Abraham Lincoln 13th Amendment RE: Anti-Slavery 1864 Autographed Endorsement

When you click on links to various merchants on this site and make a purchase, this can result in this site earning a commission. Affiliate programs and affiliations include, but are not limited to, the eBay Partner Network.

Abraham Lincoln 13th Amendment RE: Anti-Slavery 1864 Autographed Endorsement:
$55000.00

As Congress Finally Considers an Anti-SlaveryAmendment, Lincoln Decides That Sending a Presidential Message to Congress WouldNot Help the Cause

“Our own friends have this underconsideration now, and will do as much
without a Message or with it. AL. February 8, 1864”

ABRAHAM LINCOLN.Autograph Endorsement Signed as President, to John D. Defrees, Washington,D.C., February 8, 1864. On verso of an excellent content Autograph LetterSigned by Defrees, February 7, 1864.

Inventory #23199

Complete Transcript

[Defrees to Lincoln] WashingtonFeby 7, 1864

Mr. President:

The last session ofthe 36th Congress proposed to so amend the Constitution of the U.S.as to prohibit any interference with slavery, (by the General Government) whereit then existed.

It was disregarded, and the slavestates resorted to war to separate from the free states. Now, why not send a message to Congressrecommending the passage of a joint resolution proposing an amendment to theConstitution forever prohibiting slavery in the States and territories?

It would be your measure and would be passed by a two thirds vote, and,eventually, three fourths of the States, through their Legislatures, wouldconsent to it.

If not done very soon theproposition will be presentedby the Democracy and claimed by them as theirproposition. This may look strange to those who do not remember with whatfacility that party can change front.

Is it not right in itself and thebest way to end slavery!

It would have a beneficial influenceon our elections in the fall.

Those who deny the justice of asecond term to you are attempting to weaken the faith of the people in yourplan of reorganizing the state Governments of the rebel states. They say,suppose a state does so change its constitution as to prohibit slavery, why mayit not, in a few years, hereafter, change back again?

The proposed amendment would answerthat cavil [objection].

A single amendment, thus submittedto the Legislature of the several states, would not open the whole constitutionto amendment—and no harm can come of it, even should it fail to receive thesanction of the constitutional number of states.

If done, it would be in accordancewith the mode provided by the constitution itself—to which no one couldreasonably object.

Many reasons could be given in itsfavor—but I only desire to call our attention to the subject, and not totrouble you with an argument.

Should you submit such a propositionI think it would be heartily endorsed by our State Convention on the 22d. inst.

I think it a great move on thepolitical chess board.

Very Respectfully Your friendJno D. Defrees

[Lincoln’s response to Defrees:]

“Ourown friends have this under consideration now, and will do as much without aMessage or with it. AL. February 8, 1864”

Historical Background

John D. Defrees (1810-1882)bought the Indianapolis Journal in1846 and founded a pro-Republican newspaper, the Atlas, in 1858. He was elected to the Indiana state Senate andtried (unsuccessfully) to gain the nomination for Indiana representative inCongress in 1858. By 1860, he was a major force in Indiana Republican politics.Lincoln named Defrees “Public Printer,”the head of the Government Printing Office, where he remained a powerfulsupporter of Lincoln and the Republican agenda.

Ending slavery became a war aim after Lincoln signed theEmancipation Proclamation on January 1, 1863. However, the proclamation wasissued as a military order, and offered no permanent protection to the freedmenand women. Abolitionists had long advocated a constitutional amendment endingslavery. Defrees’s concerns regarding the Democratic Party co-opting the issueof ending slavery is somewhat mystifying. Nearly a month earlier, on January 11,1864, former Democratic Senator John B. Henderson of slave state Missouri submitteda resolution for an anti-slavery amendment. Despite having been reared inVirginia, Henderson was against slavery, and upon the outbreak of the war, he evenchanged party affiliations to Republican, and chose to serve the Union. He waselected to the Missouri State Convention where he opposed secession. He wasalso named brigadier general of the Missouri militia before being appointed tothe Senate. Considering Defrees’s placement and access to information, it seemsunlikely that he remained unaware of Henderson’s pedigree.

There are several possibilities as to why Defrees was soconcerned with “the Democracy”trumping the Republicans on ending slavery. It could have been a straw man, setup to urge Lincoln to act. Similarly, Defrees’s support of Lincoln may havespurred him to insist that Lincoln take political credit for a bold, moral act.It could have been growing personal disdain for the Democrats. Or, “the Democracy” could have beenreferring to the upcoming presidential election. Union General George McClellanhad declared his intention to run for president in late 1863. Running as thepeace candidate, he pledged an immediate end to the war, which would haveinsured slavery\'s survival. Perhaps Defrees was worried that a fickle Americanelectorate would hand McClellan the presidency and the “proposition” of abolition would be decided by “Democracy” in favor of slavery with a McClellan win. Instead,Defrees was urging Lincoln to support the amendment before the election, as hemight not have a chance to support it after.

Defrees may have been grinding his own personal axe, sincehe had to know the Democratic Party of that time would never really try to endslavery. When Defrees wrote this letter on February 7, he almost certainly knewof Henderson’s January 11 resolution. He also probably knew that MassachusettsRepublican Senator Charles Sumner was about to propose an amendment with evenmore sweeping language. Ultimately, Defrees may have been concerned that the amendmentwould fail without presidential sanction, or perhaps wanted Lincoln to lend hissupport to Sumner’s radical amendment language. Lincoln, by contrast, played “the political chess board” and steeredclear of the issue. Two months later, the Senate brought the issue to a votewithout intervention from Lincoln and on April 8, 1864, passed by 38 to 6 an amendmentthat read: “Neither slavery nor involuntary servitude, except as a punishmentfor crime whereof the party shall have been duly convicted, shall exist withinthe United States, or any place subject to their jurisdiction.” On June 15, however,the amendment failed to garner a two-thirds majority in theHouse ofRepresentatives, just as Defrees had feared.

TheRepublican Party made abolition a central plank of its platform during the 1864campaign, though Lincoln still considered it a political hot potato and avoidedtaking direct action on the amendment. However, Victory over McClellan freedLincoln’s political hand and gave him a new mandate with enough seats in theHouse to guarantee eventual passage of the stalled amendment. Though he stilldeclined to send a public message to Congress, he began actively working behindthe scenes towards the amendment’s passage. When informed the amendment was stilltwo votes short, Lincoln reputedly told the Republican Congressmen: “I amPresident of the United States, clothed with great power. The abolition ofslavery by Constitutional provisions settles the fate, for all … time, not onlyof the millions now in bondage, but of unborn millions to come – a measure ofsuch importance that those two votes must be procured. I leave itto you to determine how it shall be done, but remember that I am President ofthe United States, clothed with immense power, and I expect you to procurethose two votes ...” Lincoln’s “chessboard” moves had been to wait for the election, refrain from sending anineffectual message to Congress, and use the power of the presidency toadvocate for the amendment’s passage when his personal influence was at itsgreatest.

Notcontent to wait until the new Congress met in March, the amendment’s supportersbrought the measure to another vote in the House on January 31, 1865, and theresolution finally passed . It was ratified by the necessary three-fourths ofthe states on December 6, 1865, and was the first amendment to beadoptedin more than sixty years.Moreover, the amendment outlawing slavery andinvoluntary servitude was the first substantive change to America’s conceptionof its liberties since the Bill of Rights was ratified in 1791. Lincoln signedthe resolution on February 1, 1865 and the responded to questions about thelegality of the Emancipation Proclamation and prior efforts to eradicateslavery by saying that the amendment “is a king’s cure for all the evils. Itwinds the whole thing up.”

Two additional Reconstruction Amendments followed: theFourteenthAmendment, which guaranteed citizenship and equal protection in 1868, andtheFifteenth Amendment, which banned racial voting restrictions, in1870.

Provenance

Ex-Forbes Collection (sale, Christie’s, 15 November 2005,lot 100). Parke Bernet Galleries, Pleadwell Sale, October 8, 1958, Lot 308.