Lincoln Lincoln Lies ?

[W. Richardson]

Lincoln on the abolition of slavery in the District Of Columbia

While In Congress worked out a formula of conservative legislation for the abolition of slavery in the District Of Columbia.

Lincoln The President: Vol. 1 Springfield To Gettysburg Page 17
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I have no thought of recommending the abolition of slavery in the District Of Columbia.

Letter to Hon. John A. Gilmer
Dec. 15th, 1860
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I have never doubted the constitutional authority of congress to abolish slavery in this District; and I have ever desired to see the national capital freed from the institution in some satisfactory way.

Collected Works: Vol. 5 Page 192
Message To Congress
April 16th, 1862
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Lincoln was not evolving he was flip flopping!!

Respectfully,

William Richardson

edited by glorybound to remove red type which is reserved for moderators/staff. 6/18, 2058

 

[DanF]

I don't believe that Lincoln was in Congress in 1949.

What is the lies or contradiction? The first is form a letter written before he took office, with the uproar in the salve states over his election and threats of secession it is not surprising that he indicates he has no intention of fueling the fire by advocating the abolition of slavery in D.C.

In the second he expresses what He believes was within the power of congress to do and what he himself desired.

That is not flip flopping that is sound politics, only a fool given the tensions of the time of the first letter would have advocated abolishing slavery in the D.C.

 

[JohnnyRebCSA]

Does anything surprise you about him? Someone tell me how he was an attorney representing the railroad but would help people sue the railroad also.

 

[Sneathen]

Regarding the first quote, before the 20th century Presidents did not always do a whole lot of recommending what laws needed to created, passed and repealed and what not, that was up to the congress. John Adams for example refused to intervene in domestic issues, instead implying that was up to Congress and when needed for domestic issues they would consult him.

 

[W. Richardson]

I don't believe that Lincoln was in Congress in 1949.

What is the lies or contradiction? The first is form a letter written before he took office, with the uproar in the salve states over his election and threats of secession it is not surprising that he indicates he has no intention of fueling the fire by advocating the abolition of slavery in D.C.

In the second he expresses what He believes was within the power of congress to do and what he himself desired.

That is not flip flopping that is sound politics, only a fool given the tensions of the time of the first letter would have advocated abolishing slavery in the D.C.

You are correct he was not in congress in 1849. I entered the in-correct year. It is flip flopping and lying, but however you are entitled to your opinion.

" I have NO thought " yet he seems to have had a THOUGHT in congress ?

Respectfully,

William Richardson

 

[Old_Glory]

Lincoln was a lawyer and a master politician. That's all you need to know in regards to changing beliefs to fit a need for political gain. It's hard realizing that some of your childhood heroes were not perfect, and said and did horrible things by today's standards. It's still hard for me to think about George Washington owning slaves, or Lincoln and the things that he allowed to happen to the South during the war. We must look at the good these men did, along with the evil. Simply looking at only one or the other produces a distorted and fanatical reality.

 

[Glorybound]

This thread reminds me of the Jeff Davis-bashing thread we had a while back that turned ugly. Please keep your comments civil and use words that are not inflammatory or insulting. Thank you for your help.

 

[W. Richardson]

Lincoln was a lawyer and a master politician. That's all you need to know in regards to changing beliefs to fit a need for political gain. It's hard realizing that some of your childhood heroes were not perfect, and said and did horrible things by today's standards. It's still hard for me to think about George Washington owning slaves, or Lincoln and the things that he allowed to happen to the South during the war. We must look at the good these men did, along with the evil. Simply looking at only one or the other produces a distorted and fanatical reality.

And yet Lincoln reassured the South he would not and could not interfere with slavery and wanted them to believe him. Yet I am sure you can see why they could not believe him. Lincoln was a lawyer I can't agree on the Master Politician. I will say he was cunning.

Respectfully,

William Richardson

 

[KeyserSoze]

Lincoln was not evolving he was flip flopping!!

A lot of that going around; witness Lee on secession and any rebel leader you care to name and their post rebellion memoirs.

 

[rpkennedy]

And yet Lincoln reassured the South he would not and could not interfere with slavery and wanted them to believe him. Yet I am sure you can see why they could not believe him. Lincoln was a lawyer I can't agree on the Master Politician. I will say he was cunning.

Respectfully,

William Richardson

Seceding gave him the ability to do something about slavery where it existed. He did not have the ability to do anything about slavery where it existed by his own admission but he was given that power when the South decided to rebel. His views did not change drastically in regards to slavery's expansion into the territories.

R

 

[W. Richardson]

Does anything surprise you about him? Someone tell me how he was an attorney representing the railroad but would help people sue the railroad also.

No, not at all. I am enjoying reading more on Lincoln and finding out all the historians seem to ingnore.

Respectfully,

William Richardson

 

[CharacterGroove]

The word "recommend" has meaning in the English language. It's a verb. Really, I'm not sure if this critique is based in ignorance or in bad faith. I hope the former.

In the event anybody is interested in context, here is the full letter to Mr. Gilmer of North Carolina:

Strictly confidential.
Hon. John A. Gilmer: Springfield, Ill. Dec 15, 1860.

My dear Sir--- Yours of the 10th is received. I am greatly disinclined to write a letter on the subject embraced in yours; and I would not do so, even privately as I do, were it not that I fear you might misconstrue my silence. Is it desired that I shall shift the ground upon which I have been elected? I can not do it. You need only to acquaint yourself with that ground, and press it on the attention of the South. It is all in print and easy of access. May I be pardoned if I ask whether even you have ever attempted to procure the reading of the Republican platform, or my speeches, by the Southern people? If not, what reason have I to expect that any additional production of mine would meet a better fate? It would make me appear as if I repented for the crime of having been elected, and was anxious to apologize and beg forgiveness. To so represent me, would be the principal use made of any letter I might now thrust upon the public. My old record cannot be so used; and that is precisely the reason that some new declaration is so much sought.

Now, my dear sir, be assured, that I am not questioning your candor; I am only pointing out, that, while a new letter would hurt the cause which I think a just one, you can quite as well effect every patriotic object with the old record. Carefully read pages 18, 19, 74, 75, 88, 89, & 267 of the volume of Joint Debates between Senator Douglas and myself, with the Republican Platform adopted at Chicago, and all your questions will be substantially answered. I have no thought of recommending the abolition of slavery in the District of Columbia, nor the slave trade among the slave states, even on the conditions indicated; and if I were to make such recommendation, it is quite clear Congress would not follow it.
As to employing slaves in Arsenals and Dockyards, it is a thing I never thought of in my life, to my recollection, till I saw your letter; and I may say of it, precisely as I have said of the two points above.

As to the use of patronage in the slave states, where there are few or no Republicans, I do not expect to inquire for the politics of the appointee, or whether he does or not own slaves. I intend in that matter to accommodate the people in the several localities, if they themselves will allow me to accommodate them. In one word, I never have been, am not now, and probably never shall be, in a mood of harassing the people, either North or South.

On the territorial question, I am inflexible, as you see my position in the book. On that, there is a difference between you and us; and it is the only substantial difference. You think slavery is right and ought to be extended; we think it is wrong and ought to be restricted. For this, neither has any just occasion to be angry with the other.

As to the state laws, mentioned in your sixth question, I really know very little of them. I never have read one. If any of them are in conflict with the fugitive slave clause, or any other part of the constitution, I certainly should be glad of their repeal; but I could hardly be justified, as a citizen of Illinois, or as President of the United States, to recommend the repeal of a statute of Vermont, or South Carolina.

With the assurance of my highest regards I subscribe myself Your obt. Servt., A. LINCOLN

P.S. The documents referred to, I suppose you will readily find in Washington. A. L.

 

[W. Richardson]

This thread reminds me of the Jeff Davis-bashing thread we had a while back that turned ugly. Please keep your comments civil and use words that are not inflammatory or insulting. Thank you for your help.

You mean this site hosted a Jeff Davis bashing thread ?

Respectfully,

William Richardson ?

 

[K Hale]

You mean this site hosted a Jeff Davis bashing thread ?

Respectfully,

William Richardson ?

Until it got shut down. As this one will be if it goes down the same path.

 

[DanF]

You are correct he was not in congress in 1849. I entered the in-correct year. It is flip flopping and lying, but however you are entitled to your opinion.

" I have NO thought " yet he seems to have had a THOUGHT in congress ?

Respectfully,

William Richardson

I think you are either simply unaware of the thought expressed there or intentionally misreading it. In saying, " have no thought of recommending the abolition of slavery in the District of Columbia," Lincoln is not saying he has never thought about it or desired it. He is obviously stating that recommending it is not in his plans as president. The full context of the letter would be helpful, but I have little doubt that is precisely what he means.

 

[W. Richardson]

Until it got shut down. As this one will be if it goes down the same path.

What I mean is was it a Jeff Davis thread that turned into a bashing and then shut down or was it opened as a Jeff Davis bashing thread ?

Respectfully,

William Richardson

 

[W. Richardson]

I think you are either simply unaware of the thought expressed there or intentionally misreading it. In saying, " have no thought of recommending the abolition of slavery in the District of Columbia," Lincoln is not saying he has never thought about it or desired it. He is obviously stating that recommending it is not in his plans as president. The full context of the letter would be helpful, but I have little doubt that is precisely what he means.

But yet that is exactly turned around an done. IMHO he intended to the whole time. It was one of his goals. He started on it while in congress and finished it during his presidency, while in between he denied he had and thought of doing so.

Respectfully,

William Richardson

 

[DanF]

CharacterGroove,

Thank you for the full text of the letter it shows precisely what I suspected it would, that Lincoln was responding to an inquiry as to his plans as President once he took office.

 

[Glorybound]

What I mean is was it a Jeff Davis thread that turned into a bashing and then shut down or was it opened as a Jeff Davis bashing thread ?

Respectfully,

William Richardson

-

The thread started out somewhat on an ominous note with negative anti-Davis overtones, such as this one was begun with anti-Lincoln overtones. The Davis thread went south pretty quickly and became unmanageable, so it was locked.

 

[DanF]

But yet that is exactly turned around an done. IMHO he intended to the whole time. It was one of his goals. He started on it while in congress and finished it during his presidency, while in between he denied he had and thought of doing so.

Respectfully,

William Richardson

Lincoln was quite clear from the beginning that he had no intention of interfering with the institution of Slavery where it already existed and that Congress had no power to interfere with slavery within the states. He was also clear that he was opposed to the institution of slavery. What he promised was that he would oppose the expansion of slavery into new territories or new states.