New Lincoln Letter Fragment?
Old newspaper websites have massively upped the odds of new discoveries involving even the most extensively researched topics. Recently, I came across something that purported to be a Lincoln letter, and I couldn’t find the text published anywhere when I Googled it. I knew it was unlikely that I’d discovered an actual Lincoln letter, given how extensively this stuff is tracked, but further research makes me think that I might have found a lost excerpt of a long-known incomplete letter. It appears that the descendants of the writer cut the bottom off of the single page that made up the letter (there was writing on both sides) before relinquishing it. The missing portion seems to have included unfavorable comments about people whose feelings–or ire–they wished to spare.
The letter addresses political drama and reorganization in the 1850s. Some context for the remarks made in the letter can be found here. https://ap.gilderlehrman.org/essays/abraham-lincoln-and-jacksonian-democracy
So far as I know, the most complete published version of the text is this one, which notes the missing portion:
Dr. A. G. Henry Springfield, Ills. Nov: 19, 1858
My dear Sir
Yours of the 27th. of Sept. was received two days ago. I was at Oquawka, Henderson county, on the 9th. of October; and I may then have seen Majr. A. N. Armstrong; but having nothing then to fix my attention, I do not remember such a man. I have concluded, as the best way of serving you, to inclose your letter to E. A. Paine, Esq, of Monmouth, Ills, a reliable lawyer, asking him to do what you ask of me. If a suit is to be brought, he will correspond directly with you.
You doubtless have seen, ere this, the result of the election here. Of course I wished, but I did not much expect a better result. The popular vote [of the St]ate is with us; so that the seat in the
[Lower portion of page cut off.]
whole canvass. On the contrary, John and George Weber, and several such old democrats were furiously for me. As a general rule, out of Sangamon, as well as in it, much of the plain old democracy is with us, while nearly all the old exclusive silk-stocking whiggery is against us. I do not mean nearly all the old whig party; but nearly all of the nice exclusive sort. And why not? There has been nothing in politics since the Revolution so congenial to their nature, as the present position of the great democratic party.
I am glad I made the late race. It gave me a hearing on the great and durable question of the age, which I could have had in no other way; and though I now sink out of view, and shall be forgotten, I believe I have made some marks which will tell for the cause of civil liberty long after I am gone.
Mary joins me in sending our best wishes to Mrs. Henry and others of your family; . . . .
I think I can partially fill in that blank, though the newspaper’s transcription may not have been perfect.
On July 2, 1860, Oregon Republicans held a meeting to ratify the nomination of Abraham Lincoln as their presidential candidate. Lincoln had a lot of close friends who had moved to Oregon and surrounding territories–he had gotten some of them government patronage positions, and others had followed. They were heavily represented in the Oregon newspaper community.
Dr. Anson G. Henry, the recipient of the letter quoted above, rose to speak at the meeting. A close and loyal friend of Lincoln from the 1830s up to Lincoln’s death, Henry was warm-hearted and erratic, putting Lincoln in an awkward place. He wanted to give Henry a government job during the war, but knew his judgment was sometimes lacking. After Lincoln’s assassination, Henry assisted Mary Lincoln and her sons in getting settled in Chicago, and then tragically died in a shipwreck returning to the west coast. Only weeks before, he noted he had many letters from Lincoln he’d only make public with the family’s permission. Some have survived, and were made public by his descendants, but they are mostly from the 1860s.
At the time of this Republican gathering, it had been about ten years since Henry had moved away from Springfield, and thus since he had seen Lincoln. He began by saying he had vowed to focus on medicine, “which he knew he understood better than politics.” He loved politics and had been active in them at Springfield, apparently to the neglect of his profession. He had promised himself not to get involved with the national strife in any way that interfered with his business, he announced. But the crowd had called for him to speak, and he hoped his friends would understand that he had not changed his mind, but that “He should feel that he was recreant to a most intimate and ardent friendship of more than a quarter of century’s duration, if he should fail . . . to give expression to the satisfaction he felt at the nomination of his friend, Abraham Lincoln . . . He had known Mr. Lincoln when like himself, he was struggling with poverty, without money or family influence, with nothing to depend on on but his own good name, his indomitable perseverance, and his own right arm, to make his way to the high and honorable position he now occupies; and to show that he did not belong, and had no sympathy with, that class of whig politicians,” that had been described by the previous speaker.
The speaker referred to had mentioned what Henry said were known “in old Jackson times” as “the ‘silk stocking and ruffle shirt gentry.” While “he admitted there were such men in the whig party of those days,” he said “they are not now as a general thing in the ranks of the republican party;–they are following in the lead of that old federal aristocrat, James Buchanan . . .”
In support of this, Henry then offered an excerpt of a letter written to him by Lincoln in November 1858, during the Lincoln-Douglas debates, addressing that contest and “the positions then occupied by old whigs and old democrats.” I assume the explanations in the brackets were added by the newspaper editor, perhaps after checking in with Henry. The asterisks are used in place of an ellipsis, to indicate omitted text. The portion excised from the published version decades later must have been considered sensitive way back then, as it seems it spelled out his “foes” by name, and some were former friends, well known to the Oregon political crowd.
Weekly Oregonian
Saturday, Jul 14, 1860
Weekly Oregonian (Portland, OR) 14 July 1860, page 1 GenealogyBank https://www.genealogybank.com/doc/newspapers/image/v2%3A12C9A16D2E8D2128%40GB3NEWS-12CBEC1F186885BB%402400606-12CA07EB466C5119%400-12CA07EB466C5119 : accessed 27 November 2019
I’ve bolded the “new” text.
“Politics are terribly mixed up here since you left. As specimens it will seem strange to you that I was beaten over three hundred in Sangamon, [that gave eight hundred Whig majority in 18[?]8?] and had over eighteen hundred in Cook county [Cook county used to give over two thousand Democratic.] Perhaps still stranger that both the ———— were openly against me and for Douglas * * * On the contrary, John and George Webber and several such old Democrats were furiously for me. As a general rule, out of Sangamon, as well as in it, much of the plain old Democracy is with us, while nearly all the old exclusive silk stocking Whiggery is against us;–I do not mean nearly all the old Whig party, but nearly all the nice, exclusive sort. And why not? There has been nothing in politics since the revolution so congenial to their natures as the present position of the great Democratic party.”
The annotation explains that “John B. Weber and George R. Weber [were] brothers who were early settlers in Sangamon County and prominent citizens of Springfield.” As contrasted with the mention of the Webers (inaccurately transcribed and thus misspelled in the newspaper), “————-” seems to stand for the last name of two brothers. My best guess is Benjamin S. and Ninian W. Edwards, who were known to be aristocratic and had once been Whigs, but who had opposed him politically during this period. They were powerful socially and politically, and were also related to Lincoln by marriage, which would make naming them in a public complaint awkward. The redaction of their last name would make sense, as the point made in the letter would not be clear if that sentence were cut altogether.
The published version contains the concluding words to a sentence connecting the two sections that are separated by the asterisks: “whole canvass.” Possibly he complained further about their behavior during that canvass, before contrasting them with the Webers.
It would not be surprising to learn that someone else has found this already (in which case, please let me know!), but I figured I’d put it out there. The published version is known primarily for the last surviving paragraph (the removal of the bottom of the first page meant the loss of Lincoln’s closing words and signature, which were on the opposite side). By the time Henry read the letter to the crowd, it was clear that Lincoln had not sunk out of view, and people reading today know he still had some marks to make.