<h2><SPAN name="XXXIII" id="XXXIII"></SPAN>XXXIII</h2>
<br/>
<p><i>The Thirteenth Amendment—The President's Speech on its
Adoption—The Two Constitutional Amendments of Lincoln's
Term—Lincoln on Peace and Slavery in his Annual Message of
December 6, 1864—Blair's Mexican Project—The Hampton
Roads Conference</i></p>
<br/>
<br/>
<p>A joint resolution proposing an amendment to the Constitution
prohibiting slavery throughout the United States had passed the
Senate on April 8, 1864, but had failed of the necessary two-thirds
vote in the House. The two most vital thoughts which animated the
Baltimore convention when it met in June had been the renomination
of Mr. Lincoln and the success of this constitutional amendment.
The first was recognized as a popular decision needing only the
formality of an announcement by the convention; and the full
emphasis of speech and resolution had therefore been centered on
the latter as the dominant and aggressive reform upon which the
party would stake its political fortunes in the presidential
campaign. Mr. Lincoln had himself suggested to Mr. Morgan the
wisdom of sounding that key-note in his opening speech before the
convention; and the great victory gained at the polls in November
not only demonstrated his sagacity, but enabled him to take up the
question with confidence among his recommendations to Congress in
the annual message of December 6, 1864. Relating the fate of the
measure at the preceding session, he said:</p>
<p>"Without questioning the wisdom or patriotism of <SPAN name="page472" id="page472"></SPAN> those who
stood in opposition, I venture to recommend the reconsideration and
passage of the measure at the present session. Of course the
abstract question is not changed, but an intervening election
shows, almost certainly, that the next Congress will pass the
measure if this does not. Hence there is only a question of time as
to when the proposed amendment will go to the States for their
action. And as it is to so go at all events, may we not agree that
the sooner the better? It is not claimed that the election has
imposed a duty on members to change their views or their votes any
further than, as an additional element to be considered, their
judgment may be affected by it. It is the voice of the people, now
for the first time heard upon the question. In a great national
crisis like ours, unanimity of action among those seeking a common
end is very desirable—almost indispensable. And yet no
approach to such unanimity is attainable unless some deference
shall be paid to the will of the majority, simply because it is the
will of the majority. In this case the common end is the
maintenance of the Union; and among the means to secure that end,
such will, through the election, is most clearly declared in favor
of such constitutional amendment."</p>
<p>The joint resolution was called up in the House on January 6,
1865, and general discussion followed from time to time, occupying
perhaps half the days of that month. As at the previous session,
the Republicans all favored, while the Democrats mainly opposed it;
but important exceptions among the latter showed what immense gains
the proposition had made in popular opinion and in congressional
willingness to recognize and embody it. The logic of events had
become more powerful than party creed or strategy. For fifteen
years the Democratic party had stood as sentinel and <SPAN name="page473" id="page473"></SPAN> bulwark
to slavery, and yet, despite its alliance and championship, the
"peculiar institution" was being consumed in the fire of war. It
had withered in popular elections, been paralyzed by confiscation
laws, crushed by executive decrees, trampled upon by marching Union
armies. More notable than all, the agony of dissolution had come
upon it in its final stronghold—the constitutions of the
slave States. Local public opinion had throttled it in West
Virginia, in Missouri, in Arkansas, in Louisiana, in Maryland, and
the same spirit of change was upon Tennessee, and even showing
itself in Kentucky. The Democratic party did not, and could not,
shut its eyes to the accomplished facts.</p>
<p>The issue was decided on the afternoon of January 31, 1865. The
scene was one of unusual interest. The galleries were filled to
overflowing, and members watched the proceedings with unconcealed
solicitude. "Up to noon," said a contemporaneous report, "the
pro-slavery party are said to have been confident of defeating the
amendment; and after that time had passed, one of the most earnest
advocates of the measure said: "'Tis the toss of a copper." At four
o'clock the House came to a final vote, and the roll-call showed:
yeas, one hundred and nineteen; nays, fifty-six; not voting, eight.
Scattering murmurs of applause followed affirmative votes from
several Democratic members; but when the Speaker finally announced
the result, members on the Republican side of the House sprang to
their feet, and, regardless of parliamentary rules, applauded with
cheers and hand-clappings—an exhibition of enthusiasm quickly
echoed by the spectators in the crowded galleries, where waving of
hats and handkerchiefs and similar demonstrations of joy lasted for
several minutes.</p>
<p>A salute of one hundred guns soon made the <SPAN name="page474" id="page474"></SPAN>occasion
the subject of comment and congratulation throughout the city. On
the following night a considerable procession marched with music to
the Executive Mansion to carry popular greetings to the President.
In response to their calls he appeared at a window and made a brief
speech, of which only an abstract report was preserved, but which
is nevertheless important as showing the searching analysis of
cause and effect this question had undergone in his mind, the deep
interest he felt in it, and the far-reaching consequences he
attached to the measure and its success:</p>
<p>"The occasion was one of congratulation to the country and to
the whole world. But there is a task yet before us—to go
forward and have consummated by the votes of the States that which
Congress had so nobly begun yesterday. He had the honor to inform
those present that Illinois had already to-day done the work.
Maryland was about half through, but he felt proud that Illinois
was a little ahead. He thought this measure was a very fitting, if
not an indispensable, adjunct to the winding up of the great
difficulty. He wished the reunion of all the States perfected, and
so effected as to remove all causes of disturbance in the future;
and to attain this end it was necessary that the original
disturbing cause should, if possible, be rooted out. He thought all
would bear him witness that he had never shrunk from doing all that
he could to eradicate slavery, by issuing an emancipation
proclamation. But that proclamation falls far short of what the
amendment will be when fully consummated. A question might be
raised whether the proclamation was legally valid. It might be
urged that it only aided those that came into our lines, and that
it was inoperative as to those who did not give themselves up; or
that it <SPAN name="page475" id="page475"></SPAN> would have no effect upon the children
of slaves born hereafter; in fact, it would be urged that it did
not meet the evil. But this amendment is a king's cure-all for all
the evils. It winds the whole thing up. He would repeat that it was
the fitting, if not the indispensable, adjunct to the consummation
of the great game we are playing."</p>
<p>Widely divergent views were expressed by able constitutional
lawyers as to what would constitute a valid ratification of the
Thirteenth Amendment; some contending that ratification by three
fourths of the loyal States would be sufficient, others that three
fourths of all the States, whether loyal or insurrectionary, was
necessary. Mr. Lincoln, in a speech on Louisiana reconstruction,
while expressing no opinion against the first proposition,
nevertheless declared with great argumentative force that the
latter "would be unquestioned and unquestionable"; and this view
appears to have governed the action of his successor.</p>
<p>As Mr. Lincoln mentioned with just pride, Illinois was the first
State to ratify the amendment. On December 18, 1865, Mr. Seward,
who remained as Secretary of State in the cabinet of President
Johnson, made official proclamation that the legislatures of
twenty-seven States, constituting three fourths of the thirty-six
States of the Union, had ratified the amendment, and that it had
become valid as a part of the Constitution. Four of the States
constituting this number—Virginia, Louisiana, Tennessee, and
Arkansas—were those whose reconstruction had been effected
under the direction of President Lincoln. Six more States
subsequently ratified the amendment, Texas ending the list in
February, 1870.</p>
<p>The profound political transformation which the American
Republic had undergone can perhaps best <SPAN name="page476" id="page476"></SPAN> be
measured by contrasting the two constitutional amendments which
Congress made it the duty of the Lincoln administration to submit
officially to the States. The first, signed by President Buchanan
as one of his last official acts, and accepted and indorsed by
Lincoln in his inaugural address, was in these words:</p>
<p>"No amendment shall be made to the Constitution which will
authorize or give to Congress the power to abolish or interfere
within any State with the domestic institutions thereof, including
that of persons held to labor or service by the laws of said
State."</p>
<p>Between Lincoln's inauguration and the outbreak of war, the
Department of State transmitted this amendment to the several
States for their action; and had the South shown a willingness to
desist from secession and accept it as a peace offering, there is
little doubt that it would have become a part of the Constitution.
But the thunder of Beauregard's guns drove away all possibility of
such a ratification, and within four years the Lincoln
administration sent forth the amendment of 1865, sweeping out of
existence by one sentence the institution to which it had in its
first proposal offered a virtual claim to perpetual recognition and
tolerance. The "new birth of freedom" which Lincoln invoked for the
nation in his Gettysburg address, was accomplished.</p>
<p>The closing paragraphs of President Lincoln's message to
Congress of December 6, 1864, were devoted to a summing up of the
existing situation. The verdict of the ballot-box had not only
decided the continuance of a war administration and war policy, but
renewed the assurance of a public sentiment to sustain its
prosecution. Inspired by this majestic manifestation of the popular
will, he was able to speak of the future with hope and confidence.
But with characteristic prudence <SPAN name="page477" id="page477"></SPAN> and good taste, he uttered
no word of boasting, and indulged in no syllable of acrimony; on
the contrary, in terms of fatherly kindness he again offered the
rebellious States the generous conditions he had previously
tendered them.</p>
<p>"The national resources, then, are unexhausted, and, as we
believe, inexhaustible. The public purpose to reëstablish and
maintain the national authority is unchanged and, as we believe,
unchangeable. The manner of continuing the effort remains to
choose. On careful consideration of all the evidence accessible, it
seems to me that no attempt at negotiation with the insurgent
leader could result in any good. He would accept nothing short of
severance of the Union—precisely what we will not and cannot
give. His declarations to this effect are explicit and
oft-repeated.... What is true, however, of him who heads the
insurgent cause is not necessarily true of those who follow.
Although he cannot reaccept the Union, they can. Some of them, we
know, already desire peace and reunion. The number of such may
increase. They can, at any moment, have peace simply by laying down
their arms and submitting to the national authority under the
Constitution. After so much, the government could not, if it would,
maintain war against them. The loyal people would not sustain or
allow it. If questions should remain, we would adjust them by the
peaceful means of legislation, conference, courts, and votes,
operating only in constitutional and lawful channels.... In
presenting the abandonment of armed resistance to the national
authority, on the part of the insurgents, as the only indispensable
condition to ending the war on the part of the government, I
retract nothing heretofore said as to slavery. I repeat the
declaration made a year <SPAN name="page478" id="page478"></SPAN> ago, that 'While I remain in my present
position I shall not attempt to retract or modify the emancipation
proclamation, nor shall I return to slavery any person who is free
by the terms of that proclamation, or by any of the acts of
Congress.' If the people should, by whatever mode or means, make it
an executive duty to reënslave such persons, another, and not
I, must be their instrument to perform it. In stating a single
condition of peace, I mean simply to say that the war will cease on
the part of the government whenever it shall have ceased on the
part of those who began it." The country was about to enter upon
the fifth year of actual war; but all indications were pointing to
a speedy collapse of the rebellion. This foreshadowed disaster to
the Confederate armies gave rise to another volunteer peace
negotiation, which, from the boldness of its animating thought and
the prominence of its actors, assumes a special importance. The
veteran politician Francis P. Blair, Sr., who, from his long
political and personal experience in Washington, knew, perhaps
better than almost any one else, the individual characters and
tempers of Southern leaders, conceived that the time had come when
he might take up the rôle of successful mediator between the
North and the South. He gave various hints of his desire to
President Lincoln, but received neither encouragement nor
opportunity to unfold his plans. "Come to me after Savannah falls,"
was Lincoln's evasive reply. On the surrender of that city, Mr.
Blair hastened to put his design into execution, and with a simple
card from Mr. Lincoln, dated December 28, saying, "Allow the
bearer, F.P. Blair, Sr., to pass our lines, go south and return,"
as his only credential, set out for Richmond. From General Grant's
camp he forwarded two letters to Jefferson Davis: one, a brief
request to be <SPAN name="page479" id="page479"></SPAN> allowed to go to Richmond in search of
missing title papers presumably taken from his Maryland home during
Early's raid; the other, a longer letter, explaining the real
object of his visit, but stating with the utmost candor that he
came wholly unaccredited, save for permission to pass the lines,
and that he had not offered the suggestions he wished to submit in
person to Mr. Davis to any one in authority at Washington.</p>
<p>After some delay, he found himself in Richmond, and was accorded
a confidential interview by the rebel President on January 12,
1865, when he unfolded his project, which proved to be nothing less
than a proposition that the Union and Confederate armies cease
fighting each other and unite to drive the French from Mexico. He
supported this daring idea in a paper of some length, pointing out
that as slavery, the real cause of the war, was hopelessly doomed,
nothing now remained to keep the two sections of the country apart
except the possible intervention of foreign soldiery. Hence, all
considerations pointed to the wisdom of dislodging the French
invaders from American soil, and thus baffling "the designs of
Napoleon to subject our Southern people to the 'Latin race.'"</p>
<p>"He who expels the Bonaparte-Hapsburg dynasty from our southern
flank," the paper said further, "will ally his name with those of
Washington and Jackson as a defender of the liberty of the country.
If in delivering Mexico he should model its States in form and
principle to adapt them to our Union, and add a new southern
constellation to its benignant sky while rounding off our
possessions on the continent at the Isthmus, ... he would complete
the work of Jefferson, who first set one foot of our colossal
government on the Pacific by a stride from the Gulf of
Mexico...."<SPAN name="page480" id="page480"></SPAN></p>
<p>"I then said to him, 'There is my problem, Mr. Davis; do you
think it possible to be solved?' After consideration, he said: 'I
think so.' I then said, 'You see that I make the great point of
this matter that the war is no longer made for slavery, but
monarchy. You know that if the war is kept up and the Union kept
divided, armies must be kept afoot on both sides, and this state of
things has never continued long without resulting in monarchy on
one side or the other, and on both generally.' He assented to
this."</p>
<p>The substantial accuracy of Mr. Blair's report is confirmed by
the memorandum of the same interview which Jefferson Davis wrote at
the time. In this conversation, the rebel leader took little pains
to disguise his entire willingness to enter upon the wild scheme of
military conquest and annexation which could easily be read between
the lines of a political crusade to rescue the Monroe Doctrine from
its present peril. If Mr. Blair felt elated at having so quickly
made a convert of the Confederate President, he was further
gratified at discovering yet more favorable symptoms in his
official surroundings at Richmond. In the three or four days he
spent at the rebel capital he found nearly every prominent
personage convinced of the hopeless condition of the rebellion, and
even eager to seize upon any contrivance to help them out of their
direful prospects.</p>
<p>But the government councils at Washington were not ruled by the
spirit of political adventure. Abraham Lincoln had a loftier
conception of patriotic duty, and a higher ideal of national
ethics. His whole interest in Mr. Blair's mission lay in the rebel
despondency it disclosed, and the possibility it showed of bringing
the Confederates to an abandonment of their resistance. Mr. Davis
had, indeed, given Mr. Blair a letter, to be <SPAN name="page481" id="page481"></SPAN> shown to
President Lincoln, stating his willingness, "notwithstanding the
rejection of our former offers," to appoint a commissioner to enter
into negotiations "with a view to secure peace to the two
countries." This was, of course, the old impossible attitude. In
reply the President wrote Mr. Blair on January 18 the following
note:</p>
<p>"SIR: You having shown me Mr. Davis's letter to you of the
twelfth instant, you may say to him that I have constantly been, am
now, and shall continue ready to receive any agent whom he, or any
other influential person now resisting the national authority, may
informally send to me, with the view of securing peace to the
people of our one common country."</p>
<p>With this, Mr. Blair returned to Richmond, giving Mr. Davis such
excuses as he could hastily frame why the President had rejected
his plan for a joint invasion of Mexico. Jefferson Davis therefore
had only two alternatives before him—either to repeat his
stubborn ultimatum of separation and independence, or frankly to
accept Lincoln's ultimatum of reunion. The principal Richmond
authorities knew, and some of them admitted, that their Confederacy
was nearly in collapse. Lee sent a despatch saying he had not two
days' rations for his army. Richmond was already in a panic at
rumors of evacuation. Flour was selling at a thousand dollars a
barrel in Confederate currency. The recent fall of Fort Fisher had
closed the last avenue through which blockade-runners could bring
in foreign supplies. Governor Brown of Georgia was refusing to obey
orders from Richmond, and characterizing them as "despotic." Under
such circumstances a defiant cry of independence would not reassure
anybody; nor, on the other hand, was it longer possible to remain
silent. Mr. Blair's first visit had created general interest; when
<SPAN name="page482" id="page482"></SPAN> he came a second time, wonder and rumor
rose to fever heat.</p>
<p>Impelled to take action, Mr. Davis had not the courage to be
frank. After consultation with his cabinet, a peace commission of
three was appointed, consisting of Alexander H. Stephens,
Vice-President; R.M.T. Hunter, senator and ex-Secretary of State;
and John A. Campbell, Assistant Secretary of War—all of them
convinced that the rebellion was hopeless, but unwilling to admit
the logical consequences and necessities. The drafting of
instructions for their guidance was a difficult problem, since the
explicit condition prescribed by Mr. Lincoln's note was that he
would receive only an agent sent him "with the view of securing
peace to the people of our one common country." The rebel Secretary
of State proposed, in order to make the instructions "as vague and
general as possible," the simple direction to confer "upon the
subject to which it relates"; but his chief refused the suggestion,
and wrote the following instruction, which carried a palpable
contradiction on its face:</p>
<p>"In conformity with the letter of Mr. Lincoln, of which the
foregoing is a copy, you are requested to proceed to Washington
City for informal conference with him upon the issues involved in
the existing war, and for the purpose of securing peace to the two
countries."</p>
<p>With this the commissioners presented themselves at the Union
lines on the evening of January 29, but instead of showing their
double-meaning credential, asked admission, "in accordance with an
understanding claimed to exist with Lieutenant-General Grant." Mr.
Lincoln, being apprised of the application, promptly despatched
Major Thomas T. Eckert, of the War Department, with written
directions to admit them under safe-conduct, if they would say in
writing that they <SPAN name="page483" id="page483"></SPAN> came for the purpose of an informal
conference on the basis of his note of January 18 to Mr. Blair. The
commissioners having meantime reconsidered the form of their
application and addressed a new one to General Grant which met the
requirements, were provisionally conveyed to Grant's headquarters;
and on January 31 the President commissioned Secretary Seward to
meet them, saying in his written instructions:</p>
<p>"You will make known to them that three things are
indispensable, to wit: First. The restoration of the national
authority throughout all the States. Second. No receding by the
Executive of the United States on the slavery question from the
position assumed thereon in the late annual message to Congress,
and in preceding documents. Third. No cessation of hostilities
short of an end of the war, and the disbanding of all forces
hostile to the government. You will inform them that all
propositions of theirs, not inconsistent with the above, will be
considered and passed upon in a spirit of sincere liberality. You
will hear all they may choose to say, and report it to me. You will
not assume to definitely consummate anything."</p>
<p>Mr. Seward started on the morning of February 1, and
simultaneously with his departure the President repeated to General
Grant the monition already sent him two days before: "Let nothing
which is transpiring change, hinder, or delay your military
movements or plans." Major Eckert had arrived while Mr. Seward was
yet on the way, and on seeing Jefferson Davis's instructions,
promptly notified the commissioners that they could not proceed
further without complying strictly with President Lincoln's terms.
Thus, at half-past nine on the night of February 1, their mission
was practically at an end, though next day they again recanted and
accepted the President's conditions in <SPAN name="page484" id="page484"></SPAN>writing. Mr.
Lincoln, on reading Major Eckert's report on the morning of
February 2, was about to recall Secretary Seward by telegraph, when
he was shown a confidential despatch from General Grant to the
Secretary of War, stating his belief that the intention of the
commissioners was good, and their desire for peace sincere, and
regretting that Mr. Lincoln could not have an interview with them.
This communication served to change his purpose. Resolving not to
neglect the indications of sincerity here described, he telegraphed
at once, "Say to the gentlemen I will meet them personally at
Fortress Monroe as soon as I can get there," and joined Secretary
Seward that same night.</p>
<p>On the morning of February 3, 1865, the rebel commissioners were
conducted on board the <i>River Queen</i>, lying at anchor near
Fort Monroe, where President Lincoln and Secretary Seward awaited
them. It was agreed beforehand that no writing or memorandum should
be made at the time, so the record of the interview remains only in
the separate accounts which the rebel commissioners wrote out
afterward from memory, neither Mr. Seward nor President Lincoln
ever having made any report in detail. In a careful analysis of
these reports, the first striking feature is the difference of
intention between the parties. It is apparent that Mr. Lincoln went
honestly and frankly to offer them the best terms he could to,
secure peace and reunion, but to abate no jot of official duty or
personal dignity; while the main thought of the commissioners was
to evade the express condition on which they had been admitted to
conference, to seek to postpone the vital issue, and to propose an
armistice by debating a mere juggling expedient against which they
had in a private agreement with one another already committed
themselves.<SPAN name="page485" id="page485"></SPAN></p>
<p>At the first hint of Blair's Mexican project, however, Mr.
Lincoln firmly disclaimed any responsibility for the suggestion, or
any intention of adopting it, and during the four hours' talk led
the conversation continually back to the original object of the
conference. But though he patiently answered the many questions
addressed him by the commissioners, as to what would probably be
done on various important subjects that must arise at once if the
Confederate States consented, carefully discriminating in his
answers between what he was authorized under the Constitution to do
as Executive, and what would devolve upon coördinate branches
of the government, the interview came to nothing. The commissioners
returned to Richmond in great disappointment, and communicated the
failure of their efforts to Jefferson Davis, whose chagrin was
equal to their own. They had all caught eagerly at the hope that
this negotiation would somehow extricate them from the dilemmas and
dangers of their situation. Davis took the only course open to him
after refusing the honorable peace Mr. Lincoln had tendered. He
transmitted the commissioners' report to the rebel Congress, with a
brief and dry message stating that the enemy refused any terms
except those the conqueror might grant; and then arranged as
vigorous an effort as circumstances permitted once more to "fire
the Southern heart." A public meeting was called, where the
speeches, judging from the meager reports printed, were as
denunciatory and bellicose as the bitterest Confederate could
desire. Davis particularly is represented to have excelled himself
in defiant heroics. "Sooner than we should ever be united again,"
he said, "he would be willing to yield up everything he had on
earth—if it were possible, he would sacrifice a thousand
lives"; and he further announced his confidence <SPAN name="page486" id="page486"></SPAN> that they
would yet "compel the Yankees, in less than twelve months, to
petition us for peace on our own terms."</p>
<p>This extravagant rhetoric would seem merely grotesque, were it
not embittered by the reflection that it was the signal which
carried many additional thousands of brave soldiers to death, in
continuing a palpably hopeless military struggle.</p>
<hr style="width: 65%;" />
<br/>
<br/>
<br/>
<br/>
<SPAN name="page487" id="page487"></SPAN>
<div style="break-after:column;"></div><br />