President Lincoln and the Sioux Indian uprising in Minnesota in 1862

[Eva Elisabeth]

(09-23-2014 11:38 AM)L Verge Wrote:  I feel that Mr. Lincoln had no qualms about executing at least some of the "rebelling" Sioux - just as he knew that the "rebelling" Southerners had to be defeated - no matter the cost.

From what I read I would veto this.

Not to forget - more than 350 whites had been killed by the Indians. Gen. Pope and Minnes. Senator M. Wilkinson pressed on all 303 convicted men to be executed. Lincoln himself deliberately went through the record of each of the 303 convicted men (how the record was collected is another point he couldn't influence much then anymore), and of the remaining 37, 35 were found guilty of murder and 2 were convicted of rape. He carefully wrote down all names (such as "Te-he-hdo-ne-cha") himself and warned the telegraph officer not to make the slightes error when wiring the list to the military authorities as this might kill the wrong man. Why such efforts when it was just about "executing at least some of the "rebelling" Sioux"?

When in 1864, Minnesota Governor Ramsey told President Lincoln that if he had executed all 303 Indians, he would have won a larger majority for his reelection, Lincoln replied: “I could not afford to hang men for votes." This is also IMO but little compatible with "he knew that the 'rebelling' Southerners had to be defeated - no matter the cost".