Free Republic
Browse · Search
Smoky Backroom
Topics · Post Article

To: x

"I do deny that he ever used those words".

I read your reply to 4CJ. You offer speculation but no proof. All you have is your bias.

You speculate on who had what political opinions and motivations. You discount everyone but yourself.

Just to remind you what was said:

[ONE]

The picturesque hills of New England were dotted with costly mansions, erected with money, of which the Southern planters had been despoiled, by means of the tariffs of which Mr. Benton spoke. Her harbors frowned with fortifications, constructed by the same means. Every cove and inlet had its lighthouse, for the benefit of New England shipping, three fourths of the expense of erecting which had been paid by the South, and even the cod, and mackerel fisheries of New England were bountied, on the bald pretext, that they were nurseries for manning the navy. The South resisted this wholesale robbery, to the best of her ability. Some few of the more generous of the Northern representatives in Congress came to her aid, but still she was overborne; and the curious reader, who will take the pains to consult the "Statutes at Large," of the American Congress, will find on an average,-a tariff for every five years recorded on their pages; the cormorants increasing in rapacity, the more they devoured. No wonder that Mr. Lincoln when asked, "why not let the South go?" replied, "Let the South go! where then shall we get our revenue?"

Admiral Raphael Semmes, Memoirs of Service Afloat, During the War Between The States, Baltimore: Kelly, Piet & Co., 1869, p. 59.

[TWO]

When asked, as President of the United States, "why not let the South go?" his simple, direct, and honest answer revealed one secret of the wise policy of the Washington Cabinet. "Let the South go!" said he, "where, then, shall we get our revenue?"

Albert Taylor Bledsoe, Is Davis a traitor; or, Was secession a constitutional right previous to the war of 1861?, Baltimore: Innes & Company, 1866, pp. 143-144.

[THREE]

Another effort was made to move Abraham Lincoln to peace. On the 22nd, a deputation of six members from each of the five Christian Associations of Young Men in Baltimore, headed by Dr. Fuller, and eloquent clergyman of the Baptist church, went to Washington and had an interview with the President. He received them with a sort of rude formality. Dr. Fuller said, that Maryland had first moved in adopting the constitution, and yet the first blood in this war was shed on her soil; he then interceded for a peaceful separation, entreated that no more troops should pass through Baltimore, impressed upun Mr. Lincoln the terrible responsibility resting on him - that on him depended peace or war - a fratricidal conflict or a happy settlement.

"But," said Lincoln, "what am I to do?"

"Let the country know that you are disposed to recognize the Southern Confederacy," answered Dr. Fuller, "and peace will instantly take the place of anxiety and suspense and war may be averted."

"And what is to become of the revenue?" rejoined Lincoln, "I shall have no government, no resources!"

Robert Reid Howison, History of the War, excerpted in Southern Literary Messenger, Vol. 34, Issue 8, August 1862, Richmond, VA., pp. 420-421.

[FOUR]

"But," said Mr. Lincoln, "what am I to do?" "Why, sir, let the country know that you are disposed to recognize the independance of the Southern States. I say nothing of secession; recognize the fact that they have formed a government of their own; that they will never be united again with the North, and and peace will instantly take the place of anxiety and suspense, and war may be averted."

"And what is to become of the revenue?" was the reply. "I shall have no government - no revenues."

Evert A. Duyckinck, National History of the War For the Union, Civil, Military and Naval. Founded on official and other authentic documents, New York: Johnson Fry & Co., 1861, Vol. I, p. 173.

[FIVE]

In 1861, if the erring sisters had been allowed to go in peace, was not the disturbing question of the hour: Whence is to come national revenue? Had not this very consideration much to do with the policy of coercion?

"Thus," said Mr. Lincoln, "if we allow the Southern States to depart from the Union, where shall we get the money with which to carry on the Government?"

James Battle Avirett, The Old Plantation: How We Lived in Great House and Cabin Before the War, New York: F. Tennyson Neely Co., 1901, p. 18.

[SIX]

It seems obvious that Lincoln's concern over secession, "What then will become of my tariff?" was a serious matter.

When in the Course of Human Events, Charles Adams, 2000, p. 27.

Footnoted to: Robert L. Dabny, Memoir of a Narrative Received of Colonel John B. Baldwin, in Secular (1897; reprint, Harrisburg, VA.: Sprinkle, 1994), 94, 100.

[SEVEN]

Reported in the Baltimore Sun 23 Apr 1861 edition.

[EIGHT]

The quote from Lincoln re: Revenues (meeting with Dr. Fuller) is also substantiated by Benson Lossing, in his "Pictorial Field Book of the Civil War: Journeys Through the Battlefields in the Wake of Conflict", Johns Hopkins Univ Press (Reprint edition), 1997, Vol. 1, p. 420 (reprinted 1997)

Still another embassy, in the interest of the secessionists of Baltimore, waited upon the President. These were delegates from five of the Young Men's Christian Associations of that city, with the Rev. Dr. fuller, of the Baptist Church, at their head. The President received them cordially, and treated them kindly. He met their propositions and their sophisms with Socratic reasoning. When Dr. Fuller assued him that he could produce peace if he would let the country know that he was "disposed to recognize the independence of the Southern States -- recognize the fact they they have formed a government of their own; and that they will never again be united with the North," the President asked, significantly, "and what is to become of the revenue?"


815 posted on 08/03/2004 8:07:15 AM PDT by PeaRidge ("Walt got the boot? I didn't know. When/why did it happen?" Ditto 7-22-04)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 798 | View Replies ]


To: PeaRidge
I repeat, most of these are second- or third-hand citations. They aren't consistent in their wording and don't give the time and place where such comments were allegedly made. They are folklore rather than fact.

You've asked me to show you where you make unsupported jumps or leaps in reasoning. And here's one: when the subject was first discussed Lincoln's military advisors counseled against using force to reinforce Sumter or remove the danger to it. They also did not support reinforcement, but advised evacuation. Knowing that Lincoln attempted resupply and the result was war, you assume 1) that the military advised against resupply because it would bring war and 2) that Lincoln sent supplies to the fort because he wanted war. But neither one of these leaps of assumption is proven to be true, and both may be false. From what I've read, both are false.

Do I disagree with your "authorities"? Obviously. I question whether they really have much authority in this particular question. What's right or wrong doesn't depend on majority opinion or on credentials, but it may not hurt my case to say that most of the respected scholars who've written about Sumter take a dim view of neoconfederate conspiracy theories.

817 posted on 08/03/2004 9:58:53 AM PDT by x
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 815 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Smoky Backroom
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson