Papers Of Abraham Lincoln

Alonzo J. Grover to Abraham Lincoln, 9 January [1860]1
Earlville LaSall Co Ill^s
Jan. 9^th 1859.Hon Abram LincolnDr[Dear] Sir—
It has been publicly stated in this place that you endorse the Fugative Slave Law of 1850, as constitutional in its object, & in its provisions in All Respects–2 You would would confer a favour upon the writer of this, as well as upon many Republicans hereabouts by briefly giving your views upon the matter–3
Yours Very Truly A. J. Grover
Mem.[Member] of Rep. County Com.[Committee] of La Salle Co.

<Page 2>

[Envelope]

EARLVILLE ILL.[ILLINOIS]
JAN[JANUARY] 10Hon Abram LincolnSpringfieldIll^s

[ docketing ]
Lincoln, Abraham (President)

A. J. Grover.4

1Alonzo J. Grover wrote and signed this letter. He also wrote Abraham Lincoln’s name and address on the envelope. Grover misdated this letter. Lincoln responded on January 15, 1860, and Grover’s reply to Lincoln came on January 31, 1860.

2It is unclear to which public statement Grover refers. The editors have been unable to find any published accounts of a public statement at Earlville concerning Lincoln’s stance on the Fugitive Slave Act. Lincoln did, however, publicly uphold the right of the U.S. Congress to enact such a law. In fact, while serving in the U.S. House of Representatives in January 1849, Lincoln proposed an amendment to a resolution regarding slavery in Washington, DC, which included clauses providing for the gradual emancipation of enslaved people and the extradition of self-emancipated persons. Later, in a October 16, 1854 speech at Peoria, Illinois, Lincoln expressed his opposition to Democratic Senator Stephen A. Douglas’s Kansas-Nebraska Act which effectively repealed the Missouri Compromise of 1820. Though he argued against “permitting slavery to go into our own free territory,” Lincoln also conceded that “when they (slaveholders) remind us of their constitutional rights, I acknowledge them, not grudgingly, but fully, and fairly; and I would give them any legislation for the reclaiming of their fugitives, which should not, in its stringency, be more likely to carry a free man into slavery, than our ordinary criminal laws are to hang an innocent one.” Framing the restoration of the Missouri Compromise as critical to the preservation of the Union, Lincoln warned against Northerners who “defy all constitutional restraints, resist the execution of the fugitive slave law, and even menace the institution of slavery in the states where it exists” as well as Southerners who “claim the constitutional right to take to and hold slaves in the free states.” He then further counseled former Whigs who “hesitate to go for its (the Missouri Compromise’s) restoration” lest they be deemed abolitionists, stating “Stand with anybody that stands RIGHT. Stand with him while he is right, and PART with him when he goes wrong. Stand WITH the abolitionist in restoring the Missouri Compromise; and stand AGAINST him when he attempts to repeal the fugitive slave law. In the latter case you stand with the southern disunionist. What of that? you are still right. In both cases you are right. In both cases you oppose the dangerous extremes.”
Lincoln’s stance on the Fugitive Slave Act conflicted with the views of many anti-slavery, Anti-Nebraska, and, later, Republican men in Northern Illinois. Several La Salle County communities such as Ottawa, Freedom, and Lowell served as Underground Railroad stations. In one case in October 1859, a number of Ottawa residents organized a meeting to collect funds for the defense of a local Black man named Berkeley who had been jailed in Missouri, sold to a slaveholder, and subsequently escaped his captors. That same meeting adopted a resolution denouncing the Fugitive Slave Act as “a tyrannic violation of the inherent rights of American citizens.” Beyond La Salle County, an Anti-Nebraska convention met at Aurora, Illinois, in 1854 to adopt a political platform calling for the repeal of the Fugitive Slave Act, the abolition of slavery in DC, abolition of the interstate slave trade, exclusion of slavery from all U.S. territories, and a ban on the admission of new slave states. This platform later became the subject of debate during the 1858 U.S. Senate race. Lincoln had been the Republican candidate from Illinois for Senate in 1858. In the summer and fall of that year, Lincoln and his Democratic opponent, the incumbent Douglas, held a series of seven political debates throughout the state. The issue of slavery and its expansion to U.S. territories served as a focal point of the Senate race. During the first debate at Ottawa on August 21, 1858, Douglas erroneously accused Lincoln of helping to write the aforementioned platform, attributing its origin to a different Anti-Nebraska convention in Springfield, Illinois. In truth, no such resolution appeared in the platform adopted at the state convention in Springfield. Lincoln also took no part in either convention. Still, Douglas questioned whether Lincoln stood committed to the platform’s principles.

Michael Burlingame, Abraham Lincoln: A Life (Baltimore: The Johns Hopkins University Press, 2008), 1:288-90, 380-81, 458, 489-90; Report of Speech at Peoria, Illinois; U. J. Hoffman, History of La Salle County, Illinois (Chicago: S. J. Clarke, 1906), 109-10; First Debate with Stephen A. Douglas at Ottawa, Illinois; First Debate with Stephen A. Douglas at Ottawa, Illinois; First Debate with Stephen A. Douglas at Ottawa, Illinois.

3In his January 15 reply, Lincoln directed Grover to see his August 27, 1858 joint debate with Douglas at Freeport, Illinois. There Lincoln responded to Douglas’s interrogatories from the Ottawa debate, including Douglas’s question whether Lincoln favored, as Douglas claimed he did in 1854, the “unconditional repeal of the fugitive slave law.” Lincoln asserted that “I do not now, nor ever did, stand in favor of the unconditional repeal of the fugitive slave law.” He then reiterated his belief that “under the Constitution of the United States, the people of the Southern States are entitled to a Congressional Fugitive Slave Law.” Here Lincoln added a caveat, noting that the “existing Fugitive Slave Law” should have been “framed so as to be free from some of the objections that pertain to it, without lessening its efficiency.” Still, Lincoln declined to revive controversy or “agitation in regard to an alteration or modification” of the existing version of the law. In short, as Lincoln explained in his reply to Grover, he recognized that “Congress has constitutional power to enact a Fugitive slave law,” but he did not publicly comment on the constitutionality of the existing law’s specific provisions. At Freeport, Lincoln also stated that he favored Congressional prohibition of slavery in the territories and indicated while he personally favored abolishing slavery in DC, he would only vote for it if three conditions were met: that the abolition be gradual; that a majority of voters approve it; and that “unwilling owners” be compensated for the loss of enslaved persons. On the questions of prohibiting admission of new slave states and banning the slave trade, Lincoln denied standing “pledged” to these proposals.
Burlingame, Abraham Lincoln: A Life, 1:500-2; Second Debate with Stephen A. Douglas at Freeport, Illinois; Second Debate with Stephen A. Douglas at Freeport, Illinois; Second Debate with Stephen A. Douglas at Freeport, Illinois.

4Lincoln wrote this docketing.