Unwanted Facts: Facts that Most Books on the Lincoln Assassination Ignore

[Steve]

(11-30-2018 07:11 PM)mikegriffith1 Wrote:  One of the biggest ignored facts is that Lincoln and the Radicals were far apart on Reconstruction and that the Radicals bitterly opposed Lincoln’s lenient, forgiving approach. This ignored fact is accompanied by the Big Lie myth that shortly before Lincoln died, he moved close to the Radical position on Reconstruction and thereefore no Radicals had any motive to assassinate him. Incredible as it may seem, this myth is based almost entirely on Attorney General James Speed’s claim that at the April 14 cabinet meeting, held less than 14 hours before he was shot, Lincoln “never seemed so near” the Radical view on Reconstruction.

Now, of course, this was the same James Speed who issued the obscene legal opinion that it was perfectly constitutional to try the alleged Booth conspirators in a military court, even though civilian courts were open and operating, and he based this erroneous opinion on the unproven—and later debunked—claim that Booth and his gang had acted on orders and with backing from Confederate leaders, including Jefferson Davis himself.

Anyway, back to Speed’s claim about what Lincoln said at the April 14 cabinet meeting. Interior Secretary Caleb Smith and Navy Secretary Gideon Welles remembered Lincoln’s statements at that meeting very differently from how Speed did. Smith recalled that Lincoln expressed “charity for all” on Reconstruction. Gideon Welles gave us a detailed account of the meeting, which is 180 degrees different from Speed’s claim:

The President said he proposed to bring forward that subject, although he had not had time as yet to give much attention to the details of the paper which the Secretary of War had given him only the day before; but that it was substantially, in its general scope, the plan which we had sometimes talked over in Cabinet meetings. We should probably make some modifications, prescribe further details; there were some suggestions which he should wish to make, and he desired all to bring their minds to the question, for no greater or more important one could come before us, or any future Cabinet. He thought it providential that this great rebellion was crushed just as Congress had adjourned, and there were none of the disturbing elements of that body to hinder Sand embarrass us. If we were wise and discreet, we should reanimate the States and get their governments in successful operation, with order prevailing and the Union reestablished, before Congress came together in December. This he thought important. We could do better; accomplish more without than with them. There were men in Congress who, if their motives were good, were nevertheless impracticable, and who possessed feelings of hate and vindictiveness in which he did not sympathize and could not participate.

He hoped there would be no persecution, no bloody work, after the war was over.
None need expect he would take any part in hanging or killing those men, even the worst of them. Frighten them out of the country, open the gates, let down the bars, scare them off, said he, throwing up his hands as if scaring sheep. Enough lives have been sacrificed. We must extinguish our resentments if we expect harmony and union. There was too much of a desire on the part of some of our very good friends to be masters, to interfere with and dictate to those States, to treat the people not as fellow-citizens; there was too little respect for their rights. He did not sympathize in these feelings. . . .

He impressed upon each and all the importance of deliberating upon and carefully considering the subject before us, remarking that this was the great question pending, and that we must now begin to act in the interest of peace. He again declared his thankfulness that Congress was not in session to embarrass us.

The President was assassinated that evening, and I am not aware that he exchanged a word with any one after the Cabinet meeting of that day on the subject of a resumption of the national authority in the States where it had been suspended, or of reestablishing the Union. (“Lincoln and Johnson: Their Plan of Reconstruction and the Resumption of National Authority,” The Galaxy Magazine, April 1872, pp. 526-527)

Of course, we also know that, just hours after Lincoln died, some Radicals expressed the view that Lincoln's death was a "godsend" to the country, that his views on Reconstruction had been unacceptable, and that they hoped/expected that Andrew Johnson would support imposing harsh reunification terms on the South. I discuss this fact at length in "Unwanted Evidence: William Hanchett, the Neff-Guttridge Documents, and Evidence that Lincoln Was Killed by a Radical Republican Plot," http://miketgriffith.com/files/unwanted.pdf

It's unfortunately unknowable how Lincoln would've approached Reconstruction policy. Although, he did seem to favor giving voting rights and educating former slaves. On those issues he seems closer to the Radical Republicans than Pres. Johnson was. But whatever Lincoln's Reconstruction policy would've been, it would likely have evolved in response to events in the South. I find it hard to believe that Lincoln would've approved of the 1865-1866 "Black Codes" and their broad vagrancy laws that allowed them to arrest former slaves for minor offenses and sentence them to involuntary labor which Pres. Johnson didn't seem to have a problem with.