Year: 1863

THE PRESIDENTS LETTnn TO THE


SPRINGFIELD MASS MEETING.
Plain Statement of His position--e Nainsdins tas


Emancipation Policy -Hoto C0,nprosiss Gun BE-


E1scted-TA Esnploy'nsst Of Negro Soldiers.


Exscurrvs MANSION, wAsnrxexos, Aug. %, 1858.


Hon. JAMES c. CoNkLrs-My Dear Sir:
Your letter inviting me to attend q mass
meeting of unconditional Union men, to be
held at the capital of Illinois on the Sd day of
September, has been received. It would be
very agreeable for me thus to meet my old
friends at my own home; but cannot just
now be absent from here so long as visit
there would require. as


The meeting is to be of all those who main.
tain unconditional devotion to the Union !;
and am sure my old political friends will
thank me for rendering, as do, the nations
gratitude to those other noble men whom no
partisan malice or partisan hope can make
false to the nations life.


There are those who are dissatisfied with
me. To such would say You desire peace,
and you blame me that you do not have it,
But how can we attain it There are but
three conceivable ways: First to suppress
the rebellion by force Of arms. This am
trying to do. Are you for itl If you are, so
far we are agreed If you are not for it, a
second way is to give up the Union. I am
against this. Are you for it? If you are,
you should say SO plainly If you are not
for force, nor yet for dicision, there only
remains some imaginable Compromise


| do not believe that any compromise EN-.
bracing the maintenance Of the Union is now
possible. All that learn leads to directly
opposite belief. The strength of the Rebel.
lion is its military, its army. That army
dominates all the country and all the people
within its range. Any offer Of terms made
by any other man or men within that range,
in opposition to that army, is simply nothing
for the present; because such man or men
have no power whatever to enforce their
side Of compromise, il one were made with
them. ....-s. . a-


To illustrate: Suppose refugees from the
South and peace men of the North get to-
gether in convention, and frame and proclaim
a compromise embracing restoration of the
Union. In what way can that compromise
be used to keep Lees army out of Pennsyl.
vania Meade's army can keep Lees army
out Of Pennsylvania, and, think, can ulti.
mately drive it out of existence. But no pa.
per compromise to which the controllers o
Lees army are not agreed can at all affect
that army. In an effort at such compromise
we would waste time, which the enemy
would improve to our disadvantage; and
that would be all.


A compromise, to DO effective, must be
made either with those who control the Iebe
xvitE ba
the dominion Of that army by the success oil
our own army. Now, allow me to assure
you that no word or intimation from thai
rebel army, or from any OF the men CONTROL
ing it, in relation to any peace compromise
has ever come to my knowledge or belief
All charges and insinuations to the contrary
are deceptive and groundless And prom
ise you that If any such proposition shal
hereafter come, it shall not be rejected and
kept a secret from you. I freely acknowl
edge myself to be the servant of the people
according to the bond of service, the United
States Constitution; and that, as such, am
responsible to them.


But, to be plain. You are dissatisfied with
me about the negro. Quite likely there is 0
difference of opinion between you and myse
upon that subject l certainly wish that all
men could be free, while you, suppose, dc
not. Yet, have neither adopted nor pro
posed any measure which is not consistent
with even your view, provided that you are
for the Union. suggested compensated
emancipation; to which you replied you
wished rot to be taxed TO buy negroes. But
| had not asked you to be taxed to buy ne
groes, except in such way as to save you
from greater taxation to save the Union ex
clusvely by other means.


You dislike the Emancipation Proclama.
ton, and perhaps would have it retracted.-
You say it is unconstitutional. | think diff
ferently. think the Constitution invests
its Commander-in.C Chief with the law OF wal
in times of war. The most that can be said
if SO much, is, that slaves are property. Is
there, has there ever been, any question thct
by the law Of war. property, both Of enc,
mics and friends, may be taken when need
ed? And is it not needed whenever it helps
us and hurts the enemyp Armies, the world
over, destroy enemies property when they
cannot use it; and even destroy their own
to keep it from the enemy. Civilized beliig.
erents do all in their power to help themselves
or hurt the enemy, except a few things re.
garded as barbarous or cruel. Among the
exceptions are the massacre Of vanauished
foes and non-combatants. male and female.


But the proclamation, rs law, either is val.
i'd or is not valid. If it is not valid it needs
no retraction. If it is valid it cannot be re.
tracted, any more than the dead can be bro't
70 life. Some of you profess to think it's re.
traction would operate favorably for the Union.
Why better after the retraction than before
tie issue? There was more than q year and
half of trial to suppress the rebellion before
the Proclamation was issued, the last one
hundred days Of which passed under an ex-
plicit notice that it was coming unless avert
ed by those in revolt returning to their allie.
glance. The war has certainly progressed
as favorably for US since the issue of the
Proclamation as before.


| know as fully as one can know the opin.
ions of others, that some of the commanders
Of our armies in the field who have given rs
our most important victories believe the
emancipation policy and the use of colored
troops constitute the heaviest blows yet dealt
to the Rebellion, and that at least one Of
those important successes could not have
been achieved when it was, but for the aid of
black soldiers.


Among the commanders holding these views
are some who have never had any affinitywith
what is Called" Abolitionism ~ or with "Re.
publican party politics. but who hold them
=