Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: GOPcapitalist
Therefore your above statement fails you. It's as simple as that.

You can't prove that Lincoln knew what the proposed text of the 13th amendment was. Why would he lie?

Why not say in his first inaugural, "I have examined the text of the proposed 13th amendment, and concur fully."

Surely even you cannot deny that Lincoln sought compromise --talking rather than fighting -- in everything he said in 1860-61 (and throughout his life).

WHY would he lie about this?

You have tried to prove that Mister Lincoln lied in this, deducing it from circumstances, and all you've done is show that YOU are the liar.

Walt

93 posted on 04/28/2002 4:06:42 PM PDT by WhiskeyPapa
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 89 | View Replies ]


To: WhiskeyPapa
You can't prove that Lincoln knew what the proposed text of the 13th amendment was.

Logic dictates otherwise, as Lincoln's documented participation in a number of events prior to March 4th necessitated his familiarity with the amendment.

Why would he lie?

As I have indicated, that is not my concern and is a question to which I could only speculate. Regardless, it bears no relevance upon the fact, in and of itself, that he did just that. And as I have previously indicated, my own theory is that it has something to do with the same reason he specifically asked Lyman Trumbull to keep his involvement in the committee of 13 secret.

Why not say in his first inaugural, "I have examined the text of the proposed 13th amendment, and concur fully."

See above.

Surely even you cannot deny that Lincoln sought compromise --talking rather than fighting -- in everything he said in 1860-61

Not everything, but between late December 1861 and March 4, 1862. But for that matter, Jefferson Davis was a member of the Committee of 13 and actively made compromise proposals in it from early December through the end of January prior to his departure.

WHY would he lie about this?

Again, that is not my concern nor does it address the fact that he did lie.

You have tried to prove that Mister Lincoln lied in this, deducing it from circumstances

No. Deducting it logically from the necessity of individual events. To take an example - For Lincoln to convince Corwin to substitute language X for language Y on the amendment, it is first necessary that Lincoln himself know what X is. Since X was the text that passed and to which Lincoln referred on March 4th, it therefore follows that his familiarity with X entailed familiarity with the amendment itself. That much is inescapable, Walt, and I invite you to show otherwise.

and all you've done is show that YOU are the liar.

Your failure to substantiate that allegation permits me to reject it in a word.

Quod gratis asseritur, gratis negatur. So there.

98 posted on 04/28/2002 4:25:54 PM PDT by GOPcapitalist
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 93 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


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