The Writings of Abraham Lincoln, Complete

A >> Abraham Lincoln >> The Writings of Abraham Lincoln, Complete


I have made a speech, a copy of which I will send you by next mail.

Yours as ever,
A. LINCOLN.




REGARDING SPEECH ON MEXICAN WAR

TO WILLIAM H. HERNDON.

WASHINGTON, February 1, 1848.

DEAR WILLIAM:--Your letter of the 19th ultimo was received last night,
and for which I am much obliged. The only thing in it that I wish to talk
to you at once about is that because of my vote for Ashmun's amendment
you fear that you and I disagree about the war. I regret this, not
because of any fear we shall remain disagreed after you have read this
letter, but because if you misunderstand I fear other good friends may
also. That vote affirms that the war was unnecessarily and
unconstitutionally commenced by the President; and I will stake my life
that if you had been in my place you would have voted just as I did.
Would you have voted what you felt and knew to be a lie? I know you would
not. Would you have gone out of the House--skulked the vote? I expect
not. If you had skulked one vote, you would have had to skulk many more
before the end of the session. Richardson's resolutions, introduced
before I made any move or gave any vote upon the subject, make the direct
question of the justice of the war; so that no man can be silent if he
would. You are compelled to speak; and your only alternative is to tell
the truth or a lie. I cannot doubt which you would do.

This vote has nothing to do in determining my votes on the questions of
supplies. I have always intended, and still intend, to vote supplies;
perhaps not in the precise form recommended by the President, but in a
better form for all purposes, except Locofoco party purposes. It is in
this particular you seem mistaken. The Locos are untiring in their
efforts to make the impression that all who vote supplies or take part in
the war do of necessity approve the President's conduct in the beginning
of it; but the Whigs have from the beginning made and kept the
distinction between the two. In the very first act nearly all the Whigs
voted against the preamble declaring that war existed by the act of
Mexico; and yet nearly all of them voted for the supplies. As to the Whig
men who have participated in the war, so far as they have spoken in my
hearing they do not hesitate to denounce as unjust the President's
conduct in the beginning of the war. They do not suppose that such
denunciation is directed by undying hatred to him, as The Register would
have it believed. There are two such Whigs on this floor (Colonel Haskell
and Major James) The former fought as a colonel by the side of Colonel
Baker at Cerro Gordo, and stands side by side with me in the vote that
you seem dissatisfied with. The latter, the history of whose capture with
Cassius Clay you well know, had not arrived here when that vote was
given; but, as I understand, he stands ready to give just such a vote
whenever an occasion shall present. Baker, too, who is now here, says the
truth is undoubtedly that way; and whenever he shall speak out, he will
say so. Colonel Doniphan, too, the favorite Whig of Missouri, and who
overran all Northern Mexico, on his return home in a public speech at St.
Louis condemned the administration in relation to the war. If I remember,
G. T. M. Davis, who has been through almost the whole war, declares in
favor of Mr. Clay; from which I infer that he adopts the sentiments of
Mr. Clay, generally at least. On the other hand, I have heard of but one
Whig who has been to the war attempting to justify the President's
conduct. That one was Captain Bishop, editor of the Charleston Courier,
and a very clever fellow. I do not mean this letter for the public, but
for you. Before it reaches you, you will have seen and read my pamphlet
speech, and perhaps been scared anew by it. After you get over your
scare, read it over again, sentence by sentence, and tell me honestly
what you think of it. I condensed all I could for fear of being cut off
by the hour rule, and when I got through I had spoken but forty-five
minutes.

Yours forever,
A. LINCOLN.




TO WILLIAM H. HERNDON.

WASHINGTON, February 2, 1848

DEAR WILLIAM:--I just take my pen to say that Mr. Stephens, of Georgia, a
little, slim, pale-faced, consumptive man, with a voice like Logan's, has
just concluded the very best speech of an hour's length I ever heard. My
old withered dry eyes are full of tears yet.

If he writes it out anything like he delivered it, our people shall see a
good many copies of it.

Yours truly,
A. LINCOLN.




ON THE MEXICAN WAR

TO WILLIAM H. HERNDON.

WASHINGTON, February 15, 1848.

DEAR WILLIAM:--Your letter of the 29th January was received last night.
Being exclusively a constitutional argument, I wish to submit some
reflections upon it in the same spirit of kindness that I know actuates
you. Let me first state what I understand to be your position. It is that
if it shall become necessary to repel invasion, the President may,
without violation of the Constitution, cross the line and invade the
territory of another country, and that whether such necessity exists in
any given case the President is the sole judge.

Before going further consider well whether this is or is not your
position. If it is, it is a position that neither the President himself,
nor any friend of his, so far as I know, has ever taken. Their only
positions are--first, that the soil was ours when the hostilities
commenced; and second, that whether it was rightfully ours or not,
Congress had annexed it, and the President for that reason was bound to
defend it; both of which are as clearly proved to be false in fact as you
can prove that your house is mine. The soil was not ours, and Congress
did not annex or attempt to annex it. But to return to your position.
Allow the President to invade a neighboring nation whenever he shall deem
it necessary to repel an invasion, and you allow him to do so whenever he
may choose to say he deems it necessary for such purpose, and you allow
him to make war at pleasure. Study to see if you can fix any limit to his
power in this respect, after having given him so much as you propose. If
to-day he should choose to say he thinks it necessary to invade Canada to
prevent the British from invading us, how could you stop him? You may say
to him,--"I see no probability of the British invading us"; but he will
say to you, "Be silent: I see it, if you don't."

The provision of the Constitution giving the war making power to Congress
was dictated, as I understand it, by the following reasons: kings had
always been involving and impoverishing their people in wars, pretending
generally, if not always, that the good of the people was the object.
This our convention understood to be the most oppressive of all kingly
oppressions, and they resolved to so frame the Constitution that no one
man should hold the power of bringing this oppression upon us. But your
view destroys the whole matter, and places our President where kings have
always stood. Write soon again.

Yours truly,
A. LINCOLN.




REPORT IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES,

MARCH 9, 1848.

Mr. Lincoln, from the Committee on the Postoffice and Post Roads, made
the following report:

The Committee on the Post-office and Post Roads, to whom was referred the
resolution of the House of Representatives entitled "An Act authorizing
postmasters at county seats of justice to receive subscriptions for
newspapers and periodicals, to be paid through the agency of the
Post-office Department, and for other purposes," beg leave to submit the
following report:

The committee have reason to believe that a general wish pervades the
community at large that some such facility as the proposed measure should
be granted by express law, for subscribing, through the agency of the
Post-office Department, to newspapers and periodicals which diffuse
daily, weekly, or monthly intelligence of passing events. Compliance with
this general wish is deemed to be in accordance with our republican
institutions, which can be best sustained by the diffusion of knowledge
and the due encouragement of a universal, national spirit of inquiry and
discussion of public events through the medium of the public press. The
committee, however, has not been insensible to its duty of guarding the
Post-office Department against injurious sacrifices for the
accomplishment of this object, whereby its ordinary efficacy might be
impaired or embarrassed. It has therefore been a subject of much
consideration; but it is now confidently hoped that the bill herewith
submitted effectually obviates all objections which might exist with
regard to a less matured proposition.

The committee learned, upon inquiry, that the Post-office Department, in
view of meeting the general wish on this subject, made the experiment
through one if its own internal regulations, when the new postage system
went into operation on the first of July, 1845, and that it was continued
until the thirtieth of September, 1847. But this experiment, for reasons
hereafter stated, proved unsatisfactory, and it was discontinued by order
of the Postmaster-General. As far as the committee can at present
ascertain, the following seem to have been the principal grounds of
dissatisfaction in this experiment:

(1) The legal responsibility of postmasters receiving newspaper
subscriptions, or of their sureties, was not defined.

(2) The authority was open to all postmasters instead of being limited to
those of specific offices.

(3) The consequence of this extension of authority was that, in
innumerable instances, the money, without the previous knowledge or
control of the officers of the department who are responsible for the
good management of its finances, was deposited in offices where it was
improper such funds should be placed; and the repayment was ordered, not
by the financial officers, but by the postmasters, at points where it was
inconvenient to the department so to disburse its funds.

(4) The inconvenience of accumulating uncertain and fluctuating sums at
small offices was felt seriously in consequent overpayments to
contractors on their quarterly collecting orders; and, in case of private
mail routes, in litigation concerning the misapplication of such funds to
the special service of supplying mails.

(5) The accumulation of such funds on draft offices could not be known to
the financial clerks of the department in time to control it, and too
often this rendered uncertain all their calculations of funds in hand.

(6) The orders of payment were for the most part issued upon the
principal offices, such as New York, Philadelphia, Boston, Baltimore,
etc., where the large offices of publishers are located, causing an
illimitable and uncontrollable drain of the department funds from those
points where it was essential to husband them for its own regular
disbursements. In Philadelphia alone this drain averaged $5000 per
quarter; and in other cities of the seaboard it was proportionate.

(7) The embarrassment of the department was increased by the illimitable,
uncontrollable, and irresponsible scattering of its funds from
concentrated points suitable for its distributions, to remote, unsafe,
and inconvenient offices, where they could not be again made available
till collected by special agents, or were transferred at considerable
expense into the principal disbursing offices again.

(8) There was a vast increase of duties thrown upon the limited force
before necessary to conduct the business of the department; and from the
delay of obtaining vouchers impediments arose to the speedy settlement of
accounts with present or retired post-masters, causing postponements
which endangered the liability of sureties under the act of limitations,
and causing much danger of an increase of such cases.

(9) The most responsible postmasters (at the large offices) were ordered
by the least responsible (at small offices) to make payments upon their
vouchers, without having the means of ascertaining whether these vouchers
were genuine or forged, or if genuine, whether the signers were in or out
of office, or solvent or defaulters.

(10) The transaction of this business for subscribers and publishers at
the public expense, an the embarrassment, inconvenience, and delay of the
department's own business occasioned by it, were not justified by any
sufficient remuneration of revenue to sustain the department, as required
in every other respect with regard to its agency.

The committee, in view of these objections, has been solicitous to frame
a bill which would not be obnoxious to them in principle or in practical
effect.

It is confidently believed that by limiting the offices for receiving
subscriptions to less than one tenth of the number authorized by the
experiment already tried, and designating the county seat in each county
for the purpose, the control of the department will be rendered
satisfactory; particularly as it will be in the power of the Auditor, who
is the officer required by law to check the accounts, to approve or
disapprove of the deposits, and to sanction not only the payments, but to
point out the place of payment. If these payments should cause a drain on
the principal offices of the seaboard, it will be compensated by the
accumulation of funds at county seats, where the contractors on those
routes can be paid to that extent by the department's drafts, with more
local convenience to themselves than by drafts on the seaboard offices.

The legal responsibility for these deposits is defined, and the
accumulation of funds at the point of deposit, and the repayment at
points drawn upon, being known to and controlled by the Auditor, will not
occasion any such embarrassments as were before felt; the record kept by
the Auditor on the passing of the certificates through his hands will
enable him to settle accounts without the delay occasioned by vouchers
being withheld; all doubt or uncertainty as to the genuineness of
certificates, or the propriety of their issue, will be removed by the
Auditor's examination and approval; and there can be no risk of loss of
funds by transmission, as the certificate will not be payable till
sanctioned by the Auditor, and after his sanction the payor need not pay
it unless it is presented by the publisher or his known clerk or agent.

The main principle of equivalent for the agency of the department is
secured by the postage required to be paid upon the transmission of the
certificates, augmenting adequately the post-office revenue.

The committee, conceiving that in this report all the difficulties of the
subject have been fully and fairly stated, and that these difficulties
have been obviated by the plan proposed in the accompanying bill, and
believing that the measure will satisfactorily meet the wants and wishes
of a very large portion of the community, beg leave to recommend its
adoption.




REPORT IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES,

MARCH 9, 1848.

Mr. Lincoln, from the Committee on the Postoffice and Post Roads, made
the following report:

The Committee on the Post-office and Post Roads, to whom was referred the
petition of H. M. Barney, postmaster at Brimfield, Peoria County,
Illinois, report: That they have been satisfied by evidence, that on the
15th of December, 1847, said petitioner had his store, with some fifteen
hundred dollars' worth of goods, together with all the papers of the
post-office, entirely destroyed by fire; and that the specie funds of the
office were melted down, partially lost and partially destroyed; that
this large individual loss entirely precludes the idea of embezzlement;
that the balances due the department of former quarters had been only
about twenty-five dollars; and that owing to the destruction of papers,
the exact amount due for the quarter ending December 31, 1847, cannot be
ascertained. They therefore report a joint resolution, releasing said
petitioner from paying anything for the quarter last mentioned.




REMARKS IN THE UNITED STATES HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES,
MARCH 29, 1848.

The bill for raising additional military force for limited time, etc.,
was reported from Committee on judiciary; similar bills had been reported
from Committee on, Public Lands and Military Committee.

Mr. Lincoln said if there was a general desire on the part of the House
to pass the bill now he should be glad to have it done--concurring, as he
did generally, with the gentleman from Arkansas [Mr. Johnson] that the
postponement might jeopard the safety of the proposition. If, however, a
reference was to be made, he wished to make a very few remarks in
relation to the several subjects desired by the gentlemen to be embraced
in amendments to the ninth section of the act of the last session of
Congress. The first amendment desired by members of this House had for
its only object to give bounty lands to such persons as had served for a
time as privates, but had never been discharged as such, because promoted
to office. That subject, and no other, was embraced in this bill. There
were some others who desired, while they were legislating on this
subject, that they should also give bounty lands to the volunteers of the
War of 1812. His friend from Maryland said there were no such men. He
[Mr. L.] did not say there were many, but he was very confident there
were some. His friend from Kentucky near him, [Mr. Gaines] told him he
himself was one.

There was still another proposition touching this matter; that was, that
persons entitled to bounty lands should by law be entitled to locate
these lands in parcels, and not be required to locate them in one body,
as was provided by the existing law.

Now he had carefully drawn up a bill embracing these three separate
propositions, which he intended to propose as a substitute for all these
bills in the House, or in Committee of the Whole on the State of the
Union, at some suitable time. If there was a disposition on the part of
the House to act at once on this separate proposition, he repeated that,
with the gentlemen from Arkansas, he should prefer it lest they should
lose all. But if there was to be a reference, he desired to introduce his
bill embracing the three propositions, thus enabling the committee and
the House to act at the same time, whether favorably or unfavorably, upon
all. He inquired whether an amendment was now in order.

The Speaker replied in the negative.




TO ARCHIBALD WILLIAMS.

WASHINGTON, April 30, 1848.

DEAR WILLIAMS:--I have not seen in the papers any evidence of a movement
to send a delegate from your circuit to the June convention. I wish to
say that I think it all-important that a delegate should be sent. Mr.
Clay's chance for an election is just no chance at all. He might get New
York, and that would have elected in 1844, but it will not now, because
he must now, at the least, lose Tennessee, which he had then, and in
addition the fifteen new votes of Florida, Texas, Iowa, and Wisconsin. I
know our good friend Browning is a great admirer of Mr. Clay, and I
therefore fear he is favoring his nomination. If he is, ask him to
discard feeling, and try if he can possibly, as a matter of judgment,
count the votes necessary to elect him.

In my judgment we can elect nobody but General Taylor; and we cannot
elect him without a nomination. Therefore don't fail to send a delegate.

Your friend as ever,

A. LINCOLN.




REMARKS IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES,

MAY 11, 1848.

A bill for the admission of Wisconsin into the Union had been passed.

Mr. Lincoln moved to reconsider the vote by which the bill was passed. He
stated to the House that he had made this motion for the purpose of
obtaining an opportunity to say a few words in relation to a point raised
in the course of the debate on this bill, which he would now proceed to
make if in order. The point in the case to which he referred arose on the
amendment that was submitted by the gentleman from Vermont [Mr. Collamer]
in Committee of the Whole on the State of the Union, and which was
afterward renewed in the House, in relation to the question whether the
reserved sections, which, by some bills heretofore passed, by which an
appropriation of land had been made to Wisconsin, had been enhanced in
value, should be reduced to the minimum price of the public lands. The
question of the reduction in value of those sections was to him at this
time a matter very nearly of indifference. He was inclined to desire that
Wisconsin should be obliged by having it reduced. But the gentleman from
Indiana [Mr. C. B. Smith], the chairman of the Committee on Territories,
yesterday associated that question with the general question, which is
now to some extent agitated in Congress, of making appropriations of
alternate sections of land to aid the States in making internal
improvements, and enhancing the price of the sections reserved, and the
gentleman from Indiana took ground against that policy. He did not make
any special argument in favor of Wisconsin, but he took ground generally
against the policy of giving alternate sections of land, and enhancing
the price of the reserved sections. Now he [Mr. Lincoln] did not at this
time take the floor for the purpose of attempting to make an argument on
the general subject. He rose simply to protest against the doctrine which
the gentleman from Indiana had avowed in the course of what he [Mr.
Lincoln] could not but consider an unsound argument.

It might, however, be true, for anything he knew, that the gentleman from
Indiana might convince him that his argument was sound; but he [Mr.
Lincoln] feared that gentleman would not be able to convince a majority
in Congress that it was sound. It was true the question appeared in a
different aspect to persons in consequence of a difference in the point
from which they looked at it. It did not look to persons residing east of
the mountains as it did to those who lived among the public lands. But,
for his part, he would state that if Congress would make a donation of
alternate sections of public land for the purpose of internal
improvements in his State, and forbid the reserved sections being sold at
$1.25, he should be glad to see the appropriation made; though he should
prefer it if the reserved sections were not enhanced in price. He
repeated, he should be glad to have such appropriations made, even though
the reserved sections should be enhanced in price. He did not wish to be
understood as concurring in any intimation that they would refuse to
receive such an appropriation of alternate sections of land because a
condition enhancing the price of the reserved sections should be attached
thereto. He believed his position would now be understood: if not, he
feared he should not be able to make himself understood.

But, before he took his seat, he would remark that the Senate during the
present session had passed a bill making appropriations of land on that
principle for the benefit of the State in which he resided the State of
Illinois. The alternate sections were to be given for the purpose of
constructing roads, and the reserved sections were to be enhanced in
value in consequence. When that bill came here for the action of this
House--it had been received, and was now before the Committee on Public
Lands--he desired much to see it passed as it was, if it could be put in
no more favorable form for the State of Illinois. When it should be
before this House, if any member from a section of the Union in which
these lands did not lie, whose interest might be less than that which he
felt, should propose a reduction of the price of the reserved sections to
$1.25, he should be much obliged; but he did not think it would be well
for those who came from the section of the Union in which the lands lay
to do so.--He wished it, then, to be understood that he did not join in
the warfare against the principle which had engaged the minds of some
members of Congress who were favorable to the improvements in the western
country. There was a good deal of force, he admitted, in what fell from
the chairman of the Committee on Territories. It might be that there was
no precise justice in raising the price of the reserved sections to $2.50
per acre. It might be proper that the price should be enhanced to some
extent, though not to double the usual price; but he should be glad to
have such an appropriation with the reserved sections at $2.50; he should
be better pleased to have the price of those sections at something less;
and he should be still better pleased to have them without any
enhancement at all.

There was one portion of the argument of the gentleman from Indiana, the
chairman of the Committee on Territories [Mr. Smith], which he wished to
take occasion to say that he did not view as unsound. He alluded to the
statement that the General Government was interested in these internal
improvements being made, inasmuch as they increased the value of the
lands that were unsold, and they enabled the government to sell the lands
which could not be sold without them. Thus, then, the government gained
by internal improvements as well as by the general good which the people
derived from them, and it might be, therefore, that the lands should not
be sold for more than $1.50 instead of the price being doubled. He,
however, merely mentioned this in passing, for he only rose to state, as
the principle of giving these lands for the purposes which he had
mentioned had been laid hold of and considered favorably, and as there
were some gentlemen who had constitutional scruples about giving money
for these purchases who would not hesitate to give land, that he was not
willing to have it understood that he was one of those who made war
against that principle. This was all he desired to say, and having
accomplished the object with which he rose, he withdrew his motion to
reconsider.