Lincoln’s True Views on Niggers, In his own words…

president-abraham-lincoln-civil-warI cannot write like Thomas DiLorenzo on this abhorrence of a man, this man people hold up as some sort of savior. But, I hope there are a few black people that make it to this page, and they tell a few of their black friends, and hopefully then they can uncover the true fraud that is the REAL LINCOLN.

(posted from lewrockwell)

On Slavery:

“… when they [slaveowners] remind us of their constitutional rights, I acknowledge them, not grudgingly but fully and fairly; and I would give them any legislation for the claiming of their fugitives.” ~ Lincoln, speaking in support of the Fugitive Slave Act of 1850.

“…in nearly all the published speeches of him who now addresses you… I do but quote from one of those speeches when I declare that ‘I have no purpose, directly or indirectly, to interfere with the institution of slavery in the states where it exists. I believe I have no lawful right to do so, and I have no inclination to do so.’ ”

“I have no objection to its being made express and irrevocable.” ~ Lincoln, speaking in regards to slavery and in support of a proposed Thirteenth Amendment to explicitly guarantee slavery.

“Servile labor disappeared because it could not stand the competition of free labor; its profitability sealed [slavery’s] doom in the market economy.” ~ Ludwig von Mises, explaining why an institution that had been a universal feature of all societies throughout recorded history could finally be abolished by laissez-faire economic liberties, which unfortunately, could not prevent politicians from stealing the credit for it.

As his own words demonstrate, Lincoln was willing to accomodate slavery. As was shown in the taxation section above, it was only the tariff that he would never compromise on.

On Blacks:

“The whole nation is interested that the best use shall be made of these territories. We want them for the homes of free white people.” ~ Lincoln, on whether blacks – slave or free – should be allowed in the new territories in the west, October 16, 1854.

“I, as well as Judge Douglas, am in favor of the race to which I belong having the superior position. I have never said anything to the contrary.” ~ Lincoln, Aug. 21, 1858, in remarks stating his belief that blacks were naturally inferior to whites, which was a nearly universal belief on the part of whites in both the North and South long before and long after the Civil War.

“Root, hog, or die” ~ Lincoln’s suggestion to illiterate and propertyless ex-slaves unprepared for freedom, Feb. 3, 1865.

“They had better be set to digging their subsistence out of the ground.” ~ Lincoln in a War Department memo, April 16, 1863

“Send them to Liberia, to their own native land.” ~ Lincoln, speaking in favor of ethnic cleansing all blacks from the United States.

“I cannot make it better known than it already is, that I favor colonization.” ~ Lincoln, in a message to Congress, December 1, 1862, supporting deportation of all blacks from America.

“President Lincoln may colonize himself if he choose, but it is an impertinent act, on his part, to propose the getting rid of those who are as good as himself.” ~ America’s preeminent immediate Abolitionist and advocate of free trade, William Lloyd Garrison.

“[Lincoln] had not a drop of anti-slavery blood in his veins.” ~ William Lloyd Garrison.

The comments shown here illustrate that abolition was not what motivated Lincoln. The coldness in Lincoln’s remarks, the lack of thought and preparation about the process of emancipation, and how the freedman would cope without the necessary skills is readily apparent.

On the Emancipation Proclamation:

“What good would a proclamation of emancipation from me do, especially as we are now situated? I do not want to issue a document that the whole world will see must necessarily be inoperative, like the Pope’s bull against the comet! Would my word free the slaves, when I cannot even enforce the Constitution in the rebel States?… Now, then, tell me, if you please, what possible result of good would follow the issuing of such a proclamation as you desire? Understand, I raise no objections against it on legal or constitutional grounds; for, as commander-in-chief of the army and navy, in time of war I suppose I have a right to take any measure which may best subdue the enemy; nor do I urge objections of a moral nature, in view of possible consequences of insurrection and massacre at the South. I view this matter as a practical war measure, to be decided on according to the advantages or disadvantages it may offer to the suppression of the rebellion…. I will also concede that emancipation would help us in Europe, and convince them that we are incited by something more than ambition…. Still, some additional strength would be added in that way to the war, and then, unquestionably, it would weaken the rebels by drawing off their laborers, which is of great importance; but I am not so sure we could do much with the blacks…. I think you should admit that we already have an important principle to rally and unite the people, in the fact that constitutional government is at stake. This is a fundamental idea.” ~ Lincoln’s reply to a Committee from Religious Denominations of Chicago asking for a Proclamation of Emancipation, on Sept. 13, 1862. Less than four months later he would decree what he would term a “war measure,” the Emancipation Proclamation, on Jan 1, 1863.

“It had got to be midsummer, 1862. Things had gone on from bad to worse, until I felt that we had reached the end of our rope on the plan of operations we had been pursuing; that we had about played our last card, and must change our tactics, or lose the game. I now determined upon the adoption of the emancipation policy; and without consultation with, or the knowledge of, the Cabinet, I prepared the original draft of the proclamation, and, after much anxious thought, called a Cabinet meeting upon the subject. This was the last of July or the first part of the month of August, 1862. [The exact date was July 22, 1862.]” ~ Lincoln, to the artist F.B. Carpenter, Feb. 6 1864. Almost two months before his meeting with the Chicago Committee. Ol’ Honest Abe, indeed.

“The original proclamation has no… legal justification, except as a military measure.” ~ Lincoln, in a letter to Treasury Secretary Salmon P. Chase.

On the War:

“My paramount object in this struggle is to save the Union, and is not either to save or destroy slavery. If I could save the Union without freeing any slave I would do it; and if I could save it by freeing some and leaving others alone I would also do that. What I do about slavery, and the colored race, I do because I believe it helps to save the Union.” ~ Letter to Horace Greeley, Editor of the New York Tribune, August 22 1862. This more than anything else demonstrates that Lincoln’s centralist superstitions derived from Daniel Webster and Joseph Story about “the Union,” rather than the immorality of slavery, were his motivations in plotting war. This letter also contradicts Lincoln’s sentiment expressed in his first inaugural address, that he had neither the “lawful right,” or the “inclination” to abolish slavery.

Also, by Myles KantorSlavery was another area Lincoln encountered as a lawyer. He served as counsel in two slavery cases: Bailey v. Cromwell (1841) and Matson v. Rutherford (1847). In the 1841 case, Lincoln victoriously argued for the presumption of freedom regarding an attempt to sell a black woman. (The converse presumption would have considered her a slave until she proved her freedom.) The 1847 case involved a slave owner named Robert Matson claiming return of fugitive slaves. Matson was from Kentucky and brought slaves to Coles County, Illinois, for part of the year. Jane Bryant escaped with her four children from the Coles County plantation and found refuge with local abolitionists. They were soon after found and jailed as fugitive slaves.

Given Lincoln’s 1837 description of slavery as “founded on both injustice and bad policy” and his 1841 advocacy, one would guess he came to aid of the runaways. In fact, Lincoln represented Matson in his desire to re-enslave Bryant and her children. He predicated his argument upon Illinois law that allowed ownership in slaves to be maintained if they were brought into the state in transit. The Illinois circuit court was unconvinced, and the disgruntled tyrant returned to Kentucky in default on his attorney fees; the Bryants left to make a new start in Liberia.

Lincoln’s conduct here not only diverged from but defied his actions in Bailey. It was one thing to abstain from Garrisonian positions; it was another to assist a slave owner in pursuit of his “property.” Added to which, consider what Lincoln wrote to his friend Joshua Speed in 1855:

“In 1841 you and I had together a tedious low-water trip, on a Steam Boat from Louisville to St. Louis. You may remember, as I well do, that from Louisville to the mouth of the Ohio there were, on board, ten or a dozen slaves, shackled together with irons. That sight was a continual torment to me; and I see something like it every time I touch the Ohio, or any other slave-border.”

Indeed, the 1841 sight was so much of “a continual torment” that in 1847 he went on to represent a man who would have put Jane Bryant and her children in those very shackles. Just to top things off, the attorney who defended Matson with Lincoln was Usher F. Linder, who as Illinois Attorney General had encouraged the mob that murdered abolitionist Elijah Lovejoy in 1837.

HL Mencken

The Gettysburg speech was at once the shortest and the most famous oration in American history…the highest emotion reduced to a few poetical phrases. Lincoln himself never even remotely approached it. It is genuinely stupendous. But let us not forget that it is poetry, not logic; beauty, not sense. Think of the argument in it. Put it into the cold words of everyday. The doctrine is simply this: that the Union soldiers who died at Gettysburg sacrificed their lives to the cause of self-determination – that government of the people, by the people, for the people, should not perish from the earth. It is difficult to imagine anything more untrue. The Union soldiers in the battle actually fought against self-determination; it was the Confederates who fought for the right of their people to govern themselves.

Advertisements