Civil War History - Secession and PoliticsWas it Slavery, or was it States Rights? Perhaps it was the election of Lincoln? What were the real reasons for Southern Secession and what were the political issues in this time of war? Find your answers here in the Secession and Politics Disussion.
I respect your disagreement with Mr. Douglass's opinion and his views and your observation that his was a more emotional rather than objective view. Being raised as a slave ones entire life more than likely would tend to twist one's objectivity concerning the subject, I will admit.
You also raise another interesting point about who will be able to be more objective about the current events happening in our lifetime, we who are here in the present or those who come 140 years after us. I submit neither of the groups mentioned will ever really grasp the situation and the why of it more than a soldier on patrol in Bagdad or an Iraqi civilian being allowed to vote for the first time in 50 years.
Just an observation, dear friend, no wisdom or second sight presumed.
__________________ "The American people and the Government at Washington may refuse to recognize it for a time but the inexorable logic of events will force it upon them in the end; that the war now being waged in this land is a war for and against slavery." Frederick Douglass
"Loyalty to our ancestors does not include loyalty to their mistakes." George Santayana
Sorry it took so long to get to this, but things got a bit busy here.
Morgan: “To Horace Greeley, editor of the New York Tribune, who had passed along a report of a rabid anti-Lincoln harangue in the Mississippi legislature, Lincoln wrote that ‘madman’ there had quite misrepresented his views. He stated he was not ‘pledged to the ultimate extinction of slavery,’ and that he did not ‘hold the black man to be the equal of the white.’ “
------------------------
It was actually Henry Raymond.
Here is the letter:
[begin quote]
Confidential
Hon. H. J. Raymond Springfields, Ills.
My dear Sir Dec. 18, 1860
Yours of the 14th. is received. What a very mad-man your correspondent, Smedes is. Mr. Lincoln is not pledged to the ultimate extinctinction [sic] of slavery; does not hold the black man to be the equal of the white, unqualifiedly as Mr. S. states it; and never did stigmatize their white people as immoral & unchristian; and Mr. S. can not prove one of his assertions true.
Mr. S. seems sensitive on the questions of morals and christianity. What does he think of a man who makes charges against another which he does not know to be true, and could easily learn to be false?
As to the pitcher story, it is a forgery out and out. I never made but one speech in Cincinnati---the last speech in the volume containing the Joint Debates between Senator Douglas and myself. I have never yet seen Gov. Chase. I was never in a meeting of negroes in my life; and never saw a pitcher presented by anybody to anybody.
I am much obliged by your letter, and shall be glad to hear from you again when you have anything of interest. Yours truly
A. LINCOLN
[end quote]
[Collected Works, Vol 4, p. 156]
As can be easily seen, Morgan again takes Lincoln’s words out of context. He says he “does not hold the black man to be the equal of the white, unqualifiedly,” which is different than what Morgan is claiming. We’ve already discussed how Lincoln carefully worded his speeches and how he had claimed black men were not equal to white men certainly in color and perhaps in other attributes. Lincoln recognized that the black man was not equal to the white man in the United States regarding political rights that were granted.
Also, while Lincoln had never actually pledged himself to the extinction of slavery, he certainly spoke out against it, and he did say he wanted to see slavery put on the course to ultimate extinction.
The Chiriqui Resettlement Plan
An excellent article on this is Paul J. Scheips, “Lincoln and the Chiriqui Colonization Project,” _Journal of Negro History,_ Vol XXXVII, No. 4, October, 1952, pp. 418-453.
Morgan: “Even before he took office, Lincoln was pleased to note widespread public support for "colonization" of the country's blacks. ‘In 1861-1862, there was widespread support among conservative Republicans and Democrats for the colonization abroad of Negroes emancipated by the war,’ historian James M. McPherson has noted. At the same time, free blacks in parts of the North were circulating a petition asking Congress to purchase a tract of land in Central America as a site for their resettlement.”
----------------------
And as Prof. Scheips writes, “In ante-bellum and Civil War days it [colonization] was a solution championed by persons like Lincoln with humanitarian motives.” [p. 418] And, “When Lincoln assumed office in March, 1861, he had long held the then middle-of-the-road and not uncommon view that the solution of the nation’s racial problem lay in separation of the races and foreign colonization of the Negroes.” [Ibid.]
Morgan: Lincoln ordered his Secretary of War, Simon Cameron, to release Thompson from his military duties so he could escort Blow to Central America.
"for the purpose of reconnaissance of, and a report upon the lands, and harbors of the Isthmus of Chiriqui; the fitness of the lands to the colonization of the Negro race; the practicability of connecting the said harbors by a railroad; and the works which will be necessary for the Chiriqui Company to erect to protect the colonists as they may arrive, as well as for the protection and defense of the harbors at the termini of said road."
This was actually a draft that Francis Blair prepared in December of 1861. I can’t find anything to verify that Lincoln actually signed it or that it actually went to Cameron.
Morgan: “Cameron was to provide Thompson with the necessary equipment and assistants. The mission was to be carried out under sealed orders with every precaution for secrecy, because Lincoln did not have legal authority to undertake such an expedition.
”While Blow was investigating the Chiriqui area, Lincoln called Delaware Congressman George Fisher to the White House in November 1861 to discuss compensated emancipation of the slaves in that small state”
Actually, there is nothing in the draft order that says anything about it being a secret mission. Also, “For some reason, however, Blow returned to the States on a leave of absence and resigned his post early in 1862 without undertaking the Chiriqui mission.” [Paul J. Scheips, “Lincoln and the Chiriqui Colonization Project,” _Journal of Negro History,_ Vol XXXVII, No. 4, October, 1952, p. 421]
So Blow never investigated Chiriqui, and his mission, as far as I can determine, was not a secret. Lincoln apparently had the legal authority to undertake the mission.
Morgan: “In his first annual message to Congress on December 3, 1861, President Lincoln proposed that persons liberated by the fighting should be deemed free and
” ’that, in any event, steps be taken for colonizing [them] ... at some place, or places, in a climate congenial to them. It might be well to consider, too, whether the free colored people already in the United States could not, so far as individuals may desire, be included in such colonization.’
”This effort, Lincoln recognized, ‘may involve the acquiring of territory, and also the appropriation of money beyond that to be expended in the territorial acquisition.’ Some form of resettlement, he said, amounts to an ‘absolute necessity.’ “
Here’s what Lincoln said in context:
“Under and by virtue of the act of Congress entitled ‘An act to confiscate property used for insurrectionary purposes,' approved August, 6, 1861, the legal claims of certain persons to the labor and service of certain other persons have become forfeited; and numbers of the latter, thus liberated, are already dependent on the United States, and must be provided for in some way. Besides this, it is not impossible that some of the States will pass similar enactments for their own benefit respectively, and by operation of which persons of the same class will be thrown upon them for disposal. In such case I recommend that Congress provide for accepting such persons from such States, according to some mode of valuation, in lieu, pro tanto, of direct taxes, or upon some other plan to be agreed on with such States respectively; that such persons, on such acceptance by the general government, be at once deemed free; and that, in any event, steps be taken for colonizing both classes, (or the one first mentioned, if the other shall not be brought into existence,) at some place, or places, in a climate congenial to them. It might be well to consider, too,---whether the free colored people already in the United States could not, so far as individuals may desire, be included in such colonization.
“To carry out the plan of colonization may involve the acquiring of territory, and also the appropriation of money beyond that to be expended in the territorial acquisition. Having practiced the acquisition of territory for nearly sixty years, the question of constitutional power to do so is no longer an open one with us. The power was questioned at first by Mr. Jefferson, who, however, in the purchase of Louisiana, yielded his scruples on the plea of great expediency. If it be said that the only legitimate object of acquiring territory is to furnish homes for white men, this measure effects that object; for the emigration of colored men leaves additional room for white men remaining or coming here. Mr. Jefferson, however, placed the importance of procuring Louisiana more on political and commercial grounds than on providing room for population.
“On this whole proposition,---including the appropriation of money with the acquisition of territory, does not the expediency amount to absolute necessity---that, without which the government itself cannot be perpetuated? The war continues. In considering the policy to be adopted for suppressing the insurrection, I have been anxious and careful that the inevitable conflict for this purpose shall not degenerate into a violent and remorseless revolutionary struggle. I have, therefore, in every case, thought it proper to keep the integrity of the Union prominent as the primary object of the contest on our part, leaving all questions which are not of vital military importance to the more deliberate action of the legislature.” [Collected Works of Abraham Lincoln, Vol 5, pp. 48-49]
So Morgan again takes Lincoln’s words out of context. Lincoln is clearly calling the “whole proposition,” which included confiscation, emancipation, compensation to slaveowners in states that choose to emancipate their slaves on their own, and voluntary colonization, to be an absolute necessity in order to win the war. Those who claim Lincoln didn’t care about slavery should take note that here in December of 1861, before the Peninsula Campaign, before Jackson’s Valley Campaign, before the Seven Days, before Second Bull Run, before Fredericksburg, Lincoln is saying that emancipation is a key ingredient in winning the war.
Morgan: “Lincoln realized that the growing clamor to abolish slavery threatened to seriously jeopardize the support he needed to prosecute the war to preserve the Union. Accordingly, on March 6, 1862, he called on Congress to endorse a carefully worded resolution:
" ‘Resolved, that the United States ought to cooperate with any state which may adopt gradual abolishment of slavery, giving to such state pecuniary aid, to be used by such state in its discretion, to compensate for the inconvenience, public and private, produced by such change of system.’ "
As we can see from the previous section, this is exactly in line with what he claimed was an absolute necessity for winning the war. So the circumstances surrounding this call are not at all what Morgan claims.
Morgan: “Serious obstacles remained, however. Secretary of the Interior Caleb B. Smith informed the President that Liberia was out of the question as a destination for resettling blacks because of the inhospitable climate, the unwillingness of blacks to travel so far, and the great expense involved in transporting people such a vast distance. Haiti was ruled out because of the low level of civilization there, because Catholic influence was so strong there, and because of fears that the Spanish might soon take control of the Caribbean country. Those blacks who had expressed a desire to emigrate, Secretary Smith went on to explain, preferred to remain in the western hemisphere. The only really acceptable site was Chiriqui, Smith concluded, because of its relative proximity to the United States, and because of the availability of coal there. Meanwhile, the United States minister in Brazil expressed the view that the country's abundance of land and shortage of labor made it a good site for resettling America's blacks.”
This letter is not in the Collected Works or in the Lincoln Papers, but is apparently in a Congressional Report.
“In May Secretary Smith addressed two letters to the President urging colonization of eligible Negroes on lands claimed by the Chiriqui Company. According to Thompson these were the results of Lincoln’s having directed Smith ‘to procure such information as could be obtained without delay relative to the best’ means of implementing the colonization provision of the April legislation. It was Smith’s opinion, in part, that the execution of the coal contract with the Thompson interests ‘would secure a supply of good coal at a cheap rate’ and at the same time enable the government to get its colonization program under way. Besides, ‘the settlement of a colony of colored Americans, whose sympathies would naturally be with this country, would ultimately establish there such an influence as would most probably secure to us the absolute control of the country.’ The elder Blair had this in mind, too.” [Paul J. Scheips, “Lincoln and the Chiriqui Colonization Project,” _Journal of Negro History,_ Vol XXXVII, No. 4, October, 1952, p. 426] Prof. Scheips cites Sen. Executive Document 55, 39-1, Ser. 1238, pp. 7, 10-11 as the source for these letters.
Ok Cash, when are you going to publish your book exposing the propoganda of the Lost Cause for what it is? You've got at least one guaranteed sale from me.
__________________ Few take the trouble to understand or to view the American scene with perspective. And we Americans love to find ourselves guilty of something. However, it is never I who am guilty, but those other Americans, the past or present government or the other political party. Americans almost never find other countries guilty. It is always ourselves or our fancied influence in other countries. Louis L'amour
Dear breathern and sisters of this board,
I realize that everyone who appears on this board and on this thread, has his or hers, own opinion on just what the causes of that late unpleasantness was, or is. There are far too many instances to even begin to relate here, and yet, the different opinions that are stated herein, are as diverse as any I have ever seen. Each and everyone of us has his or hers, own idea of just how and why, slavery inspired the falling out of the two sections. In the end, have we settled anything? From what I've read,......NO! Is that a bad thing?.....NO! Is it a good thing?, I guess that depends on how much of an open mind you may have. I, or any one of us, for that matter, could argue till we turn blue (No, Union, not you), and absolutley nothing will be settled. I sure don't pretend to have one of the worlds best minds, and I don't pretend to have one of the finest educations, but what I do find, is that we still have some of those same reasons that began that war in the first place. Who started it.....the North did! No, the South did! And so it goes. True, we do not have slavery, to be the match that did start it all, but all things taken into consideration, we simpley do not THINK the way those folks did. A man by the name of Frank Harrell seems to have summed it all up by saying this, "We cannot judge the past events soley by the standards of today. In order to understand history, we must consider the attitudes and beliefs of the time". Now it seems to me, that those attitudes and beliefs of that time were pro and con on both sides of the isle, in both sections of the country. Is it right for us to say who was right and who was wrong? I guess that's an opinion that each of us has, and shares with others on this board. Do we learn from all of this? Who's to say? Perhaps we do, or then again, perhaps we don't. As I mentioned, I'm not the most educated individual on this board, far from it, but in my own simple way, I see much argument either for or against the institution of slavery and was it THE cause or not. My personal opinion, is that it was not. As for whether it was right or not? Well, again, for us today...........NO! But for the folks that lived then? Well, for the most part, I suppose it would be considered a ...YES! I look at some of the posts that have been put on this board, and I marvel at the depth of study that has gone into the answers that each has given. For every reason yea, or nea......there is another one to refute that answer. In the end, one has to make up his or her, own mind as to which answer is the right one for them, or which one they believe in. I tip my cap to all those who have written their own words, or shared others' opinions, with us, to this conversation, for there have been some very eloquent pieces of literature written about, not only the institution of slavery, but also, who started the war, or, was slavery the sole reason for the conflict. Those answers have been as varied as the members of this board. In the end, who is, or was, correct? Many from the North will say they were correct, while many from the South will say were not to blame or were wrong, and that they were correct. Well, we can debate it forever, and will we still ever arrive at a total consensus of who was right? Perhaps. Maybe that question has already been answered. We are the greatest country on earth, with all due respects to our neighbors to the North and to the U.K. and any others who may frequent this fine board. As has been said, our country has been put through the refiners fire, and has come out very well tempered. As I have stated, I enjoy CWtalk. I think the people who post their opinions hereon, are some very fine folks. I want to say to all of you, I am honored to participate in these discussions with you. Whether we agree or not, it is a pleasure to agree or disagree with each of you. Unionblue..........I still believe that slavery was not the sole reason for the war being started. I have stated before, that it may have been the match, but it wasn't the powder. Times up, so goes the news!
Your points are well received. I believe you will find, without exception, that contributors to this board try mightily to see things as they were seen at the time. You won't find anyone who considers slavery a moral wrong looking at it with today's eyes -- there were a great many then who also considered it a moral wrong.
Meanwhile, I join you in your salute to the contributors as seekers of truth -- regardless of preconceptions and history books. This is what makes this board the superior of pretending CW discussion groups. There is apparent a genuine effort to learn! Your perception is right on!
Morgan: "Eager to proceed with the Chiriqui project, on August 14, 1862, Lincoln met with five free black ministers, the first time a delegation of their race was invited to the White House on a matter of public policy. The President made no effort to engage in conversation with the visitors, who were bluntly informed that they had been invited to listen. Lincoln did not mince words, but candidly told the group:
"... We look to our condition, owing to the existence of the two races on this continent. I need not recount to you the effects upon white men growing out of the institution of slavery. I believe in its general evil effects on the white race.
"See our present condition -- the country engaged in war! -- our white men cutting one another's throats, none knowing how far it will extend; and then consider what we know to be the truth. But for your race among us there could not be war, although many men engaged on either side do not care for you one way or the other. Nevertheless, I repeat, without the institution of slavery, and the colored race as a basis, the war would not have an existence.
"It is better for us both, therefore, to be separated.
"An excellent site for black resettlement, Lincoln went on, was available in Central America. It had good harbors and an abundance of coal that would permit the colony to be quickly put on a firm financial footing. The President concluded by asking the delegation to determine if a number of freedmen with their families would be willing to go as soon as arrangements could be made."
--------------------------
Morgan once again takes Lincoln's comments completely out of context to make it seem as though he was interested only in the white race, when a look at what Lincoln said makes it plain that he was interested in both races.
Let's look at the record for this meeting in its entirety:
[begin quote]
Address on Colonization to a Deputation of Negroes [1]
previous section | next section
August 14, 1862
This afternoon the President of the United States gave audience to a Committee of colored men at the White House. They were introduced by the Rev. J. Mitchell, Commissioner of Emigration. E. M. Thomas, the Chairman, remarked that they were there by invitation to hear what the Executive had to say to them. Having all been seated, the President, after a few preliminary observations, informed them that a sum of money had been appropriated by Congress, and placed at his disposition for the purpose of aiding the colonization in some country of the people, or a portion of them, of African descent, thereby making it his duty, as it had for a long time been his inclination, to favor that cause; and why, he asked, should the people of your race be colonized, and where? Why should they leave this country? This is, perhaps, the first question for proper consideration. You and we are different races. We have between us a broader difference than exists between almost any other two races. Whether it is right or wrong I need not discuss, but this physical difference is a great disadvantage to us both, as I think your race suffer very greatly, many of them by living among us, while ours suffer from your presence. In a word we suffer on each side. If this is admitted, it affords a reason at least why we should be separated. You here are freemen I suppose.
A VOICE: Yes, sir.
The President---Perhaps you have long been free, or all your lives. Your race are suffering, in my judgment, the greatest wrong inflicted on any people. But even when you cease to be slaves, you are yet far removed from being placed on an equality with the white race. You are cut off from many of the advantages which the other race enjoy. The aspiration of men is to enjoy equality with the best when free, but on this broad continent, not a single man of your race is made the equal of a single man of ours. Go where you are treated the best, and the ban is still upon you.
I do not propose to discuss this, but to present it as a fact with which we have to deal. I cannot alter it if I would. It is a fact, about which we all think and feel alike, I and you. We look to our condition, owing to the existence of the two races on this continent. I need not recount to you the effects upon white men, growing out of the institution of Slavery. I believe in its general evil effects on the white race. See our present condition---the country engaged in war!---our white men cutting one another's throats, none knowing how far it will extend; and then consider what we know to be the truth. But for your race among us there could not be war, although many men engaged on either side do not care for you one way or the other. Nevertheless, I repeat, without the institution of Slavery and the colored race as a basis, the war could not have an existence.
It is better for us both, therefore, to be separated. I know that there are free men among you, who even if they could better their condition are not as much inclined to go out of the country as those, who being slaves could obtain their freedom on this condition. I suppose one of the principal difficulties in the way of colonization is that the free colored man cannot see that his comfort would be advanced by it. You may believe you can live in Washington or elsewhere in the United States the remainder of your life [as easily], perhaps more so than you can in any foreign country, and hence you may come to the conclusion that you have nothing to do with the idea of going to a foreign country. This is (I speak in no unkind sense) an extremely selfish view of the case.
But you ought to do something to help those who are not so fortunate as yourselves. There is an unwillingness on the part of our people, harsh as it may be, for you free colored people to remain with us. Now, if you could give a start to white people, you would open a wide door for many to be made free. If we deal with those who are not free at the beginning, and whose intellects are clouded by Slavery, we have very poor materials to start with. If intelligent colored men, such as are before me, would move in this matter, much might be accomplished. It is exceedingly important that we have men at the beginning capable of thinking as white men, and not those who have been systematically oppressed.
There is much to encourage you. For the sake of your race you should sacrifice something of your present comfort for the purpose of being as grand in that respect as the white people. It is a cheering thought throughout life that something can be done to ameliorate the condition of those who have been subject to the hard usage of the world. It is difficult to make a man miserable while he feels he is worthy of himself, and claims kindred to the great God who made him. In the American Revolutionary war sacrifices were made by men engaged in it; but they were cheered by the future. Gen. Washington himself endured greater physical hardships than if he had remained a British subject. Yet he was a happy man, because he was engaged in benefiting his race---something for the children of his neighbors, having none of his own.
The colony of Liberia has been in existence a long time. In a certain sense it is a success. The old President of Liberia, Roberts, has just been with me---the first time I ever saw him. He says they have within the bounds of that colony between 300,000 and 400,000 people, or more than in some of our old States, such as Rhode Island or Delaware, or in some of our newer States, and less than in some of our larger ones. They are not all American colonists, or their descendants. Something less than 12,000 have been sent thither from this country. Many of the original settlers have died, yet, like people elsewhere, their offspring outnumber those deceased.
The question is if the colored people are persuaded to go anywhere, why not there? One reason for an unwillingness to do so is that some of you would rather remain within reach of the country of your nativity. I do not know how much attachment you may have toward our race. It does not strike me that you have the greatest reason to love them. But still you are attached to them at all events.
The place I am thinking about having for a colony is in Central America. It is nearer to us than Liberia---not much more than one-fourth as far as Liberia, and within seven days' run by steamers. Unlike Liberia it is on a great line of travel---it is a highway. The country is a very excellent one for any people, and with great natural resources and advantages, and especially because of the similarity of climate with your native land---thus being suited to your physical condition.
The particular place I have in view is to be a great highway from the Atlantic or Caribbean Sea to the Pacific Ocean, and this particular place has all the advantages for a colony. On both sides there are harbors among the finest in the world. Again, there is evidence of very rich coal mines. A certain amount of coal is valuable in any country, and there may be more than enough for the wants of the country. Why I attach so much importance to coal is, it will afford an opportunity to the inhabitants for immediate employment till they get ready to settle permanently in their homes.
If you take colonists where there is no good landing, there is a bad show; and so where there is nothing to cultivate, and of which to make a farm. But if something is started so that you can get your daily bread as soon as you reach there, it is a great advantage. Coal land is the best thing I know of with which to commence an enterprise.
To return, you have been talked to upon this subject, and told that a speculation is intended by gentlemen, who have an interest in the country, including the coal mines. We have been mistaken all our lives if we do not know whites as well as blacks look to their self-interest. Unless among those deficient of intellect everybody you trade with makes something. You meet with these things here as elsewhere.
If such persons have what will be an advantage to them, the question is whether it cannot be made of advantage to you. You are intelligent, and know that success does not as much depend on external help as on self-reliance. Much, therefore, depends upon yourselves. As to the coal mines, I think I see the means available for your self-reliance.
I shall, if I get a sufficient number of you engaged, have provisions made that you shall not be wronged. If you will engage in the enterprise I will spend some of the money intrusted to me. I am not sure you will succeed. The Government may lose the money, but we cannot succeed unless we try; but we think, with care, we can succeed.
The political affairs in Central America are not in quite as satisfactory condition as I wish. There are contending factions in that quarter; but it is true all the factions are agreed alike on the subject of colonization, and want it, and are more generous than we are here. To your colored race they have no objection. Besides, I would endeavor to have you made equals, and have the best assurance that you should be the equals of the best.
The practical thing I want to ascertain is whether I can get a number of able-bodied men, with their wives and children, who are willing to go, when I present evidence of encouragement and protection. Could I get a hundred tolerably intelligent men, with their wives and children, to ``cut their own fodder,'' so to speak? Can I have fifty? If I could find twenty-five able-bodied men, with a mixture of women and children, good things in the family relation, I think I could make a successful commencement.
I want you to let me know whether this can be done or not. This is the practical part of my wish to see you. These are subjects of very great importance, worthy of a month's study, [instead] of a speech delivered in an hour. I ask you then to consider seriously not pertaining to yourselves merely, nor for your race, and ours, for the present time, but as one of the things, if successfully managed, for the good of mankind---not confined to the present generation, but as
``From age to age descends the lay,
To millions yet to be,
Till far its echoes roll away,
Into eternity.''
The above is merely given as the substance of the President's remarks.
The Chairman of the delegation briefly replied that ``they would hold a consultation and in a short time give an answer.'' The President said: ``Take your full time---no hurry at all.''
The delegation then withdrew.
[end quote] [Collected Works of Abraham Lincoln, Vol 5, pp. 370-375]
As we can see from the beginning of the record, the President did make some opening observations. Also, we have to stress the fact that this was the first time a delegation of black men had been received into the White House for a policy meeting.
One of the first things Lincoln says is, "We have between us a broader difference than exists between almost any other two races. Whether it is right or wrong I need not discuss, but this physical difference is a great disadvantage to us both, as I think your race suffer very greatly, many of them by living among us, while ours suffer from your presence. In a word we suffer on each side. If this is admitted, it affords a reason at least why we should be separated."
He also says, "Your race are suffering, in my judgment, the greatest wrong inflicted on any people. But even when you cease to be slaves, you are yet far removed from being placed on an equality with the white race. You are cut off from many of the advantages which the other race enjoy. The aspiration of men is to enjoy equality with the best when free, but on this broad continent, not a single man of your race is made the equal of a single man of ours. Go where you are treated the best, and the ban is still upon you."
Remember also that Lincoln had already drafted the Emancipation Proclamation at this time, so he is dealing with the subject of emancipation and what to do after emancipation in what he knew was a very racist country.
"But at the same time, Lincoln began preparing public opinion for a proclamation of freedom if one was to be issued. Because one of the chief objections to emancipation was the widespread belief that whites and blacks could never live together harmoniously, he revived his long-cherished idea of colonizing free blacks outside the United States. On August 14 he summoned a delegation of African-American leaders to the White House in order to discuss future relations between blacks and whites. 'You and we are different races,' he reminded them. 'We have between us a broader difference than exists between almost any other two races.' Nowhere in America were blacks treated as equals of whites. 'It is better for us both, therefore, to be separated." [David H. Donald, Lincoln, p. 367]
Morgan: "Rev. Edwin Thomas, the chairman of the black delegation, informed the President in a letter of August 16 that while he had originally opposed colonization, after becoming acquainted with the facts he now favored it. He asked Lincoln's authorization to travel among his black friends and co-workers to convince them of the virtues of emigration."
--------------------
Here is the text of Thomas' letter:
[begin quote]
Washington Augt 16th 1862
Sir
We would respectfully Suggest that it is necessary that we Should confer with leading colored men in Phila New York and Boston upon this movement of emigration to the point recommended in your address
We were entirely hostile to the movement until all the advantages were so ably brought to our views by you and we believe that our friends and co-laborers for our race in those cities will when the Subject is explained by us to them join heartily in Sustaining Such a movement
It is therefore Suggested in addition to what is Stated that you authorize two of us to proceed to those cities and place your views before them to facilitate and promote the object. We desire no appointment only a letter from your hand Saying you wish u s to consult with our leading friends. As this is part of the movement to obtain a proper plan of colonization we would respectfully Suggest to your Excellency that the necessary expenses of the two (or more if you desire) be paid from the fund appropriated.
It is our belief that Such a conference will lead to an active and zealous Support of this measure by the leading minds of our people and that this Support will lead to the realization of the fullest Success, within the Short time of two weeks from our departure the assurance can be Sent you of the results of our mission and that a Success
I have the honor to be your
Excellencies Obt St
Edward M. Thomas
chairman
[end quote]
It seems that more than just Rev. Thomas were convinced by Lincoln's words.
As we've seen, Morgan takes Lincoln's words out of context in several areas, and he ignores the fact that Lincoln's purpose in championing colonization was humanitarian, born out of the conviction that racism was so ingrained in the United States that blacks could never be treated on an equal basis. Morgan tries to paint Lincoln as a rabid white supremacist who wanted to get rid of all blacks, but Lincoln's plan was for voluntary colonization and was an example of the compassion he had for his fellow men.
1. Attack the fort, with the consequence that you allow the U.S.A. to embrace its beloved oxymoron, a “defensive” invasion of the Confederacy.
2. Don’t attack the fort, and engage in negotiations. Lincoln would then prevaricate and stonewall indefinitely. The result would be to invite the fury of the Southern public and the ridicule of international public opinion. What credibility does a new “national” government have if it cannot even control the forts in its own harbours?
------------------------
Bill, actually I think you ignore what Davis was actually trying to do. With the war started, the upper south has to get off the fence. Davis was trying to get all 7 states of the upper south into the confederacy. If that happens, the Federals are faced with an insurmountable problem of subduing a confederacy that also includes Maryland, Kentucky, and Missouri.
Lincoln had the political nous to realise the advantage which he held once Anderson’s men occupied Sumter. He really could not lose, whatever the government in Montgomery did.
----------------------
He certainly could lose if all 7 upper south states joined the confederacy.
For those who say that the war resulted from Confederate aggression in Charleston Harbour, I simply ask whether there was ever any chance that Lincoln would have consented to recognise the independence of the Confederate States. If there was no chance (and I am unaware of anything that he ever said or wrote to indicate otherwise), it follows that a Federal invasion of the Confederacy was inevitable whatever happened with regard to Sumter. It was inevitable regardless of the number of volunteers that Montgomery sought to enlist. It was inevitable regardless of whether the new nation created an army or not.
-----------------------
No, it wasn't. Lincoln was playing for time. He perceived that if he took a medium course between coercion and acquiescence in secession, then eventually the seceded states would come to their senses and return to the Union on their own. With that outcome, no invasion is necessary.
With all the Federal installations in the seceded states still held by the Federal government, he was in a fine pickle, particularly with those around populated centers, and most particularly with Ft Sumter.
-----------------------
Actually, only two Federal installations in the seceded states were still held by the Federal government. States took action to take over Federal installations, in some cases BEFORE the states had seceded. Fort Pickens and Fort Sumter were the only two Federal installations in seceded states that were still held by the Federal government.
I confess that I dwell in a little obscure hole in the wall and far from the madding crowd, which has it's own unique sense of charm, until you actually need something, like a decent library.
----------------
Dawna, you have my condolences.
I read, very thoroughly, the information that you provided in your last posting, with many thanks. And I do understand that there were countless times President Lincoln was quoted out of context, like any other politician, and many other times when he was not. I can't find anything to dispute Reverend James Mitchell's letter to Lincoln in May, 1862 ("Our republican system was meant for a homogeneous people. As long as blacks continue to live with the whites they constitute a threat to the national life. Family life may also collapse and the increase of mixed breed bastards may some day challenge the supremacy of the white man") as being out of context, but perhaps by now you have.
---------------------------
I have his complete 28-page document he sent to President Lincoln and after poring through it 3 times I cannot find that statement anywhere in it. This is the document dated 18 May 1862, and I believe it is the one Mr. Morgan refers to.
Now, Rev. Mitchell did say that our republican institutions required a homogeneous population, and he was against the mixing of the races, but that was a view commonly held throughout the country in the 1860s. Indeed, it wasn't until relatively recently, within my own lifetime, that it became acceptable for blacks and whites to intermarry throughout the country.
To touch on the Chiriqui Project briefly, it would seem that Frederick Douglass was deeply angered when he was informed of President Lincoln's meeting regarding the shipment of blacks to Chiriqui, and to quote Mr. Douglass' reaction, "It expresses merely the desire to get rid of them, and reminds one of the politeness with which a man might try to bow out of his house some troublesome creditor or the witness of some old guilt." I think that this statement stands alone and would be difficult to take out of context.
-----------------------
Douglass was against colonization, that's true. And he helped persuade Lincoln that colonization was the wrong way to go. Frederick Douglass said of Lincoln, "I was never more quickly or more completely put at ease in the presence of a great man than that of Abraham Lincoln." Douglass praised Lincoln for always treating him (Douglass) as a complete equal. [William Lee Miller, Lincoln's Virtues, pages 40-41]
To borrow a phrase from Ole, I have no wish to "whang on the deceased dobbin, " but it is very difficult for me to regard President Lincoln as the "Great Emancipator" or noble liberator of all time.
------------------------
Who was it who issued the Emancipation Proclamation? Who lobbied Congress extensively to pass the 13th Amendment? Who called for giving blacks the right to vote in Louisiana? Who spoke out against slavery his entire political life?
It appears that you believe that the mass exodus of black people out of America would have been for their own good,
------------------------
No. I have said consistently that this was what Lincoln believed.
and I suppose that to be true, if it is from the viewpoint that no one, including President Lincoln, thought blacks would ever achieve racial equality - with that belief freedom was bound to fail. Fair enough. But don't wrap it under the guise of liberating a people, only to enslave them again in coal mines and in other countries where opportunties were meagre and the success rate of adaption, minimal.
-------------------
They wouldn't be enslaved again. That is a misrepresentation of the plan.
They would be paid for all the work they did, and it was the belief of everyone involved in the project that they would thrive in the new country. Whether they were right or wrong doesn't matter right now.
Many blacks wanted to stay in the United States, but didn't have that option under President Lincoln's colonization program.
----------------------
That is absolutely untrue, Dawna. Lincoln was ALWAYS for voluntary colonization.
CivilWarTalk.com -
A free and friendly Civil War community. 
Linear Mode
