slave clause of the Constitution, and the law for the suppression of the foreign slave-trade, are each as well enforced, perhaps, as any law can ever be in a community where the moral sense of the people imperfectly supports the law itself. The great body of the people abide by the dry legal obligation in both cases, and a few break over in each. This, I think, cannot be perfectly cured; and it would be worse in both cases after the separation of the sections than before. The foreign slave-trade, now imperfectly suppressed, would be ultimately revived, without restriction, in one section, while fugitive slaves, now only partially surrendered, would not be surrendered at all by the other. Physically speaking, we cannot separate. We cannot remove our respective sections from each other, nor build an impassable wall between them. A husband and wife may be divorced, and go out of the presence and beyond the reach of each other; but the different parts of our country cannot do this. They cannot but remain face to face, and intercourse, either amicable or hostile, must continue between them. Is it possible, then, to make that intercourse more advantageous or more satisfactory after separation than before? Can aliens make treaties easier than friends can make laws? Can treaties be more faithfully enforced between aliens than laws can among friends? Suppose you go to war, you cannot fight always; and when, after much loss on both sides, and no gain on either, you cease fighting, the identical old questions as to terms of intercourse are again upon you. This country, with its institutions, belongs to the people who inhabit it. Whenever they shall grow weary of the existing government, they can exercise their constitutional right of amending it, or their revolutionary right to dismember or overthrow it. I cannot be ignorant of the fact that many worthy and patriotic citizens are desirous of having the National Constitution amended. While I make no recommendation of amendments, I fully recognize the rightful authority of the people over the whole subject, to be exercised in either of the modes prescribed in the instrument itself; and I should, under existing circumstances, favor rather than oppose a fair opportunity being afforded the people to act upon it. I will venture to add that to me the convention mode seems prefer able, in that it allows amendments to originate with the people themselves, instead of only permitting them to take or reject propositions originated by others not especially chosen for the purpose, and which might not be precisely such as they would wish to either accept or refuse. I understand a proposed amendment to the Constitution - which amendment, however, I have not seen has passed Congress, to the effect that the Federal Government shall never interfere with the domestic institutions of the States, including that of persons held to service. To avoid misconstruction of what I have said, I depart from my purpose not to speak of particular amendments so far as to say that, holding such a provision to now be implied constitutional law, I have no objection. to its being made express and irrevocable. The chief magistrate derives all his authority from the people, and they have conferred none upon him to fix terms for the sep aration of the States. The people themselves can do this also if they choose; but the executive, as such, has nothing to do with it. His duty is to administer the present government, as it came to his hands, and to transmit it, unimpaired by him, to his successor. Why should there not be a patient confidence in the ultimate justice of the people? Is there any better or equal hope in the world? In our present differences is either party without faith of being in the right? If the Almighty Ruler of Nations, with his eternal truth and justice, be on your side of the North, or on yours of the South, that truth and that justice will surely prevail by the judgment of this great tribunal of the American people. By the frame of the government under which we live, this same people have wisely given their public servants but little power for mischief; and have, with equal wisdom, provided for the return of that little to their own hands at very short intervals. While the people retain their virtue and vigilance, no administration, by any extreme of wickedness or folly, can very seriously injure the government in the short space of four years. My countrymen, one and all, think calmly and well upon this whole subject. Nothing valuable can be lost by taking time. If there be an object to hurry any of you in hot haste to a step which you would never take deliberately, that object will be frustrated by taking time; but no good object can be frustrated by it. Such of you as are now dissatisfied, still have the old Constitution unimpaired, and, on the sensitive point, the laws of your own framing under it; while the new administration will have no immediate power, if it would, to change either. If it were admitted that you who are dissatisfied hold the right side in the dispute, there still is no single good reason for precipitate action. Intelligence, patriotism, Christianity, and a firm reliance on Him who has never yet forsaken this favored land, are still competent to adjust in the best way all our present difficulty. In your hands, my dissatisfied fellow-countrymen, and not in mine, is the momentous issue of civil war. The government will not assail you. You can have no conflict without being yourselves the aggressors. You have no oath registered in heaven to destroy the government, while I shall have the most solemn one to "preserve, protect, and defend it." I am loath to close. We are not enemies, but friends. We must not be enemies. Though passion may have strained, it must not break our bonds of affection. The mystic chords of memory, stretching from every battle-field and patriot grave to every living heart and hearthstone all over this broad land, will yet swell the chorus of the Union when again touched, as surely they will be, by the better angels of our nature. March 4, 1861.-LETTER TO Wм. H. SEWARD. EXECUTIVE MANSION, March 4, 1861. My dear Sir: Your note of the 2d instant, asking to withdraw your acceptance of my invitation to take charge of the State De partment, was duly received. It is the subject of the most painful solicitude with me, and I feel constrained to beg that you will countermand the withdrawal. The public interest, I think, demands that you should; and my personal feelings are deeply enlisted in the same direction. Please consider and answer by 9 A. M. to-morrow. Your obedient servant, HON. WILLIAM H. SEWARD. A. LINCOLN. March 7, 1861.-LETTER TO SECRETARY SEWARD. EXECUTIVE CHAMBER, March 7, 1861. My dear Sir: Herewith is the diplomatic address and my reply. To whom the reply should be addressed- that is, by what title or style-I do not quite understand, and therefore I have left it blank. Will you please bring with you to-day the message from the War Department, with General Scott's note upon it, which we had here yesterday? I wish to examine the general's opinion, which I have not yet done. Yours very truly, HON. W. H. SEWARD. A. LINCOLN. March 7, 1861.— REPLY TO THE DIPLOMATIC CORPS. MR. FIGANIERE AND GENTLEMEN OF THE DIPLOMATIC BODY: Please accept my sincere thanks for your kind congratulations. It affords me pleasure to confirm the confidence you so generously express in the friendly disposition of the United States, through me, toward the sovereigns and governments you respectively represent. With equal satisfaction I accept the assurance you are pleased to give, that the same disposition is reciprocated by your sovereigns, your governments, and yourselves. Allow me to express the hope that these friendly relations may remain undisturbed, and also my fervent wishes for the health and happiness of yourselves personally. March 8, 1861.- LETTER TO SCHUYLER COLFAX. HON. SCHUYLER COLFAX. EXECUTIVE MANSION, March 8, 1861. My dear Sir: Your letter of the 6th has just been handed me by Mr. Baker, of Minnesota. When I said to you the other day that I wished to write you a letter, I had reference, of course, to my not having offered you a cabinet appointment. I meant to say, and now do say, you were most honorably and amply recommended, and a tender of the appointment was not withheld, in any part, because of anything happening in 1858.1 Indeed, I should have decided as I did easier than I did, had that matter never existed. I had partly made up my mind in favor of Mr. Smith—not conclusively, of course - before your name was mentioned in that connection. When you were brought forward I said, “Colfax is a young man, is already in position, is running a brilliant career, and is sure of a bright future in any event; with Smith, it is now or never." I considered either abundantly competent, and decided on the ground I have stated. I now have to beg that you will not do me the injustice to suppose for a moment that I remember anything against you in malice. Yours very truly, A. LINCOLN. March 9, 1861.— ORDER TO GENERAL SCOTT. DRAFTED BY PRESIDENT LINCOLN AND SIGNED BY THE SECRETARY OF WAR. LIEUTENANT-GENERAL SCOTT. WAR DEPARTMENT, March 9, 1861. My dear Sir: I am directed by the President to say he desires you to exercise all possible vigilance for the maintenance of all the places within the military department of the United States, and to promptly call upon all the departments of the government for the means necessary to that end. [SIMON CAMERON.] March 9, 1861.-LETTER TO GENERAL SCOTT. EXECUTIVE MANSION, March 9, 1861. LIEUTENANT-GENERAL SCOTT. My dear Sir: On the 5th instant I received from the Hon. Joseph Holt, the then faithful and vigilant Secretary of War, a letter of that date, inclosing a letter and accompanying documents received by him on the 4th instant from Major Robert Anderson, commanding Fort Sumter, South Carolina; and copies of all which I now transmit. Immediately on receipt of them by me, I transmitted the whole to you for your consideration; and the same day you returned the package to me with your opinion indorsed upon it, a copy of which opinion I now also transmit to you. Learning from you verbally that since then you have given the subject a more full and thorough consideration, you will much oblige me by giving answers, in writing, to the following interrogatories: (1) To what point of time can Major Anderson maintain his position at Fort Sumter, without fresh supplies or reinforcement? (2) Can you, with all the means now in your control, supply or reinforce Fort Sumter within that time? The allusion here is to the fact that in the senatorial campaign of 1858 in Illinois, between Lincoln and Douglas, Mr. Colfax was understood to favor the reëlection of Douglas. (3) If not, what amount of means, and of what description, in addition to that already at your control, would enable you to supply and reinforce that fortress within the time? Please answer these, adding such statements, information, and counsel as your great skill and experience may suggest. March 11, 1861.— LETTER TO SECRETARY SEWARD. HON. SECRETARY OF STATE. My dear Sir: What think you of sending ministers at once as follows: Dayton to England; Frémont to France; Clay to Spain; Corwin to Mexico? We need to have these points guarded as strongly and quickly as possible. This is suggestion merely, and not dictation. Esq. Your obedient servant, March 13, 1861.— LETTER TO A. LINCOLN. EXECUTIVE MANSION, March 13, 1861. My dear Sir: You will start for Kansas before I see you again; and when I saw you a moment this morning I forgot to ask you about some of the Kansas appointments, which I intended to do. If you care much about them, you can write, as I think I shall not make the appointments just yet. Yours in haste, A. LINCOLN. March 13, 1861.-LETTER TO SECRETARY SEWARD. HON. W. H. SEWARD. EXECUTIVE MANSION, March 13, 1861. Dear Sir: General Cameron desires that Jacob S. Haldeman may be appointed Minister Resident at Sweden and Norway; and I am willing to oblige him, if you see no objection. Your obedient servant, A. LINCOLN. March 14, 1861.— LETTER TO SECRETARY SEward. HON. W. H. SEWARD. EXECUTIVE MANSION, March 14, 1861. My dear Sir: Allow me to introduce Mr. F. Hassaurek, one of our best German Republican workers in America, residing at Cincinnati, and of whose character you cannot be ignorant. Please give him an interview. Yours truly, A. LINCOLN. |