The Life of Abraham Lincoln (Arnold)/Chapter XXI
When Congress convened on the 5th of December, 1864, the President, in his annual message, earnestly recommended and urged the passage of the Constitutional amendment. Alluding to the elections which had lately been held, he said: "They show almost certainly that the next Congress will pass the measure if this does not. Hence there is only a question of time as to when the proposed amendment will go to the states for their action. And as it is to so go, at all events may we not agree that the sooner the better." He closed by saying: "While I remain in my present position I shall not attempt to retract or modify the emancipation proclamation, nor shall I return to slavery any person who is free by the terms of that proclamation, or by any of the acts of Congress. If the people should, by whatever mode or means, make it an Executive duty to re-enslave such persons; another, and not I must be their instrument to perform it." He thus linked his fortunes with the cause of emancipation: "'Sink or swim, live or die, survive or perish,' I give my heart and my hand to this measure."
Just before the meeting of the national convention at Baltimore, in 1864, to nominate candidates for President and Vice President--which will be more fully described hereafter--Senator Morgan, of New York, chairman of the national republican committee, at the request of the President called at the White House, and Mr. Lincoln said him: "Senator Morgan, I want you to mention in your speech when you call the convention to order, as its key note, and to put into the platform as the key-stone, the amendment of the Constitution abolishing and prohibiting slavery forever." This was done, the amendment was thus made the prominent issue, and was sanctioned by the people.
Mr. Lincoln hoped to induce some of the border state members, and war democrats who had at the last session voted against the proposition, to change their votes. To this end he sought interviews with them, and urged them to vote for the amendment. Among them was Mr. Rollins, a distinguished member of Congress from Missouri, and a warm personal friend. Mr. Rollins says:
"The President had several times in my presence expressed his deep anxiety in favor of the passage of this great measure. He and others had repeatedly counted votes in order to ascertain, as far as they could, the strength of the measure upon a second trial in the House. He was doubtful about its passage, and some ten days or two weeks before it came up for consideration in the House, I received a note from him, written in pencil on a card, while sitting at my desk in the House, stating that he wished to see me, and asking that I call on him at the White House. I responded that I would be there the next morning at nine o'clock. I was prompt in calling upon him and found him alone in his office. He received me in the most cordial manner, and said in his usual familiar way: 'Rollins, I have been wanting to talk to you for sometime about the thirteenth amendment proposed to the Constitution of the United States, which will have to be voted on now, before a great while.' I said: 'Well, I am here, and ready to talk upon that subject.' He said: 'You and I were old whigs, both of us followers of that great statesman, Henry Clay, and I tell you I never had an opinion upon the subject of slavery in my life that I did not get from him. I am very anxious that the war should be brought to a close at the earliest possible date, and I don't believe this can be accomplished as long as those fellows down South can rely upon the border states to help them; but if the members from the border states would unite, at least enough of them to pass the thirteenth amendment to the Constitution, they would soon see that they could not expect much help from that quarter, and be willing to give up their opposition and quit their war upon the government; this is my chief hope and main reliance to bring the war to a speedy close, and I have sent for you as an old whig friend to come and see me, that I might make an appeal to you to vote for this amendment. It is going to be very close, a few votes one way or the other will decide it.'
"To this I responded: 'Mr. President, so far as I am concerned you need not have sent for me to ascertain my views on this subject, for although I represent perhaps the strongest slave district in Missouri, and have the misfortune to be one of the largest slave-owners in the county where I reside, I had already determined to vote for the thirteenth amendment.' He arose from his chair, and grasping me by the hand, gave it a hearty shake, and said: 'I am most delighted to hear that.'
"He asked me how many more of the Missouri delegates in the House would vote for it. I said I could not tell; the republicans of course would; General Loan, Mr. Blow, Mr. Boyd, and Colonel McClurg. He said: 'Won't General Price vote for it? He is a good Union man.' I said I could not answer. 'Well, what about Governor King!' I told him I did not know. He then asked about Judges Hall and Norton. I said they would both vote against it, I thought.
"'Well,' he said, 'are you on good terms with Price and King?' I responded in the affirmative, and that I was on easy terms with the entire delegation. He then asked me if I would not talk with those who might be persuaded to vote for the amendment, and report to him as soon as I could find out what the prospect was. I answered that I would do so with pleasure, and remarked at the same time, that when I was a young man, in 1848, I was the whig competitor of King for Governor of Missouri and as he beat me very badly, I thought now he should pay me back by voting as I desired him on this important question. I promised the President I would talk to this gentleman upon the subject. He said: 'I would like you to talk to all the border state men whom you can approach properly, and tell them of my anxiety to have the measure pass; and let me know the prospect of the border state vote,' which I promised to do. He again said: 'The passage of this amendment will clinch the whole subject; it will bring the war, I have no
doubt, rapidly to a close.'"[1]
The debate on the subject in the House began on the 6th of January, 1865. Ashley of Ohio and Orth of Indiana spoke in its favor. Voorhees of Indiana opposed it, saying:
"When the sky shall again be clear over our heads, a peaceful sun illuminating the land, and our great household of states all at home in harmony once more, then will be the time to consider what changes, if any, this generation desire to make in the work of Washington, Madison, and the revered sages of our antiquity."[2]
Mr. Kasson, of Iowa, said:
"I would rather stand solitary, with my name recorded for this amendment, than to have all the honors which could be heaped upon me by any party in opposition to this proposition."[3]
Mr. Woodbridge, of Vermont, said:
"Coming from the Green Mountain state, where a good old judge fifty years ago said to a claimant, who claimed and presented a bill of sale for a slave: 'Show me a bill of sale from God Almighty, and your title will be recognized,' it is not necessary for me to say that in my judgment there can be no property in man... I want this resolution to pass, and then, when it (the war) does end, the beautiful statue of liberty which now crowns the majestic dome above our heads may look north and south, east and west, upon a free nation, untarnished by aught inconsistent with freedom; redeemed, regenerated, and disenthralled by the genius of universal emancipation."[4]
As has been said, one of the very ablest speeches in favor of the amendment was made by Rollins of Missouri. He said:
"The convention which recently assembled in my state, I learned from a telegram a morning or two ago, had adopted an amendment to our present state constitution, for the immediate emancipation of all the slaves in the state. I am no longer the owner of a slave, and I thank God for it. If the giving up of my slaves without complaint shall be a contribution upon my part, to promote the public good, to uphold the Constitution of the United States, to restore peace and preserve this Union, if I had owned a thousand slaves, they would most cheerfully have been given up. I say with all my heart, let them go; but let them not go without a sense of feeling and a proper regard on my part for the future of themselves and their offspring."[5]
Of the power of the slaveholders in ruling the republic, he used the following language:
"Sir, the peculiar friends of slavery have controlled the government for much the greater part of the time since its establishment, and but for their own wickedness and folly might have saved the institution, and had their full share in its management for many years to come. If they have lost the political control, all are blameless save themselves!
- "'But yesterday, the word of Cæsar might
- Have stood against the world; now lies he there,
- And none so poor to do him reverence.'"
Of the necessity of abolishing slavery to secure permanent peace, he said:[6]
"We never can have an entire peace as long as the institution of slavery remains as one of the recognized institutions of the country. It occors to me that the surest way to obtain peace is to dispose of the institution now."
Of Mr. Lincoln's proposition for compensated emancipation, he said:
"And, sir, if ever a people made a mistake on earth, it was the men of Kentucky, by whom I was somewhat governed myself, when three years ago they rejected the offer of the President of the United States, who, wiser than we were, seeing the difficulties before us, but seeing the bow of promise set in the sky, and knowing what was to come, proposed to us to sweep the institution of slavery from the border states, offering the assistance of the United States, to aid in compensating the loyal men of those states for their losses in labor and property."
Of the effects of slavery upon Missouri, he eloquently said:
"I come now to speak a word in reference to my own state of Missouri. She came into the Union as it were in the midst of a revolution. For the purpose only of having a few thousand slaves there, the whole continent shook with the agitation of this Missouri question. We were fighting for the privilege of holding a few slaves in bondage in that great state. We forgot the paramount good in this miserable struggle... Look at Illinois, just across the Father of Waters. She came into the Union in 1818, two years before Missouri, and with less population, fewer mineral resources, not so many rivers, no better facilities for commerce, yet she has four thousand miles of railroad, while Missouri has only twelve hundred. Illinois has a prosperous, happy, and peaceful population of two millions; while we have only half this number, and our people are leaving in every direction, seeking homes in the territories, in the distant mountains, in South America, in Mexico, in Illinois, flying away from the horrible spectre of this infernal rebellion. Why is this? I know of but one real, substantial, specific reason, and that is that the framers of the Missouri Constitution allowed slavery to remain, while Illinois was made forever free by the Ordinance of 1787, penned by Thomas Jefferson, a son of Virginia, and by which Virginia ceded an empire within itself (the Northwestern territory) to the United States."
He then indulged in the following predictions of the future:
"When the poor and humble farmers and mechanics of Alabama and Mississippi shall have left the bloody trials in which they are now engaged to tear down this temple of human liberty; when they will return perhaps to their desolated homes; when they shall look once more upon and hug to their bosoms the wives and children whom they love, in poverty and in rags; when they will go, perhaps, without an arm, or without an eye, or without a leg, and in poverty, to those who are dependent upon them for support in life; taught by experience, they will ask the question of themselves: 'Why all this? What have we been fighting for?' They will bring to mind the sweet memories of other days. They will remember the peaceful and happy home which they were induced to leave, and which they enjoyed under the benign influences of wholesome and liberal laws passed here, and they will inquire: 'By what sophistry, by what appeal, by what force, by what maddening influence is it that we have been induced to enter into this terrible rebellion?' Not to promote any interest of wife and children, but to destroy all the blessings vouchsafed to us and to them by a free government and equitable laws; and they will further ask: 'Who has been the author of my misfortunes, and the ruin of my family, my all?' Sir, they will point to those who hold the power at Richmond; they will direct their vengeance against them; and Davis and his traitorous crew, as I have said upon a former occasion, will, like Actæon of old, be in the end destroyed by their own friends."
The speech of Garfield of Ohio, afterwards President, was especially able and interesting. As a soldier he had already won the rank and laurels of a Major General. His victory over Humphrey Marshall, at Middle Creek, and the brilliant record he made at Chickamauga, had been rewarded by the President with the commission of Major General, dated on the day of that battle. He now represented the district in Ohio known as the Giddings district, and his manly appearance, his ruddy complexion, bronzed by exposure and hardship as a soldier, as well as his fervid eloquence, attracted general attention. His speech was mainly in reply to his colleague, Pendleton, was full of classical allusions, and gave evidence of scholarship and culture. He said:
"Who does not remember that thirty years ago, a short period in the life of a nation, but little could be said with impunity in these halls on the subject of slavery? How well do gentlemen here remember the history of that distinguished predecessor of mine, Joshua R. Giddings, lately gone to his rest, who, with his forlorn hope of faithful men, took his life in his hands, and in the name of justice protested against the great crime, and who stood bravely in his place until his white locks, like the plume of Henry of Navarre, marked where the battle of freedom raged fiercest? We can hardly realize that this is the same people, and these the same halls, where now scarcely a man can be found who will venture to do more than falter out an apology for slavery, protesting at the same time that he has no love for the dying tyrant. None, I believe, but that man of more than supernal boldness from the city of New York [Mr. Fernando Wood] has ventured this session to raise his voice in favor of slavery for its own sake. He still sees in its features the reflection of divinity and beauty, and only he. 'How art thou fallen from heaven, 0 Lucifer, son of the morning? How art thou cut down to the ground, which didst weaken the nations!' Many mighty men have been slain by thee; many proud ones have humbled themselves at thy feet! All along the coast of the political sea they lie like stranded wrecks, broken on the headlands of freedom. How lately did its advocates with impious boldness maintain it as 'God's own,' to be venerated and cherished as divine. It was another and higher form of civilization. It was the holy evangel of America, dispensing its blessings to the wilderness of the West. In its mad arrogance it lifted its hands to strike down the fabric of the Union, and since that fatal day, it has been a fugitive and a vagabond upon the earth, and like the spirit that Jesus cast out, it has since then been 'seeking rest, and finding none.'"[7]
And now, on the 13th of January, came Thaddeus Stevens, Chairman of the Committee of Ways and Means, and the recognized leader of the House, to close the debate. As he came limping with his club foot along down the aisle from his committee room, the members gathered thickly around him. He was tall and commanding in person, and although venerable with years, his form was unbent and his intellect undimmed. The galleries had already been filled with the most distinguished people in Washington. As the word ran through the Capitol that Stevens was speaking on the Constitutional Amendment, senators came over from the Senate, lawyers and judges from the court rooms, and distinguished soldiers and citizens filled every available seat, to hear the eloquent old man speak on a measure that was to consummate the warfare of forty years against slavery.
Reviewing the past, he said:
"When, fifteen years ago, I was honored with a seat in this body, it was dangerous to talk against this institution, a danger which gentlemen now here will never be able to appreciate. Some of us, however, have experienced it; my friend from Illinois on my right [Mr. Washburne] has. And yet, sir, I did not hesitate, in the midst of bowie knives and revolvers, and howling demons upon the other side of the House, to stand here and denounce this infamous institution in language which possibly now, on looking at it, I might deem intemperate, but which I then deemed necessary to rouse the public attention, and cast odium upon the worst institution upon earth, one which is a disgrace to man, and would be an annoyance to the infernal spirits...
"Perhaps I ought not to occupy so much time, and I will only say one word further. So far as the appeals of the learned gentleman [Mr. Pendleton] are concerned, his pathetic winding up, I will be willing to take my chance when we all molder in the dust. He may have his epitaph written, if it be truly written, 'Here rests the ablest and most pertinacious defender of slavery and opponent of liberty,' and I will be satisfied if my epitaph shall be written thus: 'Here lies one who never rose to any eminence, and who only courted the low ambition to have it said that he had striven to ameliorate the condition of the poor, the lowly, the downtrodden of every race and language and color.'
"I shall be content, with such an eulogy on his lofty tomb, and such an inscription on my humble grave, to trust our memories to the judgment of other ages.
"We have suffered for slavery more than all the plagues of Egypt. More than the first born of every household has been taken. We still harden our hearts, and refuse to let the people go. The scourge still continues, nor do I expect it to cease until we obey the behests of the Father of men. We are about to ascertain the national will by an amendment to the Constitution. If the gentlemen opposite will yield to the voice of God and humanity and vote for it, I verily believe the sword of the destroying angel will be stayed, and this people be reunited. If we still harden our hearts, and blood must still flow. may the ghosts of the slaughtered victims sit heavily upon the souls of those who cause it."[8]
The vote on the passage of the resolution was taken amidst the most intense anxiety and solicitude. Up to the last roll call no one knew what the result would be. Democratic votes were needed to carry the measure. We knew we should get some, but whether enough none could tell. The most intense anxiety was felt, and as the clerk called the names of members, so perfect was the silence that the sound of a hundred pencils, keeping tally as the names were called and recorded, could be heard. When the name of Governor English, a democrat from Connecticut, was called, and be voted aye, there was great applause on the floor and in the crowded galleries, and this was repeated when Ganson, Nelson, Odell, and other democrats from New York responded aye. The clerk handed the vote to the speaker, Colfax, who announced in breathless silence the result: ayes, one hundred and nineteen; noes, fifty-six. Every negative vote was given by a democrat.
When the speaker made the formal announcement: "The constitutional majority of two thirds having voted in the affirmative, the joint resolution is passed," it was received with an uncontrollable outburst of enthusiasm. The republican members, regardless of the rules, instantly sprang to their feet and applauded with cheers. The example was followed by the spectators in the galleries, who waved their hats and their handkerchiefs, and cheers and congratulations continued for many minutes. Finally, Mr. Ingersoll of Illinois, representing the district of Owen Lovejoy, in honor, as he said, of the sublime event, moved that the House adjourn. The motion was carried, but before the members left their seats the roar of artillery from Capitol Hill announced to the people of Washington that the amendment had passed Congress. The personal friends of Mr. Lincoln, hastening to the White House, exchanged congratulations with him on the auspicious result. The passage of the resolution filled his heart with joy. He saw in it the complete consummation of his own great work, the emancipation proclamation.
On the following evening a vast crowd of rejoicing and enthusiastic friends, with music, marched to the White House, publicly to congratulate the President on the passage of the joint resolution. Arriving at the Executive Mansion, the band played national airs, and as Mr. Lincoln appeared at a window over the portico he was greeted with the greatest enthusiasm. When the cheering had subsided, his whole form and every feature radiant with joy, raising his arm, he slowly said:
"The great job is ended... The occasion is one of congratulation, and I cannot but congratulate all present, myself, the country, and the whole world upon this great moral victory. The amendment," he continued, "has already been ratified by Illinois, and Maryland is half through, but I feel proud," said he, "that Illinois is a little ahead... This ends the job."
Yes, and it was the brave heart, the clear, sagacious brain, the indomitable but patient will of Abraham Lincoln that carried through the great revolution. There remained now but a few more battles, a few more victories, and all would be won, and a free and united republic established from the lakes to the gulf, and then the work of the prairie statesman would be finished. He would have fully vindicated his right to be called one "of the family of the lion and the tribe of the eagle." The dream of his youth, the prophecy of his manhood would be realized. As yet no dark shadow, no presentiment of death rose on the landscape of the future.
When in June, 1858, at his home in Springfield, Abraham Lincoln startled the people by the declaration: "This nation cannot endure permanently half slave and half free," and when in concluding that very remarkable speech, with prophetic voice, uplifted eye, and the inspired mien of a seer, he exclaimed: "We shall not fail; if we stand firm we shall not fail. Wise counsels may accelerate, or mistakes delay, but sooner or later the victory is sure to come." He looked to long years of political controversy; he expected a severe struggle and a final triumph through the use of all the agencies by which public opinion is influenced and formed; and he anticipated the final triumph through the ballot box. But he did not foresee, unless in those mysterious, dim shadows which sometimes startle by half revealing the future, his own elevation to the Presidency; he did not foresee that he should be chosen by God and the people to lead on to that victory which he then felt was sure to come; that he should speak the word which should emancipate a race and free his country. Nor did he foresee that a martyr's death would crown a life which was so consecrated to duty, a life which was to be from that day forth so filled with unselfish, untiring devotion to country and to liberty, that his example will be everlasting, growing brighter with years; forever to inspire the patriot, and give courage to those who labor, and struggle, and die, for the poor and the oppressed; until in all the world, there shall be left no slave to be freed, no oppressor to be overthrown.
As has been stated, Illinois, under the inspiration of Lincoln, took the lead of all the states in ratifying the amendment. Then followed Rhode Island and Michigan, and on the same day, the 2nd of February, regenerated Maryland; on the 3rd, and keeping pace with her, were New York and West Virginia. Then Maine and Kansas, Massachusetts and Pennsylvania; and then old Virginia and Ohio and redeemed Missouri; and then Nevada and Indiana, and Louisiana and the other states followed, until more than three-fourths of all ratified the amendment.
It was a proud moment when William H. Seward, on the 18th of November, 1865, as Secretary of State, officially proclaimed the ratification of the amendment and certified[9] "that the same had become to all intents and purposes valid as a part of the Constitution of the United States."[10]
Footnotes edit
- ↑ Lincoln Memorial Album, pp. 491, 2, 3.
- ↑ Congressional Globe, 2d Session 38th Congress, p. 141
- ↑ Congressional Globe, 2d Session 38th Congress, p. 193.
- ↑ Congressional Globe, 2d Session 38th Congress, pp. 243-4.
- ↑ Congressional Globe, 2d Session 38th Congress, pp. 258-60.
- ↑ Congressional Globe, 2d Session 38th Congress, pp. 260-61.
- ↑ Congressional Globe, 2d Session 38th Congress, p. 253.
- ↑ Congressional Globe, 2d Session 38th Congress, p. 124.
- ↑ The following correspondence gives in a semi-official form the dates of the ratification:
Washington, July 23, 1866.
Hon. W.H. Seward, Secretary of State.
My Dear Sir: ...May I trouble you to furnish me the dates at which the several states adopted the Constitutional amendment prohibiting slavery forever throughout the republic, and a copy of your official certificate or proclamation, announcing such ratification by the requisite number of states? I cannot forbear congratulating you on the part you have taken in this great revolution. Few have had the felicity of living to witness such glorious results from their labors. How few could have anticipated when you began your anti-slavery labors, that you would live to officially proclaim that "slavery is no more."
Very Respectfully Yours,
ISAAC. N. ARNOLD.
Department of State, Washington, August 22, 1866.
Isaac N. Arnold, Esq.,
Sir: your letter of the 23d ultimo, asking to be furnished the dates at which the several states adopted the amendment to the Constitution prohibiting slavery, etc., was duly received; but owing to the exigencies of public business in this Department, it has not been convenient to answer it until now.
The dates of ratification by the several states, up to this time, are as follows: Illinois, February 1st, 1865; Rhode Island, February 2d, 1865; Michigan, February 2d, 1865; Maryland, February 1st and 3d, 1865; New York, February 2d and 3d, 1865; West Virginia, February 3d, 1865; Maine, February 7th, 1865; Kansas, February 7th, 1865; Massachusetts, February 8th, 1865; Pennsylvania, February 8th, 1865; Virginia, February 9th, 1865; Ohio, February 10th, 1865; Missouri, February 10th, 1865; Nevada, February 16th, 1865; Indiana, February 16th, 1865; Louisiana, February 17th, 1865; Minnesota, February 8th and 23d, 1865; Wisconsin, March 1st, 1865; Vermont, March 9th, 1865; Tennessee, April 5th and 7th, 1865; Arkansas, April 20th, 1865; Connecticut, May 5th, 1865; New Hampshire, July 1st, 1865; South Carolina, November 13th, 1865; Alabama, December 2d, 1865; North Carolina, December 4th, 1865; Georgia, December 9th, 1865; Oregon, December 11th, 1865; California, December 20th, 1865; Florida, December 28th, 1865; New Jersey, January 23d, 1866; Iowa, January 24th, 1866.
I transmit a copy of the certificate of ratification, agreeably to your request. Thanking you for the congratulations with which you conclude your letter.
I am, Your Obedient Servant,
WILLIAM H. SEWARD. - ↑ After the passage of this resolution, I concluded that I would obtain an autograph which would have historic interest. Sumner had the pen with which the emancipation proclamation had been signed. I thought I could get something better, and so when the joint resolution was engrossed, I procured from the engrossing clerk an exact duplicate of the one which was to go on file in the office of the Secretary of State. To this, the signatures of the clerk and speaker of the House, and also of the secretary and president of the Senate were attached, and then, taking it to the President, he indorsed his approval and signature. Then I obtained the signature of every senator and member of the House who had voted for the resolution. But if it be asked where it now is, I can only repeat the sad story of the great Chicago fire of 1871--burned up with many other treasures--Author.