time, regardless of race. Nonetheless, the decision was fraught with deep emotional and national consequences.
Heading into the 1864 election, President Lincoln’s chances of victory seemed uncertain, partly due to the backlash from the Emancipation Proclamation. Initially focused on preserving the Union without resorting to war, by his Second Inaugural address, Lincoln recognized that at the root of the conflict was always the issue of slavery—widely understood as the war’s core cause aimed at its strengthening, preservation, and expansion. He now saw preserving the Union as inherently linked to upholding liberty for all men, regardless of race, reflecting a profound shift in his understanding of the war’s moral dimensions. He realized that the war, which had surpassed all early estimates in terms of its scope and length, may have resulted from divine intervention to bring an end to the moral and humanitarian tragedy of slavery (Basler, 793). This war was not just a political struggle but a moral reckoning, suggesting that the immense suffering it brought might be a divine justice for the accumulated wrongs of slavery. His address conveyed a tone of reconciliation and unity, emphasizing “malice toward none” and “charity for all” as he called for healing and peace that would include caring for veterans and their families (Basler, 793). His marked a significant shift from his earlier stance, as he now saw the war’s end not just as a political and military necessity but as a moral imperative to right the grievous wrongs of slavery and to bind the nation’s wounds in a spirit of forgiveness and collective advancement.
No comments:
Post a Comment