[thatdewd]

Most interesting, and it certainly does provide validity for the Butler comment, which I confess I had pulled from a web page. After reading your post, and the selection from Butler's book, I must wonder if the charge against that quote and Butler's recounting is a recent invention (or excuse) of revisionist historians like Jaffa and many others. If there is any real proof the quote is indeed spurious, I would be curious to see it. I did not challenge the accusation because I was not that familiar with Butler's writings and also because there are so many statements by Lincoln supporting colonization.

[WhiskeyPapa]

If there is any real proof the quote is indeed spurious, I would be curious to see it.

You can't prove a negative.

What the neo-rebs can't do is flesh out any substance to Butler's book. Where is the evidence in the record between 1865 and 1892 that Butler met with Lincoln and discussed these things? Butler is the only source that I have seen advanced.

John Hay, on the other hand, backs up with his diary entry what is amply supported in the record. By 1864 Lincoln was through with colonization.

Walt

[4CJ]

... because there are so many statements by Lincoln supporting colonization.

EXACTLY!