willing to live by, and, if it be the pleasure of Almighty God,
to die by.
FIRST INAUGURAL ADDRESS 6$
FIRST INAUGURAL ADDRESS
(March 4, 1861)
Fellow Citizens of the United States : In compliance with a
custom as old as the government itself, I appear before you
to address you briefly, and to take in your presence the oath
prescribed by the Constitution of the United States to be
taken by the President '' before he enters on the execution 5
of his office."
I do not consider it necessary at present for me to discuss
those matters of administration about which there is no special
anxiety or excitement.
Apprehension seems to exist among the people of the South- 10
ern States that by the accession of a Republican administration
their property and their peace and personal security are to be
endangered. There has never been any reasonable cause for
such apprehension. Indeed, the most ample evidence to the
contrary has all the while existed and been open to their inspec- 1 5
tion. It is found in nearly all the published speeches of him
who now addresses you. I do but quote from one of those
speeches when I declare that '' I have no purpose, directly or
indirectly, to interfere with the institution of slavery in the states
where it exists. I believe I have no lawful right to do so, and I 20
have no inclination to do so,'' Those who nominated and elected
me did so with full knowledge that I had made this and
many similar declarations, and had never recanted them. And,
more than this, they placed in the platform for my acceptance,
and as a law to themselves and to me, the clear and emphatic 25
resolution which I now read :
Resolved^ That the maintenance inviolate of the rights of the states,
and especially the right of each state to order and control its own
domestic institutions according to its own judgment exclusively, is
essential to that balance of power on which the perfection and 30
66 ABRAHAM LINCOLN
endurance of our political fabric depend, and we denounce the law-
less invasion by armed force of the soil of any state or territory, no
matter under what pretext, as among the gravest of crimes.
I now reiterate these sentiments ; and, in doing so, I only
5 press upon the public attention the most conclusive evidence
of which the case is susceptible, that the property, peace, and
security of no section are to be in any wise endangered by the
now incoming administration. I add, too, that all the protection
which, consistently with the Constitution and the laws, can be
10 given, will be cheerfully given to all the states when lawfully de-
manded, for whatever cause — as cheerfully to one section as
to another.
There is much controversy about the delivering up of fugi-
tives from service or labor. The clause I now read is as plainly
15 written in the Constitution as any other of its provisions :
No person held to service or labor in one state, under the laws
thereof, escaping into another, shall in consequence of any law or
regulation therein be discharged from such service or labor, but shall
be delivered up on claim of the party to whom such service or labor
20 may be due.
It is scarcely questioned that this provision was intended by
those who made it for the reclaiming of what we call fugitive
slaves ; and the intention of the lawgiver is the law. All mem-
bers of Congress swear their support to the whole Constitution
25 — to this provision as much as to any other. To the proposi-
tion, then, that slaves w^hose cases come within the terms of this
clause " shall be delivered up," their oaths are unanimous. Now,
if they would make the effort in good temper, could they not
with nearly equal unanimity frame and pass a law by means of
30 which to keep good that unanimous oath ?
There is some difference of opinion whether this clause should
be enforced by national or by state authority ; but surely that
FIRST INAUGURAL ADDRESS 6/
difference is not a very material one. If the slave is to be sur-
rendered, it can be of but little consequence to him or to others
by which authority it is done. And should any one in any case
be content that his oath shall go unkept on a merely unsub-
stantial controversy as to how it shall be kept ? r
Again, in any law upon this subject, ought not all the safe-
guards of liberty know^n in civilized and humane jurisprudence
to be introduced, so that a free man be not, in any case, sur-
rendered as a slave ? And might it not be well at the same time
to provide by law for the enforcement of that clause in the lo
Constitution which guarantees that '' the citizen of each state
shall be entitled to all privileges and immunities of citizens in
the several states " ?
I take the official oath to-day with no mental reservations,
and with no purpose to construe the Constitution or laws by 15
any hypercritical rules. And while I do not choose now to
specify particular acts of Congress as proper to be enforced,
I do suggest that it will be much safer for all, both in official
and private stations, to conform to and abide by all those acts
which stand unrepealed, than to violate any of them, trusting 20
to find impunity in having them held to be unconstitutional.
It is seventy-two years since the first inauguration of a pres-
ident under our national Constitution. During that period
fifteen different and greatly distinguished citizens have, in suc-
cession, administered the executive branch of the government. 25
They have conducted it through many perils, and generally with
great success. Yet, with all this scope of precedent, I now
enter upon the same task for the brief constitutional term of
four years under great and peculiar difficulty. A disruption of
the federal Union, heretofore only menaced, is now formidably 30
attempted.
I hold that, in contemplation of universal law and of the
Constitution, the union of these states is perpetual. Perpetuity
is implied, if not expressed, in the fundamental law of all
68 ABRAHAM LINCOLN
national governments. It is safe to assert that no government
proper ever had a provision in its organic law for its own ter-
mination. Continue to execute all the express provisions of our
national Constitution, and the Union will endure forever — it
5 being impossible to destroy it except by some action not pro-
vided for in the instrument itself.
Again, if the United States be not a government proper, but
an association of states in the nature of contract merely, can
it, as a contract, be peaceably unmade by less than all the
10 parties who made it ? One party to a contract may violate
it — break it, so to speak ; but does it not require all to law-
fully rescind it ?
Descending from these general principles, we find the prop-
osition that, in legal contemplation the Union is perpetual
15 confirmed by the history of the Union itself. The Union is
much older than the Constitution. It was formed, in fact, by
the Articles of Association in 1774. It was matured and con-
tinued by the Declaration of Independence in 1776. It was
further matured, and the faith of all the then thirteen states
20 expressly plighted and engaged that it should be perpetual, by
the Articles of Confederation in 1778. And, finally, in 1787
one of the declared objects for ordaining and establishing the
Constitution was '' to form a more perfect Union."
But if the destruction of the Union by one or by a part only of
3^ the states be lawfully possible, the Union is less perfect than be-
fore the Constitution, having lost the vital element of perpetuity.
It follows from these views that no state upon its own mere
motion can lawfully get out of the Union ; that resolves and
ordinances to that effect are legally void ; and that acts of vio-
30 lence, within any state or states, against the authority of the
United States, are insurrectionary or revolutionary, according
to circumstances.
I therefore consider that, in view of the Constitution and the
laws, the Union is unbroken ; and to the extent of my ability I
FIRST INAUGURAL ADDRESS 69
shall take care, as the Constitution itself expressly enjoins upon
me, that the laws of the Union be faithfully executed in all the
states. Doing this I deem to be only a simple duty on my
part ; and I shall perform it so far as practicable, unless my
rightful masters, the American people, shall withhold the requi- 5
site means, or in some authoritative manner direct the con-
trary. I trust this will not be regarded as a menace, but only
as the declared purpose of the Union that it will constitution-
ally defend and maintain itself.
In doing this there needs to be no bloodshed or violence ; 10
and there shall be none, unless it be forced upon the national
authority. The power confided to me will be used to hold,
occupy, and possess the property and places belonging to the
government, and to collect the duties and imposts ; but beyond
what may be necessary for these objects, there will be no inva- 15
sion, no using of force against or among the people anvwhere.
Where hostility to the United States, in any interior locality,
shall be so great and universal as to prevent competent resi-
dent citizens from holding the federal offices, there will be no
attempt to force obnoxious strangers among the people for that 20
object. While the strict legal right may exist in the government
to enforce the exercise of these offices, the attempt to do so
would be so irritating, and so nearly impracticable withal, that I
deem it better to forego for the time the uses of such offices.
The mails, unless repelled, will continue to be furnished in 25
all parts of the Union. So far as possible, the people Qvery-
where shall have that sense of perfect security which is most
favorable to calm thought and reflection. The course here in-
dicated will be followed unless current events and experience
shall show a modification or change to be proper, and in every 30
case and exigency my best discretion will be exercised according
to circumstances actually existing, and with a view and a hope
of a peaceful solution of the national troubles and the restora-
tion of fraternal sympathies and affections.
70 ABRAHAM LINCOLN
That there are persons in one section or another who seek
to destroy the Union at all events, and are glad of any pretext
to do it, I will neither afiEirm nor deny ; but if there be such, I
need address no word to them. To those, however, who really
5 love the Union may I not speak ?
Before entering upon so grave a matter as the destruction of
our national fabric, with all its benefits, its memories, and its
hopes, would it not be wise to ascertain precisely why we do it ?
Will you hazard so desperate a step while there is any possi-
10 bility that any portion of the ills you fly from have no real ex-
istence ? Will you, while the certain ills you fly to are greater
than all the real ones you fly from — will you risk the commis-
sion of so fearful a mistake ?
All profess to be content in the LTnion if all constitutional
15 rights can be maintained. Is it true, then, that any right,
plainly written in the Constitution, has been denied ? I think
not. Happily the human mind is so constituted that no party
can reach to the audacity of doing this. Think, if you can, of a
single instance in which a plainly written provision of the Con-
20 stitution has ever been denied. If by the mere force of num-
bers a majority should deprive a minority of any clearly written
constitutional right, it might, in a moral point of view, justify
revolution — certainly would if such a right were a vital one.
But such is not our case. All the vital rights of minorities and
25 of individuals are so plainly assured to them by affirmations and
negations, guarantees and prohibitions, in the Constitution, that
controversies never arise concerning them. But no organic law
can ever be framed with a provision specifically applicable to
every question which may occur in practical administration. No
30 foresight can anticipate, nor any document of reasonable length
contain, express provisions for all possible questions. Shall
fugitives from labor be surrendered by national or by state
authority? The Constitution does not expressly say. May
Congress prohibit slavery in the territories ? The Constitution
FIRST INAUGURAL ADDRESS /I
does not expressly say. Must Congress protect slavery in the
territories ? The Constitution does not expressly say.
From questions of this class spring all our constitutional
controversies, and we divide upon them into majorities and
minorities. If the minority will not acquiesce, the majorit\- 5
must, or the government must cease. There is no other alter-
native ; for continuing the government is acquiescence on one
side or the other.
If a minority in such case will secede rather than acquiesce,
they make a precedent which in turn will divide and ruin them ; 10
for a minority of their own will secede from them whenever a
majority refuses to be controlled by such minority. For in-
stance, why may not any portion of a new confederacy a year
or two hence arbitrarily secede again, precisely as portions of
the present Union now claim to secede from it } All who 1 5
cherish disunion sentiments are now being educated to the
exact temper of doing this.
Is there such perfect identity of interests among the states
to compose a new Union, as to produce harmony only, and
prevent renewed secession "i 20
Plainly, the central idea of secession is the essence of anarchy.
A majority held in restraint by constitutional checks and limita-
tions, and always changing easily with deliberate changes of
popular opinions and sentiments, is the only true sovereign of
a free people. Whoever rejects it does, ^f necessity, fly to an- 25
archy or to despotism. Unanimity is impossible ; the rule of a
minority, as a permanent arrangement, is wholly inadmissible ;
so that, rejecting the majority principle, anarchy or despotism
in some form is all that is left.
I do not forget the position, assumed by some, that constitu- 30
tional questions are to be decided by the Supreme Court ; nor
do I deny that such decisions must be binding, in any case,
upon the parties to a suit, as to the object of that suit, while
they are also entitled to very high respect and consideration in
72 ABRAHAM LINCOLN
all parallel cases by all other departments of the government.
And while it is obviously possible that such decision may be erro-
neous in any given case, still the evil effect following it, being
limited to that particular case, with the chance that it may be
5 overruled and never become a precedent for other cases, can
better be borne than could the evils of a different practice. At
the same time, the candid citizen must confess that if the policy
of the government, upon vital questions affecting the whole
people, is to be irrevocably fixed by decisions of the Supreme
lo Court, the instant they are made, in ordinary litigation between
parties in personal actions, the people will have ceased to be
their own rulers, having to that extent practically resigned their
government into the hands of that eminent tribunal. Nor is
there in this view any assault upon the court or the judges. It
15 is a duty from which they may not shrink to decide cases prop-
erly brought before them, and it is no fault of theirs if others
seek to turn their decisions to political purposes.
One section of our country believes slavery is right, and
ought to be extended, while the other believes it is wrong, and
20 ought not to be extended. This is the only substantial dispute.
The fugitive-slave clause of the Constitution, and the law for
the suppression of the foreign slave-trade, are each as well en-
forced, perhaps, as any law can ever be in a community where
the moral sense of the people imperfectly supports the law
25 itself. The great body of the people abide by the dry legal
obligation in both cases, and a few break over in each. This,
I think, cannot be perfectly cured ; and it would be worse in
both cases after the separation of the sections than before. The
foreign slave trade, now imperfectly suppressed, would be ulti-
30 mately revived, without restriction, in one section, while fugitive
slaves, now only partially surrendered, would not be surren-
dered at all by the other.
Physically speaking, we cannot separate. We cannot remove
our respective sections from each other, nor build an impassable
FIRST INAUGURAL ADDRESS 73
wall between them. A husband and wife may be divorced, and
go out of the presence and beyond the reach of each other ;
but the different parts of our country cannot do this. They
cannot but remain face to face, and intercourse, either amicable
or hostile, must continue between them. Is it possible, then, 5
to make that intercourse more advantageous or more satisfac-
tory after separation than before ? Can aliens make treaties
easier than friends can make laws ? Can treaties be more faith-
fully enforced between aliens than laws can among friends ?
Suppose you go to war, you cannot fight always ; and when, 10
after much loss on both sides, and no gain on either, you cease
fighting, the identical old questions as to terms of intercourse
are again upon you.
This country, with its institutions, belongs to the people
who inhabit it. Whenever they shall grow weary of the exist- 15
ing government, they can exercise their constitutional right of
amending it, or their revolutionary right to dismember or over-
throw it. I cannot be ignorant of the fact that many worthy
and patriotic citizens are desirous of having the national Con-
stitution amended. While I make no recommendation of amend- 20
ments, I fully recognize the rightful authority of the people
over the whole subject, to be exercised in either of the modes
prescribed in the instrument itself ; and I should, under exist-
ing circumstances, favor rather than oppose a fair opportunity
being afforded the people to act upon it. I will venture to add 25
that to me the convention mode seems preferable, in that it
allows amendments to originate with the people themselves,
instead of only permitting them to take or reject propositions
originated by others not especially chosen for the purpose,
and which might not be precisely such as they would wish 30
to either accept or refuse. I understand a proposed amend-
ment to the Constitution — which amendment, however, I have
not seen — has passed Congress, to the effect that the federal
government shall never interfere with the domestic institutions
74 ABRAHAM LINCOLN
of the states, including that of persons held to service. To
avoid misconstruction of what I have said, I depart from my
purpose not to speak of particular amendments so far as to
say that, holding such a provision to now be implied consti-
5 tutional law, I have no objection to its being made express
and irrevocable.
The chief magistrate derives all his authority from the people,
and they have conferred none upon him to fix terms for the
separation of the states. The people themselves can do this
lo also if they choose ; but the executive, as such, has nothing to
do with it. His duty is to administer the present government,
as it came to his hands, and to transmit it, unimpaired by him,
to his successor.
Why should there not be a patient confidence in the ultimate
15 justice of the people ? Is there any better or equal hope in the
world ? In our present differences is either party without faith
of being in the right ? If the Almighty Ruler of Nations, with
his eternal truth and justice, be on your side of the North, or on
yours of the South, that truth and that justice will surely prevail
20 by the judgment of this great tribunal of the American people.
By the frame of the government under which we live, this
same people have wisely given their public servants but little
power for mischief ; and have, with equal wisdom, provided
for the return of that little to their own hands at very short
25 intervals. While the people retain their virtue and vigilance, no
administration, by any extreme of wickedness or folly, can very
seriously injure the government in the short space of four years.
My countrymen, one and all, think calmly and well upon this
whole subject. Nothing valuable can be lost by taking time. If
30 there be an object to hurry any of you in hot haste to a step
which you would never take deliberately, that object will be
frustrated by taking time ; but no good object can be frustrated
by it. Such of you as are now dissatisfied, still have the old
Constitution unimpaired, and, on the sensitive point, the laws
FIRST INAUGURAL ADDRESS 75
of your own framing under it ; while the new administration
will have no immediate power, if it would, to change either. If
it were admitted that you who are dissatisfied hold the right
side in the dispute, there still is no single good reason for pre-
cipitate action. Intelligence, patriotism, Christianity, and a firm 5
reliance on Him who has never yet forsaken this favored land,
are still competent to adjust in the best way all our present
difficulty.
In your hands, my dissatisfied fellow countrymen, and not
in mine, is the momentous issue of civil war. The government 10
will not assail you. You can have no conflict without being
yourselves the aggressors. You have no oath registered in
heaven to destroy the government, while I shall have the most
solemn one to " preserve, protect, and defend it."
I am loath to close. We are not enemies, but friends. We 15
must not be enernies. Though passion may have strained, it
must not break our bonds of affection. The mystic chords of
memory, stretching from even,' battlefield and patriot grave to
every living heart and hearthstone all over this broad land, will
yet swell the chorus of the Union when again touched, as surely 20
they will be, by the better angels of our nature.
'j6 ABRAHAM LINCOLN
LINCOLN'S REPLY TO SECRETARY SEWARD'S
OFFER TO BECOME THE HEAD OF THE
ADMINISTRATION
,r ^ ^ April I, 1861
My Dear Sir : ^
Since parting with you I have been considering your paper
dated this day, and entitled " Some Thoughts for the President's
Consideration." The first proposition in it is, " First, We are
at the end of a month's administration, and yet without a policy
5 either domestic or foreign."
At the beginning of that month, in the inaugural, I said : " The
power confided to me will be used to hold, occupy, and possess
the property and places belonging to the government, and to
collect the duties and imposts." This had your distinct approval
10 at the time ; and, taken in connection with the order I immedi-
ately gave General Scott, directing him to employ every means
in his power to strengthen and hold the forts, comprises the
exact domestic policy you now urge, with the single exception
that it does not propose to abandon Fort Sumter.
15 Again, I do not perceive how the reenforcement of Fort
Sumter would be done on a slavery or a party issue, while that
of Fort Pickens would be on a more national and patriotic one.
The news received yesterday in regard to St. Domingo cer-
tainly brings a new item within the range of our foreign policy ;
20 but up to that time we have been preparing circulars and
instructions to ministers and the like, all in perfect harmony,
without even a suggestion that we had no foreign policy.
Upon your closing propositions — that " whatever policy we
adopt, there must be an energetic prosecution of it."
^5 ." For this purpose it must be somebody's business to pursue
and direct it incessantly."
'^ Either the President must do it himself, and be all the while
active in it, or
ON THE RELATION OF LABOR AND CAPITAL Jj
" Devolve it on some member of his cabinet. Once adopted,
debates on it must end, and all agree and abide " — I remark
that if this must be done, I must do it. When a general line of
policy is adopted, I apprehend there is no danger of its being
changed without good reason, or continuing to be a subject of un- 5
necessar}' debate ; still, upon points arising in its progress I wish,
and suppose I am entitled to have, the advice of all the cabinet.
ON THE RELATION OF LABOR AND CAPITAL
(Extract from annual message, December 3, 1861)
... It is not needed nor fitting here that a general argu-
ment should be made in favor of popular institutions ; but there
is one point, with its connections, not so hackneyed as most ic
others, to which I ask a brief attention. It is the effort to place
capital on an equal footing with, if not above, labor, in the