Abraham Lincoln and the Abolition of Slavery in the United StatesLeland, Charles Godfrey
History
Abraham Lincoln and the Abolition of Slavery in the United States
Leland, Charles Godfrey
Lincoln, Abraham, 1809-1865; United States -- History -- Civil War, 1861-1865
It was on the 12th of March, 1861, that the rebel or Confederate
States sent Commissioners to the United States to adjust matters in
reference to secession. Mr. Seward refused to receive them, on the
ground that they _had not withdrawn_ from the Union, and were unable to
do so unless it were by the authority of a National Convention acting
according to the Constitution of the United States. On the 9th of April
the Commissioners left, declaring in a letter that “they accepted the
gage of battle.” As yet there was no decided policy in the North, and
prominent Democrats like Douglas were not in favour of compelling the
seceding States to remain. Mr. Everett was preaching love, forgiveness,
and union, while the Confederate Government was seizing on “all the
arsenals, forts, custom-houses, post-offices, ships, ordnance, and
material of war belonging to the United States, within the seceding
States.” In fact, the South knew exactly what it meant to do, and was
doing it vigorously, while the North was entirely undecided. In the
spring of 1861, Congress had adjourned without making any preparation
for the tremendous and imminent crisis.
But the entire South had not as yet seceded. The Border States were not
in favour of war. In the words of Arnold, “to arouse sectional feeling
and prejudice, and secure co-operation and unanimity, it was deemed
necessary to precipitate measures and bring on a conflict of arms.” It
was generally felt that the first blood shed would bring all the Slave
States into union. The anti-war party was so powerful in the North,
that it now appears almost certain that, if President Lincoln had
proceeded at once to put down the rebellion with a strong hand, there
would have been a counter-rebellion in the North. For not doing this he
was bitterly blamed, but time has justified him. By his forbearance,
Maryland, Kentucky, and Missouri were undoubtedly kept in the Federal
Union. His wisdom was also shown in two other respects, as soon as
it was possible to do so. There had existed for years in New York an
immense slave-trading business, headed by a Spaniard named Juarez.
Vessels were bought almost openly, and Government officials were bribed
to let these pirates loose. This infamous traffic was very soon brought
to an end, so far as the United States were concerned. Another task,
which was rapidly and well performed, was the “sifting out” of rebels,
or rebel sympathisers, from Government offices, where they abounded
and acted as spies. Even General Scott, an old man full of honour, who
was at the head of the army, though true to the Union, was Southern by
sympathy and opposed to coercion, and most of the officers of the army
were like him in this respect.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account