Abraham Lincoln, former slaves & Civil Rights

[David Lockmiller]

(02-12-2022 09:47 PM)Steve Wrote:  Here's a follow-up interview with the author of the above article that's also worth a read:

https://www.theguardian.com/books/2022/f...hell-obama

I definitely think David might be interested in this article.

The Guardian article reads:

In light of the 1619 Project, the murder of George Floyd and the national conversation about race, does Lincoln need defending?

I think he does. Nikole Hannah-Jones’s lead 1619 essay in the New York Times Magazine is beautifully written and does important work of reminding Americans of the centrality of race to the American story. But she gets Lincoln wrong. She focuses on one moment in August 1862 when Lincoln condescendingly told a Black delegation they should lead the freedpeople out of the country through a process known as colonization. But she doesn’t give the context for that meeting or explain why he did what he did.

A reader would be left with the impression that Lincoln did not treat Black visitors well, but nothing could be further from the truth. In every other instance, he welcomed them warmly, and listened to their concerns.




Nikole Hannah-Jones writes an essay that wins the 2020 Pulitzer Prize for Commentary. In large measure, she discusses therein the March 14, 1862 meeting in the White House with President Abraham Lincoln and a Committee of five prominent black free men on the subject of black colonization.

The following is from my post #17 (5-25-2020) on the thread titled RE: The 1619 Project (in the New York Times Magazine).

But [Nikole Hannah-Jones]does say: "As Lincoln closed the remarks, Edward Thomas, the delegation’s chairman, informed the president, perhaps curtly, that they would consult on his proposition. ‘Take your full time,’ Lincoln said. ‘No hurry at all.’”

The implication of these last two sentences is that the Committee Chairman's immediate reaction to the speech was strongly negative and that the President's last remark to the Committee was of a condescending nature. [Emphasis added for this post today (2-13-2022)]

However, the New York Times [in an August, 1862 article on this same meeting] describes the close of President Lincoln's speech in the following manner:

I want you to let me know whether this can be done or not. This is the practical part of my wish to see you. These are subjects of very great importance -- worthy of a month's study, of a speech delivered in an hour. I ask you, then, to consider seriously, not pertaining to yourselves merely, nor for your race and ours for the present time, but as one of the things, if successfully managed, for the good of mankind -- not confined to the present generation . . . ."

The Chairman of the delegation briefly replied that "they would hold a consultation and in a short time give an answer." The President said, "Take your full time -- no hurry at all."

Although the President had suggested in the close of his speech that "these are subjects of very great importance -- worthy of a month's study, of a speech delivered in an hour," the Committee chairman, in behalf of the entire Committee, responded to President Lincoln's proposal in a letter two day's later on August 16, 1862 as follows:

“We were entirely hostile to the movement until all the advantages were so ably brought to our views by you,” the delegation chief wrote Lincoln two days later, promising to consult with prominent blacks in Philadelphia, New York, and Boston who he hoped would “join heartily in Sustaining Such a movement.” (Source: Team of Rivals, The Political Genius of Abraham Lincoln, Doris Kearns Goodwin, (2005), page 469.)