Abraham Lincoln

If these are not correct please write immediately.

Our apology for the delay is that we have been weighed down by other matters; mine that I have but to-day

returned to town.

Respectfully,

Charles C. Nott.

To Hon. Abraham Lincoln.

69 WALL STREET, N.Y.

Sept. 17, 1860.

_Dear Sir_:

We forward you by this day's express 250 copies, with the last corrections. I delayed sending, thinking that

Abraham Lincoln

62

---

you would prefer these to those first printed.

The "Abraham Baldwin letter" referred to in your last I regret to say has not arrived. From your not touching

the proofs in that regard, I inferred (and hope) that the correction was not itself an error.

Should you wish a larger number of copies do not hesitate to let us know; it will afford us much pleasure to

furnish them and no inconvenience whatever.

Respectfully, etc.,

CHARLES C. NOTT.

Hon. A. Lincoln.

SPRINGFIELD, ILLS., Sept. 22, 1860.

CHARLES C. NOTT, Esq.,

_My Dear Sir_:

Yours of the 17th was duly received--The 250 copies have not yet arrived--I am greatly obliged to you for

what you have done, and what you propose to do.

The "Abraham Baldwin letter" in substance was that I could not find the Journal of the Confederation

Congress for the session at which was passed the Ordinance of 1787--and that in stating Mr. Baldwin had

voted for its passage, I had relied on a communication of Mr. Greeley, over his own signature, published in

the New York Weekly Tribune of October 15, 1859. If you will turn to that paper, you will there see that Mr.

Greeley apparently copies from the Journal, and places the name of Mr. Baldwin among those of the men who

voted for the measure.

Still; if the Journal itself shows differently, of course it is right.

Yours very truly,

A. LINCOLN.

The Address of

THE HON. ABRAHAM LINCOLN,

In Vindication of the Policy of the Framers of the

Constitution and the Principles of the

Republican Party.

Delivered at Cooper Institute, February 27th, 1860.

Issued by the Young Men's Republican Union.

With Notes by

Abraham Lincoln

63

---

CHARLES C. NOTT and CEPHAS BRAINERD,

Members of the Board of Control.

OFFICERS OF THE UNION

CHARLES T. RODGERS, President. DEXTER A. HAWKINS, Vice-President. ERASMUS STERLING,

Secretary. WILLIAM M. FRANKLIN, Treasurer.

EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE

CEPHAS BRAINERD, Chairman. BENJAMIN P. MANIERRE, RICHARD C. McCORMICK, CHARLES

C. NOTT, CHARLES H. COOPER, P.G. DEGRAW, JAMES H. WELSH, E.C. JOHNSON, LEWIS M.

PECK.

ADVISORY BOARD

WM. CULLEN BRYANT, DANIEL DREW, HIRAM BARNEY, WILLIAM V. BRADY, JOHN JAY,

GEORGE W. BLUNT, HENRY A. HURLBUT, ABIJAH MANN, JR., HAMILTON FISH, FRANCIS

HALL, HORACE GREELEY, CHARLES A. PEABODY, EDGAR KETCHUM, JAMES KELLY, GEORGE

FOLSOM, WILLIAM CURTIS NOYES, BENJAMIN F. MANIERRE.

PREFACE

This edition of Mr. Lincoln's address has been prepared and published by the Young Men's Republican Union

of New York, to exemplify its wisdom, truthfulness, and learning. No one who has not actually attempted to

verify its details can understand the patient research and historical labor which it embodies. The history of our

earlier politics is scattered through numerous journals, statutes, pamphlets, and letters; and these are defective

in completeness and accuracy of statement, and in indices and tables of contents. Neither can any one who has

not travelled over this precise ground appreciate the accuracy of every trivial detail, or the self-denying

impartiality with which Mr. Lincoln has turned from the testimony of "the Fathers," on the general question of

slavery, to present the single question which he discusses. From the first line to the last--from his premises to

his conclusion, he travels with swift, unerring directness which no logician ever excelled--an argument

complete and full, without the affectation of learning, and without the stiffness which usually accompanies

dates and details. A single, easy, simple sentence of plain Anglo-Saxon words contains a chapter of history

that, in some instances, has taken days of labor to verify and which must have cost the author months of

investigation to acquire. And, though the public should justly estimate the labor bestowed on the facts which

are stated, they cannot estimate the greater labor involved on those which are omitted--how many pages have

been read--how many works examined--what numerous statutes, resolutions, speeches, letters, and

biographies have been looked through. Commencing with this address as a political pamphlet, the reader will

leave it as an historical work--brief, complete, profound, impartial, truthful--which will survive the time and

the occasion that called it forth, and be esteemed hereafter, no less for its intrinsic worth than its unpretending

modesty.

NEW YORK, September, 1860.

ADDRESS

MR. PRESIDENT AND FELLOW-CITIZENS OF NEW YORK:--The facts with which I shall deal this

evening are mainly old and familiar; nor is there anything new in the general use I shall make of them. If there

shall be any novelty, it will be in the mode of presenting the facts, and the inferences and observations

following that presentation.

Abraham Lincoln

64

---

In his speech last autumn, at Columbus, Ohio, as reported in the New York Times, Senator Douglas said:

"_Our fathers, when they framed the Government under which we live, understood this question just as well,

and even better than we do now_."

I fully indorse this, and I adopt it as a text for this discourse. I so adopt it because it furnishes a precise and an

agreed starting-point for a discussion between Republicans and that wing of the Democracy headed by

Senator Douglas. It simply leaves the inquiry: "_What was the understanding those fathers had of the question

mentioned_?"

What is the frame of Government under which we live?

The answer must be: "The Constitution of the United States." That Constitution consists of the original,

framed in 1787, (and under which the present Government first went into operation,) and twelve subsequently

framed amendments, the first ten of which were framed in 1789.[4]

Who were our fathers that framed the Constitution? I suppose the "thirty-nine" who signed the original

instrument may be fairly called our fathers who framed that part of the present Government. It is almost

exactly true to say they framed it, and it is altogether true to say they fairly represented the opinion and

sentiment of the whole nation at that time. Their names, being familiar to nearly all, and accessible to quite

all, need not now be repeated.[5]

I take these "thirty-nine" for the present, as being "our fathers who framed the Government under which we

live."

What is the question which, according to the text, those fathers understood "just as well, and even better than

we do now"?

It is this: Does the proper division of local from federal authority, or anything in the Constitution, forbid our