{"collection":"scripture-revelation","full_text_available":true,"graph_url":"https://unchartedknowledge.5gfusion.net/v2/api/page/gutenberg_38374/graph","html_url":"https://unchartedknowledge.5gfusion.net/v2/page/gutenberg_38374","id":"gutenberg_38374","license":"Public Domain (US)","rights_basis":"gutenberg_metadata_copyright_false","source":"gutenberg","source_url":"https://www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/38374","summary":null,"tags":["Category: Biographies","Category: History - American","Category: Religion/Spirituality","Lincoln, Abraham, 1809-1865 -- Religion"],"text":"Produced by David Widger\n\n\n\n\n\n\nABRAHAM LINCOLN: WAS HE A CHRISTIAN?\n\nBy John B. Remsburg\n\n     \"I am not a Christian.\"--Lincoln.\n\n1893\n\nTO THE FRIENDS OF\n\nABRAHAM LINCOLN\n\nWHO HAVE HAD THE COURAGE TO AFFIRM\n\nTHE TRUE AND DENY THE FALSE;\n\nAND\n\nTO THE FRIENDS\n\nOF\n\nTRUTH\n\nWHO WILL HAVE THE HONESTY TO REJECT\n\nTHE FALSE AND ACCEPT THE TRUE,\n\nTHIS VOLUME IS INSCRIBED\n\nBY THE AUTHOR.\n\n\n\n\nPREFACE.\n\nAlmost immediately after the remains of America's most illustrious son\nwere laid to rest at Springfield, one of his biographers put forward\nthe claim that he was a devout believer in Christianity. The claim was\npromptly denied by the dead statesman's friends, but only to be renewed\nagain, and again denied. And thus for a quarter of a century the\nquestion of Abraham Lincoln's religious belief has been tossed like a\nbattledoor from side to side.\n\nAs a result of this controversy, thousands have become interested in a\nsubject that otherwise might have excited but little interest. This\nis the writer's apology for collecting the testimony of more than one\nhundred witnesses, and devoting more than three hundred pages to the\nquestion, \"Was Lincoln a Christian?\"\n\nAbout few other men has so much been written as about Abraham Lincoln;\nwhile no other American's life has engaged the pens of so many\nbiographers. A thousand volumes record his name and refer to his deeds.\nIn a hundred of these he is the central figure. Nearly a score of\nelaborate biographies of him have been written. As many more books\npertaining wholly to his life, his martyrdom, and his character have\nbeen published. Of the many works on Lincoln which the writer has\nconsulted in the preparation of this volume, the following deserve to be\nmentioned: Nicolay and Hay's \"Life of Lincoln,\" Herndon and Weik's \"Life\nof Lincoln,\" Lamon's \"Life of Lincoln,\" Holland's \"Life of Lincoln,\"\nArnold's \"Life of Lincoln,\" Raymond's \"Life of Lincoln,\" Stoddard's\n\"Life of Lincoln,\" Barrett's \"Life of Lincoln,\" \"Every-Day Life of\nLincoln,\" Arnold's \"Lincoln and Slavery,\" Carpenter's \"Six Months at\nthe White House with Lincoln,\" \"Reminiscences of Lincoln,\" \"Anecdotes\nof Lincoln,\" \"Lincolniana,\" \"The President's Words,\" \"The Martyr's\nMonument,\" \"Tribute of the Nations to Lincoln,\" \"Lincoln Memorial\" and\n\"Lincoln Memorial Album.\"\n\nThe testimony concerning Lincoln's religious belief presented in this\nvolume has been derived chiefly from three sources. 1. A part of it\nhas been gathered from the works above named. In a single volume is\npublished for the first time matter which heretofore was only to be\nfound scattered through numerous volumes, some of them inaccessible to\nthe general reader. 2. A considerable portion of it has been gleaned\nfrom newspapers and periodicals containing statements brought out\nby this controversy, many of which would otherwise soon be lost or\nforgotten. 3. A very large share of it has been obtained by the writer\nfrom personal friends of Lincoln; and when we realize how rapidly those\nwho lived and moved with him are passing away--that erelong none of them\nwill remain to testify--the importance of this evidence can hardly be\noverestimated.\n\nThe writer believes that he has fully established the negative of the\nproposition that forms the title of his book. He does not expect to\nsilence the claims of the affirmative; but he has furnished an arsenal\nof facts whereby these claims may be exposed and refuted as often as\nmade.\n\nThis effort to prove that Lincoln was not a Christian will be condemned\nby many as an attempt to fasten a stain upon this great man's character.\nBut the demonstration and perpetuation of this fact will only add to his\ngreatness. It will show that he was in advance of his generation. The\nfame of Abraham Lincoln belongs not to this age alone, but will endure\nfor all time. The popular faith is transient and must perish. It is\nunpopular now to reject Christianity, but the day is fast approaching\nwhen to accept its dogmas will be considered an evidence of human\nweakness. To perpetuate the claim that Lincoln was a Christian is to\nperpetuate an idea that in a future age will lessen the luster of his\nname.\n\nIt will be urged by some that the intent and purpose of this work is\nsolely to promote the interests of Freethought. But it is not. The\nwriter advocates no cause that requires the prestige of a great name\nto make it respectable. The cause that requires the indorsement of the\ngreat to sustain it is not worthy to survive. He has prosecuted this\ninvestigation, not in the interest of any belief or creed, but in the\ninterest of truth; and truth is certainly as high as any creed, even if\nthat creed be true. In proving Lincoln a disbeliever he does not presume\nto have proved Christianity false, or Freethought true; but he has shown\nthat some Christians are not honest, and that an honest man may be a\nFreethinker. Atchison, Kan., April, 1893.\n\n\n\n\nINTRODUCTION.\n\nWas Abraham Lincoln a Christian? Many confidently believe and earnestly\ncontend that he was; others as confidently believe and as earnestly\ncontend that he was not.\n\nBefore attempting to answer this question, let us define what\nconstitutes a Christian. A Christian is one who, in common with the\nadherents of nearly all the religions of mankind, believes, 1. In the\nexistence of a God; 2. In the immortality of the soul. As distinguished\nfrom the adherents of other religions, he believes, 1. That the Bible is\na revelation from God to man; 2. That Jesus Christ was the miraculously\nbegotten son of God. He also believes in various other doctrines\npeculiar to Christianity, the chief of which are, 1. The fall of man; 2.\nThe atonement.\n\nThose who in nominally Christian countries reject the dogmas of\nChristianity are denominated Infidels, Freethinkers, Liberals,\nRationalists, unbelievers, disbelievers, skeptics, etc. These Infidels,\nor Freethinkers, represent various phases of belief, among which are,\n1. Deists, who affirm the existence of a God and the immortality of the\nsoul; 2. Atheists, who deny the existence of a God, and, generally,\nthe soul's immortality; 3. Agnostics, who neither affirm nor deny these\ndoctrines.\n\nThe following are the religious views Lincoln is said to have held as\npresented by those who affirm that he was a Christian:\n\n1. He believed in the existence of a God, and accepted the Christian\nconception of this Being.\n\n2. He believed in the immortality of the soul, and in the Christian\ndoctrine of the resurrection.\n\n3. He believed that the Bible is a revelation from God--the only\nrevealed will of God.\n\n4. He believed in the divinity of Christ--believed that Christ is God.\n\n5. He believed in the efficacy of prayer, and was accustomed to pray\nhimself.\n\n6. He believed in the doctrine of experimental religion, and had\nexperienced a change of heart.\n\n7. Although he never united with any church, he was contemplating such a\nstep at the time of his assassination.\n\n8. The church with which he would have united, we are led to infer, was\nthe Presbyterian.\n\nThe following is a statement of the theological opinions of Lincoln as\nunderstood by those who deny that he was a Christian:\n\n1. In regard to a Supreme Being he entertained at times Agnostic and\neven Atheistic opinions. During the later years of his life, however, he\nprofessed a sort of Deistic belief, but he did not accept the Christian\nor anthropomorphic conception of a Deity.\n\n2. So far as the doctrine of immortality is concerned, he was an\nAgnostic.\n\n3. He did not believe in the Christian doctrine of the inspiration of\nthe Scriptures. He believed that Burns and Paine were as much inspired\nas David and Paul.\n\n4. He did not believe in the doctrine of Christ's divinity. He affirmed\nthat Jesus was either the son of Joseph and Mary, or the illegitimate\nson of Mary.\n\n5. He did not believe in the doctrine of a special creation.\n\n6. He believed in the theory of Evolution, so far as this theory had\nbeen developed in his time.\n\n7. He did not believe in miracles and special providences. He believed\nthat all things are governed by immutable laws, and that miracles\nand special providences, in the evangelical sense of these terms, are\nimpossible.\n\n8. He rejected the doctrine of total, or inherent depravity.\n\n9. He repudiated the doctrine of vicarious atonement.\n\n10. He condemned the doctrine of forgiveness for sin.\n\n11. He opposed the doctrine of future rewards and punishments.\n\n12. He denied the doctrine of the freedom of the will.\n\n13. He did not believe in the efficacy of prayer as understood by\northodox Christians.\n\n14 He indorsed, for the most part, the criticisms of Thomas Paine on the\nBible and Christianity, and accepted, to a great extent, the theological\nand humanitarian views of Theodore Parker.\n\n15. He wrote a book (which was suppressed) against the Bible and\nChristianity.\n\n16. His connection with public affairs prevented him from giving\nprominence to his religious opinions during the later years of his life,\nbut his earlier views concerning the unsoundness of the Christian system\nof religion never underwent any material change, and he died, as he had\nlived, an unbeliever.\n\n\n\n\nABRAHAM LINCOLN: WAS HE A CHRISTIAN?\n\n\n\n\nCHAPTER I. CHRISTIAN TESTIMONY\n\n     Dr. J. G. Holland--Hon. Newton Bateman--Rev. J. A. Reed--\n     Rev. James Smith. D.D.--N. W. Edwards--Thomas Lewis--Noah\n     Brooks--Rev. Byron Sunderland. D.D.--Rev. Dr. Miner--Rev.\n     Dr. Gurley--Hon. I. N. Arnold--F. B. Carpenter--Isaac\n     Hawley--Rev. Mr. Willets--A Pious Nurse--Western Christian\n     Advocate--An Illinois Clergyman--Rev. J. H. Barrows. D D.--\n     Rev. Francis Vinton, D.D.--Bishop Simpson.\n\nIn confirmation of the claim that Lincoln was a Christian, the following\nevidence has been adduced:\n\nDR. J. G. HOLLAND.\n\nPresident Lincoln died on the 15th of April, 1865. In the same year, the\n\"Life of Abraham Lincoln,\" written by Dr. J. G. Holland, appeared. In\nthe fields of poetry and fiction, and as a magazine writer, Dr. Holland\nhad achieved an enviable reputation. His \"Life of Lincoln\" was written\nin his usually entertaining style and secured a wide circulation. He\naffirmed that Lincoln was a Christian, and by means of this work,\nand through _Scribner's Magazine_, of which he was for many years the\neditor, contributed more than any other person to render a belief in\nthis claim popular. Referring to Lincoln's administration, Dr. Holland\nsays:\n\n\"The power of a true-hearted Christian man, in perfect sympathy with a\ntrue-hearted Christian people, was Mr. Lincoln's power. Open on one side\nof his nature to all descending influences from him to whom he prayed,\nand open on the other to all ascending influences from the people whom\nhe served, he aimed simply to do his duty to God and man. Acting rightly\nhe acted greatly. While he took care of deeds fashioned by a purely\nideal standard, God took care of results. Moderate, frank, truthful,\ngentle, forgiving, loving, just, Mr. Lincoln will always be remembered\nas eminently a Christian President; and the almost immeasurably great\nresults which he had the privilege of achieving were due to the fact\nthat he was a Christian President\" (Life of Lincoln, p. 542).\n\nHON. NEWTON BATEMAN.\n\nDr. Holland's claim rests chiefly upon a confession which Lincoln is\nsaid to have made to Newton Bateman in 1860. During the Presidential\ncampaign Lincoln occupied the Executive Chamber at the State House. Mr.\nBateman was Superintendent of Public Instruction at the time, had his\noffice in the same building, and was frequently in Lincoln's room. The\nconversation in which Lincoln is alleged to have expressed a belief in\nChristianity is thus related in Holland's \"Life of Lincoln:\"\n\n\"On one of these occasions Mr. Lincoln took up a book containing a\ncareful canvass of the city of Springfield in which he lived, showing\nthe candidate for whom each citizen had declared it his intention to\nvote in the approaching election. Mr. Lincoln's friends had, doubtless\nat his own request, placed the result of the canvass in his hands.\nThis was toward the close of October, and only a few days before the\nelection. Calling Mr. Bateman to a seat at his side, having previously\nlocked all the doors, he said: 'Let us look over this book. I wish\nparticularly to see how the ministers of Springfield are going to vote.'\nThe leaves were turned, one by one, and as the names were examined Mr.\nLincoln frequently asked if this one and that were not a minister, or an\nelder, or the member of such or such a church, and sadly expressed his\nsurprise on receiving an affirmative answer. In that manner they went\nthrough the book, and then he closed it and sat silently and for some\nminutes regarding a memorandum in pencil which lay before him. At length\nhe turned to Mr. Bateman, with a face full of sadness, and said: 'Here\nare twenty-three ministers, of different denominations, and all of them\nare against me but three; and here are a great many prominent members of\nthe churches, a very large majority of whom are against me. Mr. Bateman,\nI am not a Christian--God knows I would be one--but I have carefully\nread the Bible, and I do not so understand this book;' and he drew from\nhis bosom a pocket New Testament. 'These men well know,' he continued,\n'that I am for freedom in the territories, freedom everywhere as far\nas the Constitution and laws will permit, and that my opponents are for\nslavery. They know this, and yet, with this book in their hands, in the\nlight of which human bondage cannot live a moment, they are going\nto vote against me. I do not understand it at all.' Here Mr. Lincoln\npaused--paused for long minutes--his features surcharged with emotion.\nThen he rose and walked up and down the room in the effort to retain or\nregain his self-possession. Stopping at last, he said, with a trembling\nvoice and his cheeks wet with tears: 'I know there is a God, and that he\nhates injustice and slavery. I see the storm coming, and I know that his\nhand is in it. If he has a place for me--and I think he has--I believe I\nam ready. I am nothing, but truth is everything. I know I am right, for\nChrist teaches it, and Christ is God.'\n\n\"The effect of this conversation upon the mind of Mr. Bateman, a\nChristian gentleman whom Mr. Lincoln profoundly respected, was to\nconvince him that Mr. Lincoln had, in his quiet way, found a path to the\nChristian standpoint--that he had found God, and rested on the eternal\ntruth of God. As the two men were about to separate, Mr. Bateman\nremarked: 'I have not supposed that you were accustomed to think so\nmuch upon this class of subjects. Certainly your friends generally\nare ignorant of the sentiments you have expressed to me.' He replied\nquickly: 'I know they are. I am obliged to appear different to them; but\nI think more upon these subjects than upon all others, and I have done\nso for years; and I am willing that _you_ should know it'\" (Life of\nLincoln, pp. 236-239).\n\nREV. J. A. REED.\n\nIn 1872, seven years after the publication of Holland's work, Lamon's\n\"Life of Abraham Lincoln\" was published. In this work the statements of\nHolland and Bateman concerning Lincoln's religious belief are disputed,\nand the testimony of numerous witnesses cited to prove that he lived and\ndied a disbeliever. Soon after Lamon's book was published, the Rev. J.\nA. Reed, a Presbyterian clergyman, of Springfield, Ill., delivered\na lecture in which he attempted to refute or modify the evidence of\nLamon's witnesses and prove that Lincoln died a Christian. He admitted\nthat Lincoln was an Infidel up to 1848, and possibly as late as 1862,\nbut endeavored to show that previous to his death he changed his views\nand became a Christian. The following extracts present the salient\npoints in his discourse:\n\n\"Having shown what claims Mr. Lamon's book has to being the 'only fair\nand reliable history' of Mr. Lincoln's life and views, and of what\n'trustworthy materials' it is composed, I shall now give the testimony\nI have collected to establish what has ever been the public impression,\nthat Mr. Lincoln was in his later life, and at the time of his death, a\nfirm believer in the truth of the Christian religion. The Infidelity of\nhis earlier life is not so much to be wondered at, when we consider the\npoverty of his early religious instruction and the peculiar influences\nby which he was surrounded.\" \"It does not appear that he had ever\nseen, much less read, a work on the evidences of Christianity till his\ninterview with Rev. Dr. Smith in 1848. We hear of him as reading Paine,\nVoltaire, and Theodore Parker, but nothing on the other side.\n\n\"While it is to be regretted that Mr. Lincoln was not spared to indicate\nhis religious sentiments by a profession of his faith in accordance with\nthe institutions of the Christian religion, yet it is very clear that he\nhad this step in view, and was seriously contemplating it, as a sense of\nits fitness and an apprehension of his duty grew upon him.\"\n\nIn support of his claims, Dr. Reed presents the testimony of Rev.\nDr. Smith, Ninian W. Edwards, Thomas Lewis, Noah Brooks, Rev. Dr.\nSunderland, Rev. Dr. Miner, and Rev. Dr. Gurley.\n\nREV. JAMES SMITH, D.D.\n\nThe Rev. James Smith was for many years pastor of the First Presbyterian\nChurch of Springfield. Lincoln formed his acquaintance soon after\nhe located there, remained on friendly terms with him, and with Mrs.\nLincoln frequently attended his church. Dr. Smith was one of the three\nSpringfield clergymen who supported Lincoln for President in 1860,\nand in recognition of his friendship and fidelity, he received the\nconsulship at Dundee. Dr. Reed quotes from a letter to W. H. Herndon,\ndated East Cainno, Scotland, January 24, 1867, in which Dr. Smith says:\n\n\"It is a very easy matter to prove that while I was pastor of the First\nPresbyterian Church of Springfield, Mr. Lincoln did avow his belief in\nthe divine authority and inspiration of the scriptures, and I hold that\nit is a matter of the last importance not only to the present, but all\nfuture generations of the great Republic, and to all advocates of civil\nand religious liberty throughout the world, that this avowal on his\npart, and the circumstances attending it, together with very interesting\nincidents illustrative of the excellence of his character, in my\npossession, should be made known to the public.... It was my honor\nto place before Mr. Lincoln arguments designed to prove the divine\nauthority and inspiration of the scriptures accompanied by the arguments\nof Infidel objectors in their own language. To the arguments on\nboth sides Mr. Lincoln gave a most patient, impartial, and searching\ninvestigation. To use his own language, he examined the arguments as\na lawyer who is anxious to reach the truth investigates testimony. The\nresult was the announcement by himself that the argument in favor of the\ndivine authority and inspiration of the Scriptures was unanswerable.\"\n\nHON. MINIAN W. EDWARDS.\n\nNinian W. Edwards, a brother-in-law of Lincoln, writes as follows:\n\n\"Springfield, Dec. 24th, 1872.\n\n\"Rev. Jas. A. Reed:\n\n\"Dear Sir--\n\n\"A short time after the Rev. Dr. Smith became pastor of the First\nPresbyterian church in this city, Mr. Lincoln said to me, 'I have been\nreading a work of Dr. Smith on the evidences of Christianity, and have\nheard him preach and converse on the subject, and I am now convinced of\nthe truth of the Christian religion.'\n\n\"Yours truly,\n\n\"N. W. Edwards.\"\n\nTHOMAS LEWIS.\n\nIn corroboration of Mr. Edwards's statement, Thomas Lewis, of\nSpringfield, Ill., testifies as follows:\n\n\"Springfield, Jan. 6th, 1873.\n\n\"Rev. J. A. Reed:\n\n\"Dear Sir--\n\n\"Not long after Dr. Smith came to Springfield, and I think very near the\ntime of his son's death, Mr. Lincoln said to me, that when on a visit\nsomewhere, he had seen and partially read a work of Dr. Smith on the\nevidences of Christianity which had led him to change his views about\nthe Christian religion; that he would like to get that work to finish\nthe reading of it, and also to make the acquaintance of Dr. Smith. I\nwas an elder in Dr. Smith's church, and took Dr. Smith to Mr. Lincoln's\noffice and introduced him; and Dr. Smith gave Mr. Lincoln a copy of his\nbook, as I know, at his own request.\n\n\"Yours etc.,\n\n\"Thos. Lewis.\"\n\nNOAH BROOKS. Noah Brooks, a newspaper correspondent of New York, and the\nauthor of a biography of Lincoln, gives the following testimony:\n\n\"New York, Dec. 31,1872.\n\n\"Rev. J. A. Reed,\n\n\"My Dear Sir:\n\n\"In addition to what has appeared from my pen, I will\nstate that I have had many conversations with Mr. Lincoln, which were\nmore or less of a religious character, and while I never tried to draw\nanything like a statement of his views from him, yet he freely expressed\nhimself to me as having 'a hope of blessed immortality through Jesus\nChrist.' His views seemed to settle so naturally around that statement,\nthat I considered no other necessary. His language seemed not that of an\ninquirer, but of one who had a prior settled belief in the fundamental\ndoctrines of the Christian religion. Once or twice, speaking to me of\nthe change which had come upon him, he said, while he could not fix any\ndefinite time, yet it was after he came here, and I am very positive\nthat in his own mind he identified it with about the time of Willie's\ndeath. He said, too, that after he went to the White House he kept up\nthe habit of daily prayer. Sometimes he said it was only ten words, but\nthose ten words he had. There is no possible reason to suppose that Mr.\nLincoln would ever deceive me as to his religious sentiments. In many\nconversations with him, I absorbed the firm conviction that Mr. Lincoln\nwas at heart a Christian man, believed in the Savior, and was seriously\nconsidering the step which would formally connect him with the\nvisible church on earth. Certainly, any suggestion as to Mr. Lincoln's\nskepticism or Infidelity, to me who knew him intimately from 1862 till\nthe time of his death, is a monstrous fiction--a shocking perversion.\n\n\"Yours truly,\n\n\"Noah Brooks.\"\n\nREV. BYRON SUNDERLAND, D.D.\n\nMr. Reed presents a lengthy letter from the Rev. Byron Sunderland, of\nWashington, dated Nov. 15, 1872. Dr. Sunderland in company with a party\nof friends visited the President in the autumn of 1862. In this letter\nhe says:\n\n\"After some conversation, in which he seemed disposed to have his joke\nand fun, he settled down to a serious consideration of the subject\nbefore his mind, and for one half-hour poured forth a volume of the\ndeepest Christian philosophy I ever heard.\"\n\nREV. DR. MINER.\n\nThe Rev. Dr. Miner, who met Lincoln in Washington, says:\n\n\"All that was said during that memorable afternoon I spent alone with\nthat great and good man is engraven too deeply on my memory ever to be\neffaced. I felt certain of this fact, that if Mr. Lincoln was not really\nan experimental Christian, he was acting like one. He was doing his duty\nmanfully, and looking to God for help in time of need; and, like the\nimmortal Washington, he believed in the efficacy of prayer, and it was\nhis custom to read the Scriptures and pray himself.\"\n\nREV. P. D. GURLEY, D.D.\n\nWhile in Washington, Lincoln with his family attended the Presbyterian\nchurch of which the Rev. Dr. Gurley was pastor. Mr. Reed cites the\nfollowing as the testimony of Dr. Gurley in regard to the alleged\nInfidelity of Lincoln:\n\n\"I do not believe a word of it. It could not have been true of him while\nhere, for I have had frequent and intimate conversations with him on the\nsubject of the Bible and the Christian religion, when he could have\nhad no motive to deceive me, and I considered him sound not only on the\ntruth of the Christian religion but on all its fundamental doctrines and\nteachings. And more than that, in the latter days of his chastened and\nweary life, after the death of his son Willie, and his visit to the\nbattlefield of Gettysburg, he said, with tears in his eyes, that he\nhad lost confidence in everything but God, and that he now believed\nhis heart was changed, and that he loved the Savior and, if he was not\ndeceived in himself, it was his intention soon to make a profession of\nreligion.\"\n\nHON. ISAAC N. ARNOLD.\n\nOne of the most ardent friends and admirers of Abraham Lincoln was Isaac\nN. Arnold, for several years a member of Congress from Illinois. Mr.\nArnold wrote a work on \"Lincoln and Slavery,\" and a \"Life of Lincoln\"\nwhich was published in 1885. Lincoln's religious views are thus\ndescribed by Mr. Arnold:\n\n\"No more reverent Christian than he ever sat in the Executive chair,\nnot excepting Washington. He was by nature religious; full of religious\nsentiment. The veil between him and the supernatural was very thin.\nIt is not claimed that he was orthodox, for creeds and dogmas he cared\nlittle. But in the great fundamental principles of religion, of the\nChristian; religion, he was a firm believer. Belief in the existence of\nGod, in the immortality of the soul, in the Bible as the revelation of\nGod to man, in the efficacy and duty of prayer, in reverence toward the\nAlmighty, and in love and charity to man, was the basis of his religion\"\n(Life of Lincoln, p. 446).\n\n\"His reply to the Negroes of Baltimore when they, in 1864, presented him\nwith a magnificent Bible, ought to silence forever those who charge him\nwith unbelief. He said: 'In regard to the Great Book I have only to say\nthat it is the best gift which God has given to man. All the good from\nthe Savior of the world is communicated through this book'\" (Ibid., p.\n447).\n\n\"His faith in a Divine Providence began at his mother's knee, and ran\nthrough all the changes of his life. Not orthodox, not a man of creeds,\nhe was a man of simple trust in God\" (lb., p. 448).\n\nF. B. CARPENTER.\n\nMr. Carpenter, the artist, in his popular book, entitled \"Six Months in\nthe White House with Abraham Lincoln,\" uses the following language:\n\n\"I would scarcely have called Mr. Lincoln a religious man--and yet I\nbelieve him to have been a sincere Christian\" (Six Months in the White\nHouse, p. 185).\n\nISAAC HAWLEY.\n\nIn the spring of 1887, in going from Springfield to Havana, I met Isaac\nHawley, one of the early settlers of Illinois, and who for nearly twenty\nyears resided within a few blocks of Lincoln in Springfield. In answer\nto the question, \"Was Lincoln a Christian?\" Mr. Hawley replied:\n\n\"I believe that Lincoln was a Christian, and that he was God's chosen\ninstrument to perform the mighty work he did.\"\n\nREV. MR. WILLETS.\n\nThe Rev. Mr. Willets, of Brooklyn, N. Y., is credited with the following\nstatement concerning Lincoln's reputed conversion. The information\nit contains was obtained, it is said, from a lady of Mr. Willets's\nacquaintance who met Lincoln in Washington:\n\n\"The President, it seemed, had been much impressed with the devotion\nand earnestness of purpose manifested by the lady, and on one occasion,\nafter she had discharged the object of her visit, he said to her: \"Mrs.\n--------, I have formed a high opinion of your Christian character, and\nnow, as we are alone, I have a mind to ask you to give me, in brief,\nyour idea of what constitutes a true religious experience.\" The lady\nreplied at some length, stating that, in her judgment, it consisted of a\nconviction of one's own sinfulness and weakness, and personal need of a\nSavior for strength and support; that views of mere doctrine might and\nwould differ, but when one was really brought to feel his need of divine\nhelp, and to seek the aid of the Holy Spirit for strength and guidance,\nit was satisfactory evidence of his having been born again. This was\nthe substance of her reply. When she had concluded, Mr. Lincoln was very\nthoughtful for a few moments; He at length said, very earnestly, 'If\nwhat you have told me is really a correct view of this great subject, I\nthink I can say with sincerity that I hope I am a Christian'\" (Anecdotes\nof Lincoln, pp. 166, 167).\n\nA PIOUS NURSE.\n\nA pious lady, who served in the capacity of a hospital nurse at\nWashington, and who sometimes visited the White House, testifies to\nLincoln's belief in the efficacy of prayer. The incident narrated\noccurred while a battle was in progress. The report says:\n\n\"The possibility of defeat depressed him greatly; but the lady told\nhim he must trust, and that he could at least pray. 'Yes,' said he, and\ntaking up a Bible, he started for his room. Could all the people of the\nnation have overheard the earnest petition that went up from that inner\nchamber as it reached the ears of the nurse, they would have fallen\nupon their knees with tearful and reverential sympathy\" (Anecdotes of\nLincoln, p. 120).\n\nWESTERN CHRISTIAN ADVOCATE.\n\nSoon after the close of the war, the _Western Chris-tian Advocate_, the\nleading Christian journal of the West, published the following:\n\n\"On the day of the receipt of the capitulation of Lee, as we learn from\na friend intimate with the late President Lincoln, the cabinet meeting\nwas held an hour earlier than usual. Neither the President nor any\nmember was able, for a time, to give utterance to his feelings. At the\nsuggestion of Mr. Lincoln all dropped on their knees, and offered in\nsilence and in tears their humble and heartfelt acknowledgment to the\nAlmighty for the triumph he had granted to the national cause.\"\n\nThe above is quoted by Raymond and other biographers of Lincoln.\n\nAN ILLINOIS CLERGYMAN.\n\nIn the \"Lincoln Memorial Album\" appears what is reported to be Lincoln's\n\"Reply to an Illinois Clergyman:\"\n\n\"When I left Springfield I asked the people to pray for me. I was not\na Christian. When I buried my son, the severest trial of my life, I was\nnot a Christian. But when I went to Gettysburg, and saw the graves\nof thousands of our soldiers, I then and there consecrated myself to\nChrist. Yes, I _do_ love Jesus\" (L. M. A., p. 366).\n\nREV. JOHN N. BARROWS.\n\nIn the \"Lincoln Memorial Album,\" Dr. J. H. Barrows contributes an\narticle on \"The Religious Aspects of Abraham Lincoln's Career,\" from\nwhich I quote as follows:\n\n\"In the anxious uncertainties of the great war, he gradually rose to the\nhights where Jehovah became to him the sublimest of realities, the ruler\nof nations. When he wrote his immortal Proclamation, he invoked upon it\nnot only 'the considerate judgment of mankind,' but 'the gracious favor\nof Almighty God.' When darkness gathered over the brave armies fighting\nfor the nation's life, this strong man in the early morning knelt and\nwrestled in prayer with him who holds in his hand the fate of empires.\nWhen the clouds lifted above the carnage of Gettysburg, he gave his\nheart to the Lord Jesus Christ. When he pronounced his matchless oration\non the chief battlefield of the war, he gave expression to the resolve\nthat 'this nation, under God, should have a new birth of freedom.'\nAnd when he wrote his last Inaugural Address, he gave to it the lofty\nreligious tone of an old Hebrew psalm\" (L. M. A., p. 508).\n\nREV. FRANCIS VINTON, D.D.\n\nThis clergyman, a resident of New York, and a stranger to Lincoln,\nvisited the White House in 1862, it is claimed, and indulged in an\nargument and exhortation, the effect of which was to convert the\nPresident to a belief in the Christian doctrine of the resurrection\nand the immortality of the soul. During the interview, Lincoln, it is\nreported, fell upon the neck of his clerical visitor and wept like a\nchild.\n\nBefore retiring, Dr. Vinton said: \"I have a sermon upon this subject\nwhich I think might interest you.\" \"Mr. Lincoln,\" the report continues,\n\"begged him to send it at an early day, thanking him repeatedly for his\ncheering and hopeful words. The sermon was sent, and read over and over\nby the President, who caused a copy to be made for his own private use\nbefore it was returned\" (Anecdotes of Lincoln, pp. 107, 108).\n\nBISHOP SIMPSON.\n\nThe most eminent Methodist divine of that period was Bishop Simpson.\nDuring the war his commanding influence and rare eloquence did much to\nsecure for the Union cause the united support of Northern Methodists.\nLincoln appreciated the services of the distinguished divine, and they\nbecame warm friends. When the remains of the President were conveyed to\ntheir final resting-place at Springfield, Bishop Simpson was selected\nto deliver the funeral oration. Alluding to the religious phase of\nLincoln's character, he spoke as follows:\n\n\"As a ruler, I doubt if any President has ever shown such trust in God,\nor in public documents so frequently referred to divine aid. Often did\nhe remark to friends and to delegations that his hope for our success\nrested in his conviction that God would bless our efforts because we\nwere trying to do right\" (Lincoln and Slavery, p. 673).\n\n\n\n\nCHAPTER II. REVIEW OF CHRISTIAN TESTIMONY--HOLLAND AND BATEMAN.\n\n     Character of Holland's \"Life of Lincoln\"--The Bateman\n     Interview--Inconsistency and untruthfulness of its\n     statements--Holland's Subsequent Modification and Final\n     Abandonment of his original Claims.\n\nIn the preceding chapter has been presented the Christian side of this\nquestion. It has been presented fully and fairly. Even the Christian\nclaimant must admit that it is the longest and most complete array of\ntestimony that has yet been published in support of his claim.\nThis evidence is explicit and apparently conclusive. To attempt its\nrefutation may seem presumptuous. And yet, in the face of all this\nevidence, the writer does not hesitate to declare that Abraham Lincoln\nwas not a Christian, and pledge himself to refute the statements of\nthese witnesses by a volume of testimony that is irresistible and\noverwhelming.\n\nBefore introducing this testimony the evidence already adduced will be\nreviewed. This evidence may properly be grouped into three divisions: 1.\nThe testimony of Holland and Bateman; 2. The testimony of Reed and his\nwitnesses; 3. The testimony of Arnold and the miscellaneous evidence\nremaining.\n\nHolland's \"Life of Lincoln,\" from a literary point of view, is a work\nof more than ordinary merit. It possesses a beauty of diction and\nan intellectual vigor seldom surpassed; but as an authority it\nis unreliable. Like Weems's \"Life of Washington,\" it is simply a\nbiographical romance founded upon fact, but paying little regard to\nfacts in presenting the details. Following the natural bent of Christian\nbiographers, Holland parades the subject of his work as a model\nof Christian piety. He knew that this was false; for, while he was\nunacquainted with Lincoln, he had been apprised of his unbelief--had\nbeen repeatedly told of it before he wrote his biography. But this did\nnot deter him from asserting the contrary. He knew that if he stated the\nfacts the clergy would condemn his book. They needed the influence of\nLincoln's great name to support their crumbling creed, and would have it\nat any sacrifice, particularly when its possession required no greater\nsacrifice than truth. Holland was equal to the emergency. When one of\nLincoln's friends in Springfield suggested that the less said about his\nreligious views the better, he promptly replied: \"Oh, never mind; I'll\nfix that.\" And he did. With dramatic embellishments, he presented to\nthe delight of the orthodox world the now famous, or rather infamous,\nBateman interview.\n\nThe publication of this story produced a profound sensation among\nthe personal friends of the dead President. It revealed to them the\nunpleasant fact, assuming Holland's account to be correct, either that\nNewton Bateman, who had hitherto borne the reputation of being a man\nof veracity, was an unscrupulous liar, or that Abraham Lincoln, whose\nreputation for honesty and candor, long anterior to 1860, had become\nproverbial, was a consummate hypocrite; and loath as they were to\nbelieve the former, they rejected with disdain the latter.\n\nReferring to this story, Lamon, in his \"Life of Lincoln,\" says:\n\n\"There is no dealing with Mr. Bateman except by a flat contradiction.\nPerhaps his memory was treacherous or his imagination led him astray,\nor, peradventure, he thought a fraud no harm if it gratified the strong\ndesire of the public for proofs of Mr. Lincoln's orthodoxy\" (Life of\nLincoln, p. 501).\n\nWhile Bateman undoubtedly misrepresented Lincoln in his account of\ntheir conversation--for it is not denied that he had an interview with\nLincoln--it is quite probable that he did not to the extent represented\nby Holland. Bateman doubtless exaggerated the affair, and Holland\nmagnified Bateman's report of it. In an article originally published in\nthe _Index_, and subsequently quoted by Lamon, Lincoln's law partner,\nMr. Herndon, says:\n\n\"I doubt whether Mr. Bateman said in full what is recorded there. I\ndoubt a great deal of it. I know the whole story is untrue--untrue in\nsubstance, untrue in fact and spirit. As soon as the [Holland's] 'Life\nof Lincoln' was out, on reading that part here referred to, I instantly\nsought Mr. Bateman and found him in his office. I spoke to him politely\nand kindly, and he spoke to me in the same manner. I said substantially\nto him that Mr. Holland, in order to make Mr. Lincoln a technical\nChristian, made him a hypocrite; and so his 'Life of Lincoln' quite\nplainly says. I loved Mr. Lincoln, and was mortified, if not angry, to\nsee him made a hypocrite. I cannot now detail what Mr. Bateman said, as\nit was a private conversation, and I am forbidden to make use of it in\npublic. If some good gentleman can only get the seal of secrecy removed\nI can show what was said and done. On my word, the world may take it\nfor granted that Holland is wrong--that he does not state Mr. Lincoln's\nviews correctly\" (Lamon's Life of Lincoln, p. 496).\n\nIn a lecture on \"Lincoln's Religion,\" delivered in Springfield in 1874,\nalluding to the same subject, Mr. Herndon says:\n\n\"My notes of our conversation bear date December 3, 12, and 28, 1865.\nOur conversations were private, I suppose. However, I can say this much:\nthat Mr. Bateman expressly told me Mr. Lincoln was, in the conversation\nrelated in Holland, talking _politics_ and not religion, nor\nChristianity, nor morals, as such. I have persistently dogged Mr.\nBateman for the privilege of publishing my notes, or to give me a letter\nexplaining what Mr. Lincoln did say, so that I might make known the\nfacts of the case. Mr. Bateman has as stoutly refused.\"\n\nDr. Bateman finally permitted Mr. Herndon to make public a letter,\nmarked \"confidential,\" which he had written Mr. Herndon in 1867. In this\nletter Bateman says:\n\n\"He [Lincoln] was applying the principles of moral and religious truth\nto the duties of the hour, the condition of the country, and the conduct\nof public men--ministers of the gospel. I had no thought of orthodoxy or\nheterodoxy, Unitarianism, Trinitarianism, or any other ism, during the\nwhole conversation, and I don't suppose or believe he had.\"\n\nHad Lincoln made the confession he is reported to have made, this would\nhave suggested to Mr. Bateman the idea of his admitted orthodoxy as well\nas his reputed heterodoxy. Had Lincoln declared that \"Christ is God,\"\nthis would have suggested to him the idea of Trinitarianism. It will\nbe seen, even from this letter, that instead of talking theology\nand professing a belief in Christianity, he was talking politics and\ndenouncing the intolerance and bigotry of Christian ministers.\n\nDr. Bateman privately asserts that he was not correctly reported, that\nHolland's version of the interview \"is colored.\" It is to be regretted\nthat he had not the courage to state this fact to the public, and his\nplea, \"My aversion to publicity in such matters is intense,\" is a poor\napology for refusing to do so.\n\nAs previously intimated, this story is probably founded on fact and\nhas an element of truth in it. Lincoln and Bateman had a political\ninterview, and the object of this interview was the examination and\ndiscussion of the list of Springfield voters. This list revealed the\nfact that twenty out of twenty-three clergymen and a very large majority\nof the church-members of Springfield were opposed to Lincoln. The\nsignificance of this fact Dr. Holland and Dr. Bateman have apparently\noverlooked. Why was the church opposed to him? It must have been either\nbecause it was opposed to the Republican party, or because he was\npersonally objectionable to the members of that party. His political\nprinciples were the principles of his party, his ability was conceded,\nand his moral character was above reproach. It is fair to assume\nthat the political sentiment of the Christians of Springfield was\nsubstantially the political sentiment of Northern Christians generally.\nNow, was the Northern Church overwhelmingly in favor of the extension of\nslavery? Were eighty-seven per cent, of Northern Christians Democrats?\nOr did the Christians of Springfield oppose Lincoln because he was an\nInfidel?\n\nHolland makes Bateman affirm that Lincoln \"drew from his bosom a pocket\nNew Testament.\" It is generally believed by Lincoln's friends that he\ndid not have a New Testament, that the only book used in the interview\nwas the book containing the list of Springfield voters. One of them\nsays: \"The idea that Mr. Lincoln carried the New Testament or Bible in\nhis bosom or boots, to draw on his opponents in debate, is ridiculous.\"\nIt is possible, however, that there was a New Testament in the room, and\nthat Lincoln used it to enforce an argument. Indeed, there is internal\nevidence in the story, aside from the declaration of Bateman, that such\nwas the case. The central idea in his political creed--the keynote of\nhis campaigns, both in 1858 and in 1860--was contained in that memorable\npassage, \"'A house divided against itself cannot stand.' This government\ncan not endure permanently half slave and half free.\" The figure quoted\nwas a familiar and powerful one, and Lincoln recognized its force in\ndealing with the masses. It was taken from the New Testament, and\nfrom the words of Christ himself. That he should use it against those\nChristians who were acting contrary to this well-known truth, is not\nstrange. Immediately after the declaration, \"Christ is God,\" he is\nreported as saying: \"I have told them that a house divided against\nitself cannot stand, and Christ and reason say the same.\" This furnishes\na solution to the whole story. This shows what he was doing with a New\nTestament. In connection with this, nothing is more natural than that he\nshould exclaim: \"Christ teaches it, and Christ is [their] God!\" That he\nwas terribly in earnest, that he was deeply agitated and pained to learn\nthat his Christian neighbors were opposed to him, is not improbable.\nThus the incidents of a simple political interview that were natural\nand reasonable have been perverted to make it appear that he was a\nChristian. A mere reference to the New Testament and Christ have been\ntwisted into an acknowledgment of their divinity. Bateman himself admits\nthat Lincoln said: \"I am not a Christian.\" Why not accept his statement,\nthen? Why then distort his words and in the face of this positive\ndeclaration attempt to prove that he was a Christian? Bateman reports\nhim as modifying the statement by adding: \"God knows I would be one.\"\nYes, \"God knows I would be one were I convinced that Christianity is\ntrue, but not convinced of its truth, I am an unbeliever.\" Lincoln is\nalso reported to have said that in the light of the New Testament \"human\nbondage can not live a moment.\" But he did not utter these words. He did\nnot utter them because they are untrue, and none knew this better than\nhimself. He knew that in the light of this book human bondage had lived\nfor nearly two thousand years; he knew that this book was one of the\ngreat bulwarks of human slavery; he knew that there was not to be found\nbetween its lids a single text condemning slavery, while there were to\nhe found a score of texts sustaining it; he knew that that infamous law,\nthe Fugitive Slave law, received its warrant from this book--that Paul,\nin the light of its earliest teachings, had returned a fugitive slave to\nhis master.\n\nIn this story Lincoln is charged with the grossest hypocrisy. He is\ndeclared to have professed a belief in Christ and Christianity, and when\nBateman observed that his friends were ignorant of this, he is made to\nreply: \"I know they are. I am obliged to appear different to them.\" Now,\nto use Lincoln's own words, \"A sane person can no more act without a\nmotive than can there be an effect without a cause,\" and what possible\nmotive could he have had for such conduct? Supposing that he was base\nenough to be a hypocrite, what could induce him to lead the world\nto suppose he was an Infidel if he were not? In the eyes of the more\nignorant and bigoted class of Christians, Infidelity is a more\nheinous crime than murder, and an Infidel is a creature scarcely to be\ntolerated, much less to be intrusted with a public office. Freethinkers\ngenerally detest the dogmas of Christianity as thoroughly as Christians\npossibly can the principles of Freethought. But free thought and free\nspeech are the leading tenets of their creed. They recognize the fact\nthat we are all the children of circumstances, that our belief is\ndetermined by our environments, and while they reject Christianity, they\nhave nothing but charity for those who conscientiously profess it. They\nmay repudiate a bigot, but will not oppose a man merely because he is\na Christian. If Lincoln were an Infidel, discretion might urge a\nconcealment of his views; if he were a Christian, policy would prompt\nhim to give it as wide a publicity as possible, especially when he\nrested under the imputation of being a disbeliever. Had he changed his\nbelief and become a convert to Christianity, a knowledge of the fact\nwould not have lost him the support of his friends, even though some\nof them were Freethinkers; while it would have secured for him a more\ncordial support from the Republican side of the church, many of whom had\nbeen alienated on account of his supposed anti-Christian sentiments.\nIt is hard to believe that Lincoln was a hypocrite; but this story,\nif true, makes him not only a hypocrite but a fool. If he believed in\nChristianity there can be but one reason advanced for his desiring to\nkeep it a secret--he was ashamed of it.\n\nHolland, in trying to explain away the inconsistencies of this\nfabrication, repeatedly blunders. In one of his attempts he makes use of\nthe following remarkable language:\n\n\"It was one of the peculiarities of Mr. Lincoln to hide these religious\nexperiences from the eyes of the world.... They [his friends] did not\nregard him as a religious man. They had never seen anything but the\nactive lawyer, the keen politician, the jovial, fun-loving companion\nin Mr. Lincoln. All this department of his life he had kept carefully\nhidden from them. Why he should say that he was obliged to appear\ndifferently to others does not appear; but the fact is a matter of\nhistory that he never exposed his own religious life to those who had\nno sympathy with it. It is doubtful whether the clergymen of Springfield\nknew anything of these experiences\" (Life of Lincoln, pp. 239, 240).\n\nWhat! had the clergymen of Springfield no sympathy with a religious\nlife? A person can utter one falsehood with some degree of plausibility;\nbut when he attempts to verify it by uttering another, he usually trips\nand falls. The above passage is mere hypocritical cant. It carries\nwith it not only its own refutation, but that of the rest of Holland's\ntestimony also. It is the language of the man who is conscious of having\nstated a falsehood; conscious that there are others who believe it to be\na falsehood. He knew that the personal friends of Lincoln all understood\nhim to be a disbeliever. He knew that the church-members of Springfield\nall entertained the same opinion. He virtually says to these people: \"It\nis true that Lincoln professed to be an Infidel, but he was not; he was\na Christian. The fact has been kept a profound secret. Bateman and I\nhave been the sole custodians of this secret, and we now give it to the\nworld.\"\n\nA Christian writer, apologizing for the absurd and contradictory\nstatements of Holland and Bateman, says, \"They aimed at the truth.\" I\ndo not believe it. It is clearly evident that they aimed at a plausible\nlie. But in either case they made a bad shot.\n\nIn his \"Life of Lincoln,\" Holland endeavors to convey the impression\nthat Lincoln was always a devout Christian. He declares that even during\nthe years of his early manhood at New Salem, \"he was a religious man;\"\nthat \"he had a deep religious life.\" When Herndon and Lamon exposed his\nshameful misrepresentations he retreated from his first position, and in\n_Scribner's Monthly_ wrote as follows:\n\n\"What Abraham Lincoln was when he lived at New Salem and wrote an\nanti-Christian tract (which the friend to whom he showed it somewhat\nviolently but most judiciously put in the fire) is one thing, and it may\nbe necessary for an impartial historian to record it. What he was when\nhe died at Washington with those most Christian words of the Second\nInaugural upon his lips, and that most Christian record of five years of\npatient tenderness and charity behind him, is quite another thing.\"\n\nHe admits that Lincoln was an Infidel in Illinois, but would have us\nbelieve that he was a Christian in Washington. He refers to \"those\nmost Christian words of the Second Inaugural,\" and \"that most Christian\nrecord of five years of patient tenderness and charity.\" In the Second\nInaugural there is not a word affirming a belief in Christianity--not a\nword in reference to Christianity. He mentions God, and quotes from\nthe Bible, but does not intimate that the Bible is God's word. That\nChristians have a monopoly of \"patient tenderness and charity,\" can\nhardly be accepted. The history of the church does not confirm this\nassumption. Many Christians have possessed these virtues. So have\nthe votaries of other religions. These attributes belong to good men\neverywhere, but they are the distinguishing features of no particular\ncreed.\n\nSmarting under his exposure, with that whining cant so peculiar to the\nvanquished religionist, Holland finally sent forth this parting wail and\nvirtually abandoned the whole case:\n\n\"The question is, not whether Abraham Lincoln was a subscriber to the\ncreeds of orthodoxy, but whether he was a believing--that is to say,\na truthful Christian man; not whether he was accustomed to call Jesus\nChrist 'Lord, Lord,' but whether he was used to do those things which\nJesus Christ exemplified and enforced. He was accustomed, as we know\nwell enough, to speak of an Almighty Father, of whom justice and mercy\nand sympathy with weak and suffering humanity were characteristic\nattributes. Who was it that revealed to man a God like this? Who was it\nthat once 'showed us the Father and it sufficed us?' Whoever it was that\nmade this revelation to mankind it was of him that this man, even though\nhe knew it not, had learned, and it was in his spirit that he acted\"\n(Scribner's Monthly).\n\nThe concluding words of Dr. Holland's testimony, as quoted from his\n\"Life of Lincoln,\" are as follows:\n\n\"Moderate, frank, truthful, gentle, forgiving, loving, just, Mr. Lincoln\nwill always be remembered as eminently a Christian President; and\nthe almost immeasurably great results which he had the privilege of\nachieving were due to the fact that he was a Christian President.\"\n\nThis prediction and this assumption are false, change one word and make\nthem grandly true.\n\n\"Moderate, frank, truthful, gentle, forgiving, loving, just, Mr. Lincoln\nwill always be remembered as eminently a Liberal President; and\nthe almost immeasurably great results which he had the privilege of\nachieving were due to the fact that he was a Liberal President.\"\n\n\n\n\nCHAPTER III. REVIEW OF CHRISTIAN TESTIMONY--REED AND HIS WITNESSES.\n\n     Reed--Smith--Edwards--Lewis--Brooks--Statements of Edwards,\n     Smith, and Brooks Compared--Sunderland--Miner--Gurley--\n     Failure of Reed to Establish his Claims.\n\nOf the twenty Christian witnesses whose testimony is given in\nChapter I., ten admit that, during a part of his life, Lincoln was an\nunbeliever, or Infidel. Of the remaining ten, not one denies the fact.\nIt is conceded, then, that he was once an Infidel. Now, it is a rule of\nlaw that when a certain state or condition of things is once proven to\nexist, that state or condition is presumed to continue to exist until\nthe contrary is proven. If Lincoln was, at one time, an Infidel, it is\nfair to assume that he remained an Infidel, unless it can be shown that\nhe changed his belief and became a Christian. This Dr. Reed attempts to\ndo.\n\nHis lecture, under the caption of \"The Later Life and Religious\nSentiments of Abraham Lincoln,\" will be found in _Scribner's Monthly_\nfor July, 1873. The evidence presented by Lamon had placed Dr. Holland\nin a most unenviable light. As Reed's lecture reaffirmed the claim\nmade by Holland, and brought forward fresh evidence to substantiate the\nclaim, it was naturally regarded by many Christians as a vindication of\nHolland's position, especially by those who had not read Lamon's work.\nHolland was particularly pleased at its opportune appearance, and\ncheerfully gave it a place in his magazine.\n\nReed's individual testimony proves nothing. He does not profess to know,\nfrom personal knowledge, what Lincoln's religious views were. The object\nof his lecture was to invalidate, if possible, the testimony of those\nwho affirmed that he died an Infidel, and to present, in addition to\nwhat had already been presented by Holland, the testimony of those who\naffirmed that during the last years of his life he was a Christian. To\nanswer his witnesses is to answer his lecture.\n\nThe Rev. Dr. Smith affirms that he converted Lincoln to a belief in\n\"_the divine authority and inspiration of the Scriptures._\" It was\nimperative that he should, for, said he, \"It was my honor to place\nbefore Mr. Lincoln arguments designed to prove _the divine authority and\ninspiration of the Scriptures._\" As a matter of course, \"the result was\nthe announcement by himself that the arguments in favor of _the divine\nauthority and inspiration of the Scriptures_ were unanswerable.\"\nConsequently, \"Mr. Lincoln did avow his belief in the _divine authority\nand inspiration of the Scriptures_.\"\n\nImpressed with a deep sense of the gravity and importance of his work,\nhe declares that \"It is a matter of the last importance not only to the\npresent but to all future generations of the great Republic, and to all\nadvocates of civil and religious liberty throughout the world that this\navowal on his part,... should be made known to the public,\" coupled with\nthe more important fact, of course, that it was Dr. Smith who did it.\nIt is to be regretted that his waiting until after Lincoln's death to\nannounce it, prevented the convert's Christian friends from tendering\ntheir congratulations and extending the hand of fellowship. It is\npossible that he counseled Dr. Smith not to divulge the secret for fear\nit might injure his political prospects. Certain it is, his neighbors\nwere ignorant of this remarkable change. When Holland canvassed\nSpringfield, in 1865, eager to obtain a morsel of evidence upon which to\nbase his claim that Lincoln was a Christian, he failed to catch even the\nfaintest whisper regarding this alleged conversion.\n\nWhen Dr. Smith's letter was made public, the Christians of Springfield\ngenerally smiled, but said nothing, while unbelievers laughed outright\nand pronounced it the acme of absurdity. Dr. Reed read it to his\naudience and tried to look serious.\n\nConcerning this claim, Lincoln's biographer, Colonel Lamon, says:\n\n\"The abilities of this gentleman to discuss such a topic to the\nedification of a man like Mr. Lincoln seem to have been rather slender;\nbut the chance of converting so distinguished a person inspired him with\na zeal which he might not have felt for the salvation of an obscurer\nsoul. Mr. Lincoln listened to his exhortations in silence, apparently\nrespectful, and occasionally sat out his sermons in church with as much\npatience as other people. Finding these oral appeals unavailing, Mr.\nSmith composed a heavy tract out of his own head to suit the particular\ncase. 'The preparation of that work,' says he, 'cost me long and arduous\nlabor;' but it does not appear to have been read. Mr. Lincoln took the\n'work' to his office, laid it down without writing his name on it,\nand never took it up again to the knowledge of a man who inhabited the\noffice with him, and who saw it lying on the same spot every day for\nmonths. Subsequently Mr. Smith drew from Mr. Lincoln an acknowledgment\nthat his argument was unanswerable--not a very high compliment under the\ncircumstances\" (Life of Lincoln, p. 498).\n\nThe gentleman whom Colonel Lamon refers to as testifying that Lincoln\ndid not read Dr. Smith's book was Lincoln's partner, Mr. Herndon. In his\nlecture on \"Lincoln's Religion,\" Mr. Herndon says:\n\n\"Mr. Lincoln received a book from Dr. Smith on Infidelity. He placed it\non our law table. He never opened it--never read it to my knowledge.\"\n\nIf Dr. Smith had converted Lincoln, as claimed, is it not reasonable\nto suppose that he would have joined Dr. Smith's church? Had he been\nconverted would the clergymen of Springfield have denounced him as\nan Infidel in 1860? Again, if Dr. Smith's book was so effective as to\nconvert from Infidelity to Christianity as great a mind as Lincoln, why\nhave we not heard more of it? Why has it not been used to convert other\nInfidels? Was its vitality as an evangelizer exhausted in converting\nLincoln?\n\nMr. Reed was a trifle more successful than Dr. Holland in obtaining\nwitnesses; for while Holland was able to secure but one witness in\nIllinois, Reed was able to summon two--Ninian Edwards and Thomas Lewis.\n\nThe testimony of Mr. Edwards, providing that he was the author of the\nletter accredited to him, can only be accounted for on the following\nsupposition. Being a believer in Christianity himself, he considered\nLincoln's Infidelity a grave defect in his character, and was vexed to\nsee that this controversy had given it such wide publicity. To assist\nin removing this stain, as he regarded it, from his kinsman's name, he\nallowed to be published over his signature a statement which, unless his\nmemory was very treacherous, he must have known was untrue.\n\nIt may be that Lincoln did change his views in regard to some historical\nor doctrinal point connected with Christianity, and informed Mr. Edwards\nand other friends at the time of the fact. He might have changed his\nopinions on a hundred theological questions without having in the least\nchanged his views in relation to the main or fundamental doctrines of\nChristianity. An admission concerning some trivial question connected\nwith Christianity has been tortured to convey the idea that he accepted\nthe whole system.\n\nA prominent and respected citizen of Springfield, a gentleman whose name\nhas, as yet, not been mentioned in connection with this controversy,\nhad a conversation with Mr. Edwards relative to this subject, soon after\nReed's lecture was published, and, as the result of that conversation,\nhe writes as follows: \"Mr. Edwards was not as good a witness on oral\nexamination as he was in print.\"\n\nThe letter of Mr. Edwards is dated Dec. 24, 1872. On Jan. 6, 1873, the\nletter of Thomas Lewis was written. After two weeks of arduous labor,\nReed, it seems, succeeded in finding one witness in Springfield who was\nprepared to corroborate the testimony of Edwards--Thomas Lewis.\n\nIn a lecture on Lincoln which appeared in the _State Register_, of\nSpringfield, Mr. Herndon disposed of this witness as follows:\n\n\"Mr. Lewis's veracity and integrity in this community need no comment.\nI have heard good men say they would not believe his word under any\ncircumstances, especially if he were interested. I hate to state this\nof Tom, but if he will obtrude himself in this discussion, I cannot help\nbut say a word in self-defense. Mr. Lincoln detested this man, I know.\nThe idea that Mr. Lincoln would go to Tom Lewis and reveal to him his\nreligious convictions, is to me, and to all who know Mr. Lincoln and Tom\nLewis, too absurd.\"\n\nThe introduction of this Lewis as a witness demonstrates the paucity\nof evidence to be obtained on this side of the question among Lincoln's\nneighbors. Reed, living in a city of twenty thousand inhabitants, many\nof them the personal friends of Abraham Lincoln, after a vigorous search\nfor evidence, is able only to present this pitiable apology.\n\nI have reason to believe that the letters of Edwards and Lewis were\ndrafted, not by the persons whose signatures they bear, but by the Rev.\nJ. A. Reed.\n\nWe come next to the testimony of Noah Brooks. Mr. Edwards, supported\nby Mr. Lewis, states that Lincoln was converted soon after Dr. Smith\nlocated at Springfield, and about the time of his son Eddie's death. Dr.\nSmith came to Springfield in 1848, and Eddie died toward the close of\nthe same year. Dr. Smith, in his letter, does not state when Lincoln's\nconversion took place, but it is understood from other sources that he\nclaimed that it occurred about the year 1858. Mr. Brooks, in his letter\nto Dr. Reed, says: \"Speaking to me of the change which had come upon\nhim, he said, while he could not fix any definite time, yet it was after\nhe came here [Washington], and I am very positive that in his own mind\nhe identified it with about the time of Willie's death.\"\n\nWillie's death occurred in February, 1862, nearly fourteen years after\nthe death of Eddie, and four years after Smith claimed to have converted\nLincoln. Thus it will be seen that these witnesses nullify each other.\nThe testimony of each is contradicted and refuted by the testimony of\nthe other two. Mr. Edwards says that Lincoln was converted in 1848. This\nis contradicted by the testimony of both Smith and Brooks. According to\nDr. Smith his conversion happened about 1858. This is contradicted by\nthe testimony of both Edwards and Brooks. Mr. Brooks is quite positive\nthat it took place about the time of Willie's death, in 1862. This, in\nturn, is contradicted by the testimony of both Edwards and Smith. If Mr.\nEdwards is right, both Dr. Smith and Mr. Brooks are wrong. If Dr. Smith\nis correct, both Mr. Edwards and Mr. Brooks are incorrect. If Mr.\nBrooks has stated the truth both Mr. Edwards and Dr. Smith have stated\nfalsehoods.\n\nThe testimony of these witnesses does not strengthen Reed's case, but\nweakens it. The testimony of two of them is self-evidently false, and\nthis is a sufficient reason for doubting the truthfulness of the third.\nHad the evidence of neither Edwards nor Smith been invalidated by the\nevidence of the others, the fact that Lincoln is so generally conceded\nto have been an unbeliever up to the time that he became President,\nwould render it unworthy of consideration. The testimony of Brooks alone\ndemands notice. Did Lincoln change his belief after he left Springfield\nand went to Washington? The evidence upon this point is decisive.\n\nThe man who stood nearest to President Lincoln at Washington--nearer\nthan any clergyman or newspaper correspondent--was his private\nsecretary, Col. John G. Nicolay. In a letter dated May 27, 1865, Colonel\nNicolay says:\n\n\"Mr. Lincoln did not, to my knowledge, in any way change his religious\nideas, opinions, or beliefs from the time he left Springfield to the day\nof his death.\"\n\nIn a letter to his old friend, Judge Wakefield, written after Willie's\ndeath, he declared that his earlier views of the unsoundness of the\nChristian scheme of salvation, and the human origin of the Scriptures,\nhad become clearer and stronger with advancing years, and he did not\nthink he should ever change them.\n\nAfter his assassination Mrs. Lincoln said: \"Mr. Lincoln had no hope and\nno faith in the usual acceptance of these words.\" His lifelong friend\nand executor, Judge David Davis, affirmed the same: \"He had no faith\nin the Christian sense of the term.\" His biographer, Colonel Lamon,\nintimately acquainted with him in Illinois, and with him during all the\nyears that he lived in Washington, says: \"Never in all that time did he\nlet fall from his lips or his pen an expression which remotely implied\nthe slightest faith in Jesus as the son of God and the Savior of men.\"\n\nWhy do the statements of these witnesses, Smith, Edwards, and Brooks,\nnot agree respecting the date of Lincoln's conversion? When their\ntestimony was given, Smith was in Scotland, Edwards was in Illinois, and\nBrooks was in New York.\n\nIf he was converted, why was the fact not revealed before his death? Why\ndid these men wait until he died to make these statements to the world?\nSimply because the dead can make no reply.\n\nHad Lincoln been converted, the news would have been wafted on the wings\nof lightning from one end of the continent to the other. It would have\nbeen published in every newspaper; it would have been proclaimed from\nevery pulpit; it would have been a topic of conversation at every\nfireside. When Henry Wilson, a man of far less note than Lincoln, was\nconverted to Christianity, the fact was heralded all over the land.\n\nLincoln's home was twice visited by death during his lifetime, and both\noccasions have been seized upon to assert that he experienced a change\nof heart. The death of a beloved child is no common sorrow, and the\nwomanly tenderness of Lincoln's heart made it doubly poignant to him.\n\"When death entered his household,\" says his friend, George W. Julian,\n\"his sorrow was so consuming that it could only be measured by the\nsingular depth and intensity of his love.\" That Mr. Edwards and Mr.\nBrooks did each observe a change in the demeanor of the grief-stricken\nfather, following the sad events referred to, is not improbable. But a\nmanifestation of sorrow is no proof of a theological change.\n\nThree of Reed's witnesses remain--three clergymen--Dr. Sunderland, Dr.\nMiner, and Dr. Gurley. Dr. Sunderland is a man of distinction. He has\nhad the honor of praying for the United States Senate and officiating at\nthe marriage of a President. Yet, distinction is not always the badge of\nhonesty. W. H. Burr, a literary gentleman, of Washington, writing to\na Boston paper in 1880, paid the following tribute to Dr. Sunderland's\nveracity: \"He can probably put more falsehood and calumny in a page of\nfoolscap than any priest out of prison.\"\n\nMr. Sunderland called upon the President in 1862. In his letter to Reed\nhe says: \"For one half hour [he] poured forth a volume of the deepest\nChristian philosophy I ever heard.\" Notwithstanding ten years had\nelapsed since that visit, he proceeded to give from memory a verbatim\nreport of Lincoln's remarks. The report is too long to reproduce in\nthis work, and even if correct, would add but little to the weight of\nChristian evidence already presented. It is merely an ethical discourse,\nand aside from a few indirect admissions in favor of Christianity for\nwhich Sunderland doubtless drew upon his imagination, there is nothing\nthat Paine or any other Deist might not with propriety have uttered.\nThose who wish to peruse Mr. Sunderland's letter will find it in\n_Scribner's Monthly_ for July, 1873.\n\nDr. Miner, like Dr. Sunderland, had a quiet chat with the President, and\nwhat was said he assures us is too deeply engraved on his memory ever\nto be effaced. But, unlike Dr. Sunderland, he does not favor us with a\ntranscript of it. He does not repeat a word that was uttered. He states,\nhowever, that, \"If Mr. Lincoln was not really an experimental Christian,\nhe was acting like one.\" But how does an experimental Christian act? If\nhe behaves himself, if he is intelligent and honest, his actions are not\nmaterially different from those of a good Freethinker. Dr. Miner did not\nbelieve that Lincoln was an experimental Christian, and in his article\nthere is an implied admission that he knew nothing about his religion.\n\nHe says that, \"Like the immortal Washington, he believed in the efficacy\nof prayer.\" The comparison is happily drawn. Lincoln probably did\nbelieve as much in the efficacy of prayer as Washington; that is to say,\nhe did not believe in it at all, in the evangelical sense. There is\nno evidence that Washington believed in prayer, no proof that he ever\nuttered a prayer. That story about his praying at Valley Forge is as\ntruly a myth as the story about the hatchet. The Rev. E. D. Neill, an\neminent Episcopal minister, and a relative of the person who is reported\nto have seen Washington engaged in prayer, pronounces it a fiction.\n\nDr. Gurley is represented as saying: \"I considered him sound not only\non the truth of the Christian religion, but on all its fundamental\ndoctrines and teachings.\" This, remember, is from a Calvinistic\nstandpoint. Lincoln, then, not only accepted Christianity, but its most\nultra variety--Calvinism. He believed in original sin, predestination\n(including infant damnation), particular redemption, irresistible grace,\nand perseverance of the saints. Because he sometimes went with his wife\nto the Presbyterian church, of which she was an adherent, the priests of\nthis denomination have the contemptible assurance to assert that he was\na rigid Calvinist!\n\nWhen he died Dr. Gurley, being Mrs. Lincoln's pastor, delivered the\nfuneral oration in Washington. In that oration Dr. Gurley did not affirm\nthat Lincoln was a Christian, a thing he would not have failed to do\nhad it been true. Long after Lincoln's death, Dr. Gurley, if Reed has\ncorrectly reported him, makes a statement that he had not the courage to\nmake over his dead body.\n\nA reputable Christian gentleman, of Springfield, who desires to have\nhis name withheld from the public, declares that Dr. Gurley knew and\nadmitted that Lincoln was a disbeliever in Christianity.\n\nIt is quite probable that Gurley did not state in full what Reed reports\nhim to have stated. A man who can take up his pen and at one sitting\nindite a score of falsehoods and misrepresentations, as Reed, on a\nsubsequent occasion, is shown to have done, can not be relied upon for\naccuracy as a reporter.\n\nThe reader has doubtless not failed to notice the introduction of\na claim by Reed to the effect that Lincoln at the time of his\nassassination was intending to unite with the church. That the idea was\nsuggested by Reed is shown by the fact that no less than three of these\nwitnesses, including Reed, allude to it. Reed says: \"While it is to\nbe regretted that Mr. Lincoln was not spared to indicate his religious\nsentiments by a profession of his faith in accordance with the\ninstitutions of the Christian religion, yet it is very clear that he\nhad this step in view.\" Dr. Gurley is made to say: \"It was his intention\nsoon to make a profession of religion.\" Mr. Brooks says: \"I absorbed\n[the porosity of some of these witnesses is remarkable] the firm\nconviction that Mr. Lincoln... was seriously considering the step which\nwould formally connect him with the visible church on earth.\"\n\nThis _dernier resort_ of an argument has been repeated respecting nearly\nevery notable person who has died outside of the church. Soon after\nthe publication of Reed's lecture, the New York _World_ contained the\nfollowing pertinent answer to this stale fabrication:\n\n\"It is admitted by Mr. Reed and everybody else that Mr. Lincoln was a\nworking Infidel up to a very late period of his life, that he wrote a\nbook and labored earnestly to make proselytes to his own views, that he\nnever publicly recanted, and that he never joined the church. Upon\nthose who, in the face of these tremendous facts, allege that he was\nnevertheless a Christian lies the burden of proof. Let them produce it\nor forever hold their peace. In the mean time it is a sad and puerile\nsubterfuge to argue that he _would_ have been a Christian if he had\nlived long enough, and to lament that he was not 'spared' for that\npurpose. He _had_ been spared fifty-six years and surrounded by every\ncircumstance that might soften his heart and every influence that might\nelevate his faith. If he was at that late, that fatal hour standing\nthus gloomily without the pale, what reason have we to suppose that he\nintended ever to enter?\"\n\nReed speaks of \"the poverty of his early religious instruction,\"\napparently forgetting that he was raised by Christian parents. His\nfather was a church-member, his mother was a church-member, and his\nstepmother was a church-member. Reed states, also, that the books he\nread were all of an anti-religious character. Holland, on the contrary,\ndeclares that better books than those he read could not have been chosen\nfrom the richest library. The fact is, Abraham Lincoln did not become an\nInfidel to Christianity from a lack of knowledge respecting its claims.\nHe thoroughly examined its claims, and rejected them because he found\nthem untenable.\n\nOne important feature of this subject Reed has either inadvertently\nomitted or purposely ignored, and that is in regard to the validity of\nthe Bateman story. As the result of previous controversy this evidence\nhad been rendered valueless. Lincoln's partner had declared it to be\nfalse, had asserted that Mr. Bateman in private conversations\nacknowledged it to be in part untrue, and announced his readiness to\nsubstantiate his assertions if Mr. Bateman could be prevailed upon to\npermit the publication of his notes of these conversations taken at the\ntime. If Mr. Herndon's affirmations were true, it destroyed the\ntestimony of Holland and Bateman; if untrue, it challenged Mr. Bateman\nto reaffirm the statements recorded by Holland, and allow the seal of\nprivacy to be removed from his conversations on the subject. Why did Mr.\nReed not rehabilitate this damaged evidence? Did he forget it? No, it is\nplainly evident that he did not dare to attempt it.\n\nIn reviewing this Calvinistic _coterie_ of witnesses (they are all\nCalvinists, and nearly all Presbyterians), one is struck with the\nformidable display of theological appendages. What an imposing array\nof D.D.'s! Rev. J. A. Reed, D.D.! Rev. James Smith, D.D.! Rev. Byron\nSunderland, D.D.! Rev. Mr. Miner, D.D.! Rev. Mr. Gurley, D.D.! It was a\ndesperate case--divinity was sick and needed doctoring. The doctors of\ndivinity were accordingly called in, and prescribed \"The Later Life and\nReligious Sentiments of Abraham Lincoln,\" after which it was supposed\nthat divinity would recover. He may be better, but it is painfully\napparent that some of these D.D.'s are themselves sadly in need of a\ndoctor.\n\n\n\n\nCHAPTER IV. REVIEW OF CHRISTIAN TESTIMONY--ARNOLD AND OTHER WITNESSES\n\n     Arnold's \"Life of Lincoln\"--Claims Concerning Lincoln's\n     Religious Belief--Address to Negroes of Baltimore--\n     Carpenter--Hawley--Willets--Pious Nurse--\"Western Christian\n     Advocate\"--Illinois Clergyman--Barrows--Vinton--Simpson.\n\nWith the Christian masses whose minds have become warped by the bigoted\nteachings of their clerical leaders, nothing affects the reputation of a\nman so much as his religious belief. Public men who are disbelievers\nare fully cognizant of this, and generally refrain from expressing\nsentiments that would tend to alienate those upon whom the retention\nof their positions depends. Biographers understand this, too, and are\nlikewise aware that a dead Infidel is as cordially hated as a live one.\nThey know that a cold reception awaits their works unless they are\nable to clothe the characters of their subjects in the robes of popular\nsuperstition. Mr. Arnold realized this when he wrote his \"Life of\nLincoln.\" He had been most forcibly reminded of the fact by the fate of\ntwo biographies of his own subject which had already appeared--Holland's\nand Lamon's. Holland's work by catering to popular prejudice, regardless\nof truth, had been financially a success; Lamon's work by adhering to\ntruth, regardless of popular prejudice, had been financially a failure.\n\nDetermined to profit by these examples, and intimidated by the threats\nand entreaties of those who had resolved to secure for Christianity\nthe influence of the Great Emancipator's name, Arnold dare not give the\nfacts regarding Lincoln's religious belief. Nor is it to be presumed\nthat he desired to. He had previously appeared as a special pleader for\nthe popular faith.\n\nHe affirms that \"No more reverent Christian than Lincoln ever sat in\nthe Executive chair, not excepting Washington.\" The fact is, when Arnold\nwrote his biography of Lincoln, no very reverent Christian ever had\noccupied the Executive chair. Previous to the installation of Gen. B. H.\nHarrison no real orthodox Christian communicant had held the office of\nPresident.\n\nIf Mr. Arnold knew no more about Lincoln's religion than he appears\nto have known about Washington's, a more charitable reason than those\nsuggested might be assigned for his statements concerning the former.\nWashington, like Lincoln, has been claimed by the church; yet,\nWashington, like Lincoln, was a Deist. This is admitted even by the\nleading churchmen of his day. Three of the most eminent divines of his\nage, and the three to whom he was most intimately related in a social\nway, were Bishop White, Rev. Dr. Abercrombie, and Rev. Dr. Ashbel Green.\nBishop White declares that Washington was not a communicant, as\nclaimed by some, and intimates that he was a disbeliever. The Rev. Dr.\nAbercrombie, whose church he attended while he was President, said:\n\"Washington was a Deist.\" The Rev. Dr. Ashbel Green, chaplain to\nCongress during his administration, said: \"Like nearly all the founders\nof the Republic, he was not a Christian, but a Deist.\"\n\nArnold presents the following as the basis of Lincoln's religion, and\nproofs of his Christianity: \"(1) Belief in the existence of God, (2) in\nthe immortality of the soul, (3) in the Bible as the revelation of God\nto man, (4) in the efficacy and duty of prayer, (5) in reverence toward\nthe Almighty, and (6) in love and charity to man.\"\n\n1. \"Belief in the existence of God.\" This does not prove a belief in\nChristianity. The Jew believes in the existence of God; the Mohammedan\nbelieves in the existence of God; the Deistic Infidel believes in the\nexistence of God.\n\n2. \"Belief in the immortality of the soul.\" That he believed in the\nimmortality of the soul is a claim that cannot be clearly established;\nand even if it could, would not confirm the assumption that he was a\nChristian. Deists, many of them, believe in the doctrine of immortality.\nPaine believed in immortality; Voltaire believed in immortality.\n\n3. \"Belief in the Bible as the revelation of God to man.\" This, if\ntrue, would be evidence of his Christianity; but, unfortunately for Mr.\nArnold's claim, Lincoln did not entertain this belief.\n\n4. \"Belief-in the efficacy and duty of prayer.\" This, in the orthodox\nsense of these terms, is not true; and if it were, would not furnish\nconclusive evidence that he was a Christian. Jews pray; Mohammedans\npray; Buddhists pray; some Deists pray. Franklin believed in the\nefficacy and duty of prayer, and Franklin was an Infidel.\n\n5. \"Belief in reverence to the Almighty.\" This does not demonstrate\na belief in Christianity, for all Deists believe in reverence to the\nAlmighty.\n\n6. \"Belief in love and charity to man.\" When it can be shown that only\nChristians believe in love and charity, then will it be time to affirm\nthat Lincoln was a Christian.\n\nArnold confounds Christianity with Deism. In the following words he\nadmits that Lincoln was simply a Deist: \"Not orthodox, not a man of\ncreeds, he was a man of simple trust in God.\"\n\nWhen the subject of Lincoln's belief was once mentioned to Mr. Arnold,\nhe said: \"Lincoln was a rational Christian because he believed in\nmorality.\" With equal propriety one might say of an upright Christian,\n\"He is a rational Freethinker because he believes in morality.\"\n\n\"His reply to the Negroes of Baltimore,\" he says, \"ought to silence\nforever those who charge him with unbelief.\" This alleged reply of\nLincoln was as follows:\n\n\"In regard to the Great Book I have only to say that it is the best gift\nwhich God has given to man. All the good from the Savior of the world\nis communicated to us through this book. But for this book we could not\nknow right from wrong. All those things desirable to man are contained\nin it\" (Lincoln Memorial Album, p. 340).\n\nThe writer of this was in Washington when the colored deputation\nfrom Baltimore presented the President with a $500 Bible. The papers\nmentioned the fact at the time, but no such speech as Lincoln is said\nto have made appeared in the reports. About two months later, this\napocryphal version of his remarks on the occasion referred to, made its\nappearance.\n\nThe first two sentences contained in this speech (the only part of it\nthat Arnold has quoted), Lincoln, if a Christian, might have uttered.\nThey are words that any intelligent Christian might, from his\nstandpoint, with propriety affirm. We are familiar with these claims.\nWe are also familiar with the claims embodied in the last two sentences.\nThey are repeatedly made. But they are made only by very ignorant\npersons, or by clerical hypocrites who try to impose upon the ignorance\nand credulity of their hearers. Had Lincoln been a Christian he would\nnot have used these words, because he was too intelligent to believe\nthem, and too honest to pretend to believe them.\n\nConcerning this speech, Lincoln's partner, Mr. Herndon, thus vigorously,\nyet truthfully, remarks:\n\n\"I am aware of the fraud committed on Mr. Lincoln in reporting some\ninsane remarks supposed to have been made by him, in 1864, on the\npresentation of a Bible to him by the colored people of Baltimore. No\nsane man ever uttered such folly, and no sane man will ever believe it.\nIn that speech Mr. Lincoln is made to say: 'But for this book we could\nnot know right from wrong.' Does any human being believe that Lincoln\never uttered this? What did the whole race of man do to know right from\nwrong during the countless years that passed before this book was given\nto the world? How did the struggling race of man build up its grand\ncivilizations in the world before this book was given to mankind? What\ndo the millions of people now living, who never heard of this book, do\nto know how to distinguish right from wrong? Was Lincoln a fool, an\nass, a hypocrite, or a combination of them all? or is this speech--this\nsupposed--this fraudulent speech--a lie?\"\n\nArnold would have his readers believe that this speech is genuine.\nAnd yet it is plainly evident that he himself does not believe it.\nHe mutilates it by omitting the more orthodox portion of it--the very\nportion he would have retained had he believed it to be genuine. The\nfirst part would suffice to serve his purpose; the remainder he knew was\ntoo incredible for belief and would stamp the whole as a fraud.\n\nArnold says: \"The veil between him and the supernatural was very thin.\"\nYes, so thin that he easily saw through it and recognized the greater\npart of it to be a sham.\n\n\"His faith in a Divine Providence began at his mother's knee, and ran\nthrough all the changes of his life.\" I do not desire to charge Mr.\nArnold with plagiarism, but the foregoing recalls the following much\nadmired passage to be found in Holland: \"This unwavering faith in a\nDivine Providence began at his mother's knee, and ran like a thread of\ngold through all the inner experiences of his life\" (Life of Lincoln,\npp. 61, 62).\n\nThere is much in Arnold's biography, aside from the above, to suggest\nthat Holland's work formed the basis and model of his own. While more\naccurate in the main than Holland's \"Life,\" Arnold's \"Life\" is in some\nrespects equally unreliable, and less readable.\n\nAdverting to the many fraudulent stories that have been circulated\nconcerning Lincoln, in an address delivered in London, Mr. Arnold said:\n\"The newspapers in America have always been full of Lincoln stories and\nanecdotes, some true and many fabulous.\" Unfortunately for the cause of\ntruth, Mr. Arnold has himself recorded some of these fabulous stories,\nnot because he deemed them authentic, but because they agreed with his\npreconceived prejudices, or the prejudices of those whom he wished to\nplease.\n\nMr. Carpenter says: \"I would scarcely have called Mr. Lincoln a\nreligious man, and yet I believe him to have been a sincere Christian.\"\n\nIn a letter, Mr. Herndon makes the following correction in regard to his\nfriend Carpenter's statement:\n\n\"Mr. Carpenter has not expressed his own ideas correctly. To say that a\nman is a Christian and yet not a religious man is absurd. _Religion_ is\nthe generic term including all forms of religion; _Christianity_ is a\nspecific term representing one form of religion. Carpenter means to say\nthat Mr. Lincoln was a religious man but not a Christian, and this is\nthe truth.\"\n\nIt is unfortunate that while in many cases we have several words to\nexpress the same idea, the same word in many cases is employed to\nexpress different ideas. Ideas thus become confused. If the terms\n_morality, religion, and Christianity_, were always used in their\nlegitimate sense--used to express the ideas of which they were the\noriginal signs--much trouble and ambiguity would be avoided. As it is,\nthey are promiscuously used as interchangeable terms. Many use the\nword _religion_ and even _Christianity_ when they mean morality. Mr.\nCarpenter uses the word _religious_ in its proper sense, and the word\n_Christian_ to mean a _moral man_. The following examples will serve to\nillustrate the various forms employed to express the thought now under\nconsideration:\n\n\"I would scarcely have called Mr. Lincoln a religious man, and yet I\nbelieve him to have been a sincere Christian.\"--_Carpenter_.\n\n\"I would scarcely have called Mr. Lincoln a Christian, and yet I believe\nhim to have been a truly religious man.\"--_Herndon_.\n\nI would scarcely have called Mr. Lincoln a religious man, and yet I\nbelieve him to have been a truly moral man.--_Author_.\n\nWe all desire to express substantially the same thought. I do not wish\nto dictate to Mr. Carpenter and Mr. Herndon what words they shall\nemploy to convey an idea, but this explanation is essential to a proper\nunderstanding of the question in dispute and will help to reconcile much\nof the apparently conflicting testimony presented in this work.\n\nAs Lincoln was in a certain sense a Deist, the religious element was not\nentirely wanting in him, and hence the statement of Mr. Herndon that he\nwas a religious man is, in a degree, true.\n\nThe basis of Carpenter's work was a series of articles contributed to\nthe New York _Independent_. When it was decided to publish these in book\nform, to swell them into a volume of the desired size, to his personal\nreminiscences he added many of the stories pertaining to Lincoln then\ngoing the rounds of the press. Although he was as it were a member of\nLincoln's household six months he failed to hear from Lincoln's lips a\nword expressing a belief in Christianity. These apocryphal stories, and\nthese alone, contain all the evidences of Lincoln's alleged piety to\nbe found in Carpenter's book. And his admission that Lincoln was not a\nreligious man disproves them.\n\nMr. Hawley professed to believe that Lincoln was a Christian, but he had\nno personal knowledge of the fact, although his neighbor for many years.\nThe only reasons he was able to adduce upon which to predicate his\nbelief were the Bateman story and his farewell speech on leaving\nSpringfield. The former has been exploded, the latter proves nothing.\n\nDuring all the later years of his life Lincoln generally refrained from\nexpressing his anti-Christian opinions, except to friends who shared his\nviews. This silence, in connection with his sterling moral character,\nmight lead some of his Christian neighbors to suppose that he was a\nbeliever, the more especially as Christians are generally ignorant of\nthe extent of unbelief, and are loath to believe that a person, unless\nhe openly avows his disbelief, can be an Infidel.\n\nAccording to Mr. Willets, Lincoln, during the war, had an attack of what\nhe thought might be a \"change of heart.\" He consulted a pious lady in\nregard to it and requested her to describe to him the symptoms attending\nthis theological disease. She defined \"a true religious experience\" as\n\"a conviction of one's own sinfulness and weakness, and personal need of\nthe Savior for strength and support.\" She said that \"when one was really\nbrought to feel his need of divine help, and to seek the aid of the Holy\nSpirit for strength and guidance, it was satisfactory evidence of his\nhaving been born again.\" Lincoln replied that if what she had told him\nwas \"a correct view of this great subject,\" he hoped he was a Christian.\nBut was this a correct view of it? I was not aware that conviction\nconstituted conversion. We have been taught that conviction is but a\npreliminary step toward conversion. If Lincoln relied upon this as a\ntrue exposition of this doctrine, the genuineness of his conversion may\nwell be questioned.\n\nIt is to be regretted that Mr. Willets did not give the name of\nhis informant. As it is, we do not know whether to credit \"a lady\nacquaintance of his,\" or himself, with the invention of a first-class\nfiction.\n\nIn regard to the story of the \"Pious Nurse,\" we have not even a\nclergyman to vouch for its authenticity. We do not know the name of this\nwitness; we do not know whom she communicated the story to; we do not\nknow when nor where it made its first appearance. We only know that for\nyears it has been floating through the columns of the religious press, a\ncompanion-piece to Washington's devotional exercise at Valley Forge.\n\n\"History,\" said Napoleon, \"is a set of lies agreed upon.\" Of the many\nlies agreed upon by Christian writers in making up the history of\nLincoln, none has become more thoroughly established than the one\noriginally published by the _Western Christian Advocate_. It has been\nincorporated into the works of a score of historians and biographers,\nand is almost universally accepted as a historical fact.\n\nNearly all the pious stories relating to Lincoln, while palpably false\nin the eyes of those who knew him, are yet of such a nature as to render\na complete refutation of them extremely difficult. The story under\nconsideration, however, is of a different character. Its truthfulness\nor falsity could at the time of its publication have been easily\nascertained. If true, any member of Lincoln's cabinet could have\nverified it. I knew that it was untrue--at least I knew that a Cabinet\nmeeting had never been transformed into a prayer meeting at Lincoln's\nsuggestion. I finally resolved to demonstrate its falsity if possible.\nBut a quarter of a century had passed away, and every member of\nLincoln's Cabinet was dead save one, Hugh McCulloch, his last Secretary\nof the Treasury. With the aid of a friend, Mr. N. P. Stockbridge, of\nFt. Wayne, Ind., an old acquaintance of Mr. McCulloch's, I succeeded\nin bringing the matter before this only surviving witness, and received\nfrom his pen, in February, 1891, the following prompt denial:\n\n\"The description of what occurred at the Executive Mansion, when the\nintelligence was received of the surrender of the Confederate forces,\nwhich you quote from the _Western Christian Advocate_, is not only\nabsolutely groundless, but absurd. After I became Secretary of the\nTreasury I was present at every Cabinet meeting, and I never saw Mr.\nLincoln or any of his ministers upon his knees or in tears.\n\n\"We were not especially jubilant over Lee's surrender, for this we had\nbeen prepared for some days. The time for our great rejoicing was a\nlittle earlier. After Sherman had commenced his celebrated march to the\nsea, and long and weary days had passed without any reliable reports\nfrom him, we were filled with anxiety and apprehension. It was when\nthe news came that he and his army, in excellent condition, were in the\nneighborhood of Charleston, that our joy was irrepressible; not only\nbecause of their safety, but because it was an assurance that the days\nof the Confederacy were nearly ended. With Grant before Richmond in\ncommand of superior forces, and Sherman with the finest army in the\nworld, ready to move northward, everybody felt that the war must be soon\nconcluded, and that the Union was safe.\n\n\"We were, of course, happy when General Lee and his severely tried\nsoldiers laid down their arms, but this, as I have said, was not\nunexpected. It was when our anxiety in regard to Sherman was succeeded\nby hopefulness and confidence that our joy became exuberant. But there\nwas no such exhibition of it as has been published by the _Advocate._\"\n\nAn \"Illinois Clergyman\" reports Lincoln as saying that when he left\nSpringfield he was not a Christian, that when his son Willie died he was\nnot a Christian, but that when he visited the battlefield of Gettysburg\nhe gave his heart to Christ. Christians cite the testimony of this\nanonymous witness, seemingly unconscious of the fact that if true\nit refutes the testimony of every other Christian witness. If this\nstatement be true what becomes of the testimony of Holland and Bateman?\nWhat becomes of the testimony of Reed's witnesses? The testimony of\nBrooks invalidated the testimony of every other witness; the testimony\nof this Illinois clergyman invalidates the testimony of Brooks itself.\n\nReed did not present this evidence, doubtless aware that his lecture\nalready contained a sufficient number of discrepancies. He was\nthoughtful enough, however, to anticipate it. He had Dr. Gurley refer to\nLincoln's conversion as taking place \"after the death of his son Willie\nand his visit to the battlefield of Gettysburg.\" These events are\nreferred to as if they occurred in close proximity to each other;\nwhereas the death of Willie occurred during the first year of his\nadministration, his visit to Gettysburg less than seventeen months\nbefore his assassination.\n\nThe passage quoted from Dr. Barrows contains six specific affirmations.\n\n1. \"In the anxious uncertainties of the great war, he gradually rose to\nthe hights where Jehovah became to him the sublimest of realities, the\nruler of nations.\"\n\nCollect all the utterances of Abraham Lincoln, all the letters he ever\nwrote, all the speeches he ever delivered, all the state papers he gave\nto the public; and from this full store of words that fell from his lips\nand flowed from his pen, I challenge Dr. Barrows to produce one word\nexpressing a recognition of Jehovah. Jehovah was to him, not \"the\nsublimest of realities,\" not \"the ruler of nations,\" but a hideous\nphantom. He recognized a God, but his God was not Jehovah, the God of\nDr. Barrows.\n\n2. \"When he wrote his immortal Proclamation, he invoked upon it not\nonly 'the considerate judgment of mankind' but 'the gracious favor of\nAlmighty God.'\"\n\nWhen he wrote his immortal Proclamation he did not invoke \"the gracious\nfavor of Almighty God.\" This instrument, as drafted by Lincoln,\ncontained no allusion to God. The paragraph containing the words quoted\nwas drafted by Secretary Chase and inserted in the Proclamation at his\nurgent request after it was printed and ready for delivery.\n\n3. \"When darkness gathered over the brave armies fighting for the\nnation's life, this strong man, in the early morning, knelt and wrestled\nin prayer with Him who holds in his hand the fate of empires.\"\n\nA \"Christian lady from Massachusetts\" (name unknown), and a Christian\ngentleman from New York (Noah Brooks), declare that Lincoln was\naccustomed to pray. This declaration is echoed by Arnold, and reechoed\nby Barrows. If true, is it not strange that a hospital nurse and\na newspaper reporter were in possession of the fact while his most\nintimate friends were entirely ignorant of it?\n\n4. \"When the clouds lifted above the carnage of Gettysburg, he gave his\nheart to the Lord Jesus Christ.\"\n\nThis is the fifth time that Lincoln gave his heart to Christ. The above\nstatement is the vital one in Dr. Barrows's testimony--the keystone in\nthe arch comprising \"the religious aspects\" of Lincoln's Presidential\ncareer. The others, even if true, only prove a Theistic belief. This\nstatement affirms that he became a Christian--a statement evidently\nbased upon the anonymous story of the \"Illinois clergyman.\" Between\nthe original presented by the \"Illinois clergyman\" at large, and that\npresented by the Illinois clergyman from Chicago, however, a grave\ndiscrepancy appears. From the time that \"the clouds lifted above the\ncarnage of Gettysburg\" to the time that Lincoln visited its cemetery, a\nperiod of twenty weeks had elapsed. Now, did Lincoln give his heart to\nChrist when the battle ended on the 3rd of July, as stated by the one,\nor not until he stood upon the battle-field on the 19th of November, as\nasserted by the other? This is a question that we leave for the Illinois\nclergymen themselves to decide.\n\n5. \"When he pronounced his matchless oration on the chief battle-field\nof the war, he gave expression to the resolve that 'this nation, under\nGod, should have a new birth of freedom.'\"\n\nThis simple Deistic phrase, \"under God,\" is the only utterance of a\nreligious character to be found in that oration. When this speech was\ndelivered, Lincoln, it is claimed, had experienced a change of\nheart, and consecrated himself to Christ. This address furnishes an\noverwhelming refutation of the claim. At the dedication of a cemetery,\nsurrounded by thousands of graves, he ignores Christianity, and even the\ndoctrine of immortality.\n\n6. \"And when he wrote his last Inaugural Address, he gave to it the\nlofty tone of an old Hebrew psalm.\"\n\nThis is true; and it is likewise true that in that document he made no\nmore reference to Christianity than did the Hebrew psalmist who lived\nand wrote a thousand years before it had its birth.\n\nThe \"Lincoln Memorial Album,\" in which Dr. Barrows's article appears,\ncontains the offerings of two hundred contributors, twenty of them\ndivines, and among them Lyman Abbot, Dr. Bellows, Theodore L. Cuyler,\nEobert Collyer, Bishop Coxe, Dr. Crosby, Bishop Haven, Philip Schaaf,\nand Bishop Simpson. The work is prefaced with a biographical sketch of\nLincoln, written by Isaac N. Arnold, in which he makes substantially the\nsame statements regarding Lincoln's belief as those made in his \"Life\nof Lincoln.\" Aside from this, Dr. Barrows is the only one of these\ntwo hundred memorialists who ventures to affirm that Lincoln was a\nChristian.\n\nThe story of Dr. Vinton, too absurd to demand serious\nconsideration--apparently too incredible for belief--is yet believed by\nthousands. When such fabulous tales are told by men who are looked upon\nas the exponents of morality, and published in papers and periodicals\nthat are presumed to be the repositories only of truth, it is not\nstrange that such stories as Washington's Praying at Valley Forge, Ethan\nAllen and His Daughter, Don't Unchain the Tiger, Paine's Recanting, and\na thousand and one other pious fictions of a similar character,\nhave gained popular credence. To read the fabrications of this class\npertaining to Lincoln alone, one would suppose that this\nastute statesman, this Chief Magistrate of a great nation, this\nCommander-in-Chief of two millions of soldiers, engaged in the most\nstupendous civil conflict the world has known, occupied the greater\nportion of his time in studying the Scriptures, poring over doctrinal\nsermons, participating in prayer-meetings led by pious nurses, and\nweeping upon the necks of clerical visitors.\n\nBishop Simpson's remarks have been presented, not because they furnish\nany proofs of Lincoln's reputed Christianity, but because he was one of\nthe clergymen who officiated at Lincoln's funeral, and because his words\non that occasion have been cited in support of this claim. But he does\nnot assert that Lincoln was a Christian. He simply testifies to his\nbelief and trust in God--to his Deistic faith--nothing more.\n\nI am aware that in some of the published reports of his address there\nhave been interpolated words intended to convey the idea that Lincoln\naccepted Christ. Bishop Simpson, I am sure, never authorized the\ninsertion of these words. They express a claim he never made--a claim he\ncertainly did not make on the day of Lincoln's interment.\n\nIn his funeral address at Washington, Dr. Gurley did not affirm that\nLincoln was a Christian, or that he was intending to make a profession\nof religion. Bishop Simpson, in his oration at Springfield, made no\nmention of these claims, and Dr. Gurley and Bishop Simpson are known to\nhave held a consultation before that oration was delivered.\n\nThis silence is conclusive evidence that these men knew that Lincoln was\nan unbeliever. Commenting on this notable omission, Mr. Herndon says:\n\n\"Bishop Simpson delivered the funeral oration, and in that oration there\nwas not one word about Mr. Lincoln's Christianity. Bishop Simpson was\nLincoln's friend; Dr. Gurley was Lincoln's pastor in Washington, Now\nthese men knew or had reason to know, Lincoln's religion, and the world\nwould have heard of his Christianity on the day of his burial if it had\nbeen known. But Simpson and Gurley are silent--dumb before the Christian\nworld.\"\n\nOne of the most beautiful and exhaustive tributes ever paid to Lincoln,\naside from the matchless tribute paid by Colonel Ingersoll, is that from\nthe pen of Bishop Simpson which appears in the \"Lincoln Memorial Album.\"\nIn this tribute he does not make even the remotest allusion to Lincoln's\nreligious belief. He appears to have heeded the advice tendered a\nless discreet Christian writer, and recognized the fact that, from\nhis standpoint, the less said about the subject the better. Had all\nChristians acted as wisely and as honorably in this matter as Bishop\nSimpson, this controversy about Lincoln's religion would never have\narisen.\n\nI have now reviewed the testimony of these witnesses. Tested in the\ncrucible of honest criticism, little remains of their statements save\nthe dross of falsehood and error. I may be charged with unjust severity\ntoward these witnesses, nearly all of whom are men of recognized\nrespectability and distinction. But a majority of them have testified to\nwhat they know to be false, and against those who knowingly bear false\nwitness no censure can be too severe. Thousands of Christian men and\nwomen, misled by this false testimony, honestly believe and contend\nthat Lincoln was a Christian. Against these I have not an unkind word\nto offer. But I am resolved to disabuse their minds of this erroneous\nbelief. Painful as the birth of an unwelcome idea is, they shall know\nthe truth.\n\n\n\n\nCHAPTER V. TESTIMONY OF HON. WILLIAM H. HERNDON--PUBLISHED TESTIMONY\n\n     Herndon's Association with Lincoln--Character--Writings--\n     Competency as a Witness,--The Abbott Letter--Contribution to\n     the Liberal Age--Article in the Truth Seeker--Herndon's\n     \"Life of Lincoln.\"\n\nHaving presented and reviewed the evidence in behalf of the affirmative\nof this question, the evidence in support of the negative will next be\ngiven, and in consideration of his long and intimate association with\nLincoln, and the character and comprehensiveness of his testimony, the\nfirst to testify will be Hon. Wm. H. Herndon, of Springfield, Ill.\n\nIn 1843, Lincoln formed a partnership with Mr. Herndon in the law\nbusiness, which existed for a period of twenty-two years, and was only\ndissolved by the bullet of the assassin. The strong attachment that\nthese men had for each other is illustrated in the following touching\nincident, related in \"The Everyday Life of Lincoln:\"\n\n\"When he was about to leave for Washington, he went to the dingy little\nlaw office which had sheltered his saddest hours. He sat down on the\ncouch and said to his law-partner, Herndon, 'Billy, you and I have been\ntogether more than twenty years, and have never \"passed a word.\" Will\nyou let my name stay on the old sign till I come back from Washington?'\nThe tears started to Mr. Herndon's eyes. He put out his hand. 'Mr.\nLincoln,' said he, 'I will never have any other partner while you live;'\nand to the day of the assassination all the doings of the firm were in\nthe name of 'Lincoln & Herndon'\" (Everyday Life of Lincoln, p. 377).\n\nMr. Herndon died in 1891. Though younger than his illustrious partner,\nhe was at the time of his death well advanced in years. He had retired\nfrom the active practice of law, and resided at his country home\nnear Springfield. He was noted for his rugged honesty, for his broad\nphilanthropy, and for his strong and original mental qualities. He was\none of the pioneers in the antislavery movement, and one of the founders\nof the Republican party. He was the Republican nominee for Presidential\nElector of the Springfield district when the first Republican ticket,\nFremont and Dayton, was placed in the field. Governor Bissell, Governor\nYates and Governor Oglesby successively appointed him Bank Commissioner\nof Illinois. His talents were recognized and his friendship was sought\nby many of the most eminent men in the nation. Garrison stopped for\nweeks at his home; Theodore Parker was his guest; Horace Greeley was his\ndevoted friend, and Charles Sumner was his friend and correspondent.\n\nWhen Lincoln and Herndon were first thrown into each other's society,\nLincoln's mind was dwelling, for the most part, in the theological (or\nrather anti-theological) world, while Herndon's found a most congenial\nhabitation in the world of politics. They were destined to exercise\nan important influence in molding each other's characters. Herndon was\nindebted chiefly to Lincoln for the religious views he entertained,\nwhile Lincoln was indebted mainly to Herndon for the political\nprinciples which he finally espoused. Colonel Lamon, in his \"Life of\nLincoln,\" gives the following truthful sketch of the character of the\nman whom Lincoln made a Deist, and who in turn made an Abolitionist of\nLincoln. Alluding to the Abolitionists of Illinois, as they appeared in\n1854, when Lincoln took his stand on the side of freedom, Lamon says:\n\n\"Chief among them was Owen Lovejoy; and second to him, if second to any,\nwas William H. Herndon. But the position of this latter gentleman\nwas one of singular embarrassment. According to himself, he was an\nAbolitionist 'some time before he was born,' and hitherto he had made\nhis 'calling and election sure' by every word and act of a life devoted\nto political philanthropy and disinterested political labors. While the\ntwo great national parties divided the suffrages of the people, North\nand South, everything in his eyes was dead. He detested the bargains by\nwhich those parties were in the habit of composing sectional troubles,\nand sacrificing the principle of freedom. When the Whig party paid its\nbreath to time, he looked upon its last agonies as but another instance\nof divine retribution. He had no patience with time-servers, and\nregarded with indignant contempt the policy which would postpone\nthe natural rights of an enslaved race to the success of parties and\npoliticians. He stood by at the sacrifice of the Whig party in Illinois\nwith the spirit of Paul when he held the clothes of them that stoned\nStephen. He believed it was for the best, and hoped to see a new party\nrise in its place, great in the fervor of its faith, and animated by\nthe spirit of Wilberforce, Garrison, and the Lovejoys. He was a fierce\nzealot, and gloried proudly in his title of 'fanatic;' for it was his\nconviction that fanatics were at all times the salt of the earth, with\npower to save it from the blight that follows the wickedness of men. He\nbelieved in a God, but it was the God of Nature--the God of Socrates and\nPlato, as well as the God of Jacob. He believed in a Bible, but it\nwas the open scroll of the universe; and in a religion clear and well\ndefined, but it was a religion that scorned what he deemed the narrow\nslavery of verbal inspiration. Hot-blooded, impulsive, brave, morally\nand physically, careless of consequences when moved by a sense of\nindividual duty, he was the very man to receive into his inmost heart\nthe precepts of Mr. Seward's 'higher law'\" (Life of Lincoln, pp. 350,\n351).\n\nHis literary abilities, both as a speaker and as a writer, were of a\nhigh order. He had written a meritorious work on Mental Philosophy,\nand a \"Life of Lincoln,\" which had just been published when he died. In\naddition to numerous addresses upon historical, economical, and other\nsubjects he prepared and delivered several able and interesting lectures\non Lincoln: \"Abraham Lincoln and Ann Rutledge,\" a beautiful and touching\nrepresentation of that pathetic and romantic love episode which forms\none of the saddest chapters in Lincoln's history; \"The Analysis of\nLincoln's Character,\" which appears in the \"Lincoln Memorial Album,\" and\n\"Lincoln's Religion,\" which was published in the _State Register_, of\nSpringfield, Ill.\n\nCarpenter, and in fact nearly every writer on Lincoln, has made free use\nof Herndon's writings. Carpenter declares that his \"masterly 'Analysis\nof Lincoln's Character' has scarcely an equal in the annals of\nbiographical literature.\" Both Holland and Lamon acknowledge that they\nwere more deeply indebted to him in the preparation of their respective\nworks than to any other person. The Petersburg _Democrat_, published in\nMenard county, where Lincoln spent the first years of his manhood, says:\n\"Mr. Herndon was the law partner of Mr. Lincoln from 1843 to 1860, and\nknew his inner life better than any other man.\" The Sangamon county\n_Monitor_, of Springfield, where Lincoln lived for a quarter of a\ncentury, says: \"Herndon knew Lincoln's views better than any man in\nAmerica.\" Judge David Davis, the lifelong friend of Lincoln, in whose\ncourt both Lincoln and Herndon practiced for years, declared that\nHerndon knew more about Lincoln's religion than any other man.\n\nIn this chapter will be reproduced the evidence of Mr. Herndon that has\nalready been made public.\n\nThe first elaborate exposition of Lincoln's Free-thought views was made\nin 1870, in what is known as the \"Abbott Letter,\" an article which Mr.\nHerndon by request contributed to the _Index_, a paper then published at\nToledo, O., and edited by Francis E. Abbott. The article was extensively\ncopied and commented upon, and produced a profound sensation in the\nreligious world, which, to a great extent, had been misled by such\nwriters as Holland. The first and more important part of Mr. Herndon's\narticle will now be presented:\n\n\"Mr. Abbott: Some time since I promised you that I would send a letter\nin relation to Mr. Lincoln's religion. I do so now. Before entering on\nthat question, one or two preliminary remarks will help us to understand\nwhy he disagreed with the Christian world in its principles as well as\nin its theology. In the first place, Mr. Lincoln's mind was a purely\nlogical mind; secondly, Mr. Lincoln was a purely practical man. He\nhad no fancy or imagination, and not much emotion. He was a realist\nas opposed to an idealist. As a general rule, it is true that a purely\nlogical mind has not much hope, if it ever has faith in the unseen and\nunknown. Mr. Lincoln had not much hope and no faith in things that\nlie outside of the domain of demonstration; he was so constituted, so\norganized, that he could believe nothing unless his senses or logic\ncould reach it. I have often read to him a law point, a decision, or\nsomething I fancied. He could not understand it until he took the\nbook out of my hand, and read the thing for himself. He was terribly,\nvexatiously skeptical. He could scarcely understand anything, unless he\nhad time and place fixed in his mind.\n\n\"I became acquainted with Mr. Lincoln in 1834, and I think I knew him\nwell to the day of his death. His mind, when a boy in Kentucky, showed a\ncertain gloom, an unsocial nature, a peculiar abstractedness, a bold and\ndaring skepticism. In Indiana, from 1817 to 1830, it manifested the same\nqualities or attributes as in Kentucky: it only intensified, developed\nitself, along those lines in Indiana. He came to Illinois in 1830, and,\nafter some little roving, settled in New Salem, now in Menard county\nand state of Illinois. This village lies about twenty miles northwest of\nthis city. It was here that Mr. Lincoln became acquainted with a class\nof men the world never saw the like of before or since. They were large\nmen--large in body and large in mind; hard to whip and never to be\nfooled. They were a bold, daring, and reckless sort of men; they were\nmen of their own minds--believed what was demonstrable; were men of\ngreat common sense. With these men Mr. Lincoln was thrown; with them\nhe lived, and with them he moved and almost had his being. They were\nskeptics all--scoffers some. These scoffers were good men, and their\nscoffs were protests against theology--loud protests against the follies\nof Christianity. They had never heard of Theism and the newer and better\nreligious thoughts of this age. Hence, being natural skeptics, and being\nbold, brave men, they uttered their thoughts freely. They declared\nthat Jesus was an illegitimate child. They were on all occasions, when\nopportunity offered, debating the various questions of Christianity\namong themselves. They took their stand on common sense and on their\nown souls; and, though their arguments were rude and rough, no man\ncould overthrow their homely logic. They riddled all divines, and not\nunfrequently made them skeptics, disbelievers as bad as themselves.\nThey were a jovial, healthful, generous, social, true, and manly set of\npeople. It was here and among these people that Mr. Lincoln was thrown.\nAbout the year 1834 he chanced to come across Volney's 'Ruins' and\nsome of Paine's theological works. He at once seized hold of them, and\nassimilated them into his own being. Volney and Paine became a part of\nMr. Lincoln from 1834 to the end of his life. \"In 1835 he wrote out a\nsmall work on Infidelity, and intended to have it published. This book\nwas an attack upon the whole grounds of Christianity, and especially\nwas it an attack upon the idea that Jesus was the Christ, the true and\nonly-begotten son of God, as the Christian world contends. Mr. Lincoln\nwas at that time in New Salem, keeping store for Mr. Samuel Hill,\na merchant and postmaster of that place. Lincoln and Hill were very\nfriendly. Hill, I think, was a skeptic at this time. Lincoln, one day\nafter the book was finished, read it to Mr. Hill, his good friend. Hill\ntried to persuade him not to make it public, not to publish it. Hill\nat that time saw in Mr. Lincoln a rising man, and wished him success.\nLincoln refused to destroy it--said it should be published. Hill\nswore it should never see light of day. He had an eye on Lincoln's\npopularity--his present and future success; and believing that if the\nbook was published it would kill Lincoln forever, he snatched it from\nLincoln's hand when Lincoln was not expecting it, and ran it into\nan old-fashioned tinplate stove, heated as hot as a furnace; and so\nLincoln's book went up to the clouds in smoke. It is confessed by all\nwho heard parts of it that it was at once able and eloquent; and, if I\nmay judge of it from Mr. Lincoln's subsequent ideas and opinions, often\nexpressed to me and to others in my presence, it was able, strong,\nplain, and fair. His argument was grounded on the internal mistakes of\nthe Old and New Testaments, and on reason and on the experiences and\nobservations of men. The criticisms from internal defects were sharp,\nstrong, and manly.\n\n\"Mr. Lincoln moved to this city in 1837, and here became acquainted\nwith various men of his own way of thinking. At that time they called\nthemselves Freethinkers, or free thinking men. I remember all these\nthings distinctly; for I was with them, heard them, and was one of them.\nMr. Lincoln here found other works--Hume, Gibbon, and others--and drank\nthem in. He made no secret of his views; no concealment of his religion.\nHe boldly avowed himself an Infidel.\n\n\"When Mr. Lincoln was a candidate for our Legislature, he was accused\nof being an Infidel and of having said that Jesus Christ was an\nillegitimate child. He never denied his opinions nor flinched from his\nreligious views. He was a true man, and yet it may be truthfully said\nthat in 1837 his religion was low indeed. In his moments of gloom he\nwould doubt, if he did not sometimes deny, God.\n\n\"Mr. Lincoln ran for Congress against the Rev. Peter Cartwright in the\nyear 1846. In that contest he was accused of being an Infidel, if not\nan Atheist. He never denied the charge--would not--'would die first.'\nIn the first place, because he knew it could and would be proved on him;\nand in the second place, he was too true to his own convictions, to his\nown soul, to deny it.\n\n\"When Mr. Lincoln left this city for Washington, I knew he had undergone\nno change in his religious opinions or views. He held many of the\nChristian ideas in abhorrence, and among them there was this one,\nnamely, that God would forgive the sinner for a violation of his laws.\nLincoln maintained that God could not forgive; that punishment has to\nfollow the sin; that Christianity was wrong in teaching forgiveness.\n\n\"From what I know of Mr. Lincoln, and from what I have heard and\nverily believe, I can say, first, that he did not believe in a special\ncreation, his idea being that all creation was an evolution under\nlaw; secondly, that he did not believe that the Bible was a special\nrevelation from God, as the Christian world contends; thirdly, he\ndid not believe in miracles as understood by Christians; fourthly, he\nbelieved in universal inspiration and miracles under law; fifthly,\nhe did not believe that Jesus was the Christ, the son of God, as the\nChristian church contends; sixthly, he believed that all things,\nboth matter and mind, were governed by laws, universal, absolute, and\neternal. All his speeches and remarks in Washington conclusively prove\nthis. Law was to Lincoln everything, and special interferences, shams\nand delusions.\"\n\nIn 1874 Mr. Herndon delivered in Springfield a lecture on \"Lincoln's\nReligion.\" It was a reply to Reed's lecture, and was published in the\n_State Register_, of Springfield. In this lecture he reaffirms the\nstatements made in the \"Abbott Letter,\" supports them with substantial\narguments and proofs, and completely overthrows the claims advanced by\nReed. From it I quote the following:\n\n\"It is a curious fact that when any man by his genius, good fortune,\nor otherwise rises to public notice and to fame, it does not make much\ndifference what life he has led, that the whole Christian world claims\nhim as a Christian, to be forever held up to view as a hero and a saint\nduring all the coming ages, just as if religion would die out of the\nsoul of man unless the great dead be canonized as a model Christian.\nThis is a species of hero or saint worship. Lincoln they are determined\nto enthrone among the saints, to be forever worshiped as such.\"\n\n\"I believe that Mr. Lincoln did not late in life become a firm believer\nin the Christian religion. What! Mr. Lincoln discard his logical\nfaculties and reason with his heart? What! Mr. Lincoln believe that\nJesus was the Christ of God, the true and only begotten son of him, as\nthe Christian creed contends? What! Mr. Lincoln believe that the New\nTestament is of special divine authority, and fully and infallibly\ninspired, as the Christian contends? What! Mr. Lincoln abandon his\nlifelong ideas of universal, eternal and absolute laws and contend that\nthe New Testament is any more inspired than Homer's poems, than Milton's\n'Paradise Lost,' than Shakspere, than his own eloquent and inspired\noration at Gettysburg? What! Mr. Lincoln believe that the great Creator\nhad connection through the form and instrumentality of a shadow with a\nJewish girl? Blasphemy! These things must be believed and acknowledged\nin order to be a Christian.\"\n\n\"One word concerning this discussion about Mr. Lincoln's religious\nviews. It is important in this: 1. It settles a historic fact. 2. It\nmakes it possible to write a true history of a man free from the fear\nof fire and stake. 3. It assures the reading public that the life of Mr.\nLincoln will be truly written. 4. It will be a warning forever to all\nuntrue men, that the life they have lived will be held up to view. 5. It\nshould convince the Christian pulpit and press that it is impossible in\nthis day and generation, at least in America, to daub up sin, and make\na hero out of a fool, a knave, or a villain, which Mr. Lincoln was not.\nSome true spirit will drag the fraud and lie out to the light of day. 6.\nIts tendency will be to arrest and put a stop to romantic biographies.\nAnd now let it be written in history, and on Mr. Lincoln's tomb: 'He\ndied an unbeliever.'\"\n\nIn January, 1883, Mr. Herndon contributed an article on \"Lincoln's\nReligion\" to the _Liberal Age_, of Milwaukee. From this article the\nfollowing extracts are taken and submitted:\n\n\"In 1837, Mr. Lincoln moved to the city of Springfield, and there came\nacross many people of his own belief. They called themselves at that\ntime Freethinkers. Some of these men were highly educated and polished\ngentlemen. Mr. Lincoln read in this city Hume, Gibbon, and other\nLiberal books. He was in this city from 1837 to 1861, an\nInfidel--Freethinker--Liberal--Free Religionist--of the radical type.\"\n\n\"In his philosophy, he was a realist, as opposed to an idealist; he was\na sensationalist, as opposed to an intuitionalist; and was a materialist\nas opposed to a spiritualist.\"\n\n\"Some good men and women say that Mr. Lincoln was a Christian, because\nhe was a moral man. They say that he was a _rational_ Christian, because\nhe loved morality. Do not other people, who are not Christians, love\nmorality? Morality is not _the_ test of Christianity, by any means.\nIf it is the test, then all moral men, Atheists, Agnostics, Infidels,\nMohammedans, Buddhists, Mormons, and the rest, are Christians. A\n_rational_ Christian is an anomaly, an impossibility; because when\nreason is left free, it demands proofs--it relies on experience,\nobservation, logic, nature, laws. Why not call Mr. Lincoln a rational\nBuddhist, a rational Mohammedan, a rational Confucian, a rational\nMormon, for all these, if true to their faith, love morality.\"\n\n\"Did Mr. Lincoln believe in prayer as a means of moving God? It is said\nto me by Christians, touching his religion: 'Did not he, in his parting\nspeech in Springfield, in 1861, say, \"I hope you, my friends, will\npray that I may receive,\" etc.?' and to which I say, yes. In his last\nInaugural he said: 'Fondly do we hope, fervently do we pray.' These\nexpressions are merely conventional. They do not prove that Mr. Lincoln\nbelieved that prayer is a means of moving God.... He believed, as I\nunderstood him, that human prayer did the prayer good; that prayer\nwas but a drum beat--the taps of the spirit on the living human soul,\narousing it to acts of repentance for bad deeds done, or to inspire it\nto a loftier and a higher effort for a nobler and a grander life.\"\n\n\"Did Mr. Lincoln, in his said Inaugural, say: 'Both read the same _Word\nof God?_' No, because that would be admitting revelation. He said: 'Both\nread the same _Bible_' Did Mr. Lincoln say: 'Yet if God wills that\nit [the war] continue till all the wealth piled by the bondman's two\nhundred and fifty years of unrequited toil shall be sunk, and until\nevery drop of blood drawn by the lash shall be paid with another drawn\nby the sword, _as was said by God_ three thousand years ago?' He did\nnot; he was cautious, and said: 'As was said_ three thousand years ago_.'\nJove never nods.\"\n\nA little later Mr. Herndon wrote an article entitled, \"Abraham Lincoln's\nReligious Belief,\" which appeared in the _Truth Seeker_ of New York.\nFrom this article I quote the following passages:\n\n\"In 1842 I heard Mr. Lincoln deliver a speech before the Washingtonian\nTemperance Society, of this city.... He scored the Christians for the\nposition they had taken. He said in that lecture this: 'If they [the\nChristians] believe, as they profess--that Omnipotence condescended\nto take on himself the form of sinful man,' etc. This was spoken with\nenergy. He scornfully and contemptuously emphasized the words _as they\nprofess_. The rebuke was as much in the manner of utterance as in\nthe substance of what was said. I heard the criticisms of some of\nthe Christians that night. They said the speech was an insult and an\noutrage.\"\n\n\"It is my opinion that no man ever heard Mr. Lincoln pray, in the true\nevangelical sense of that word. His philosophy is against all human\nprayer, as a means of reversing God's decrees.\"\n\n\"He has told me often that there was no freedom in the human will, and\nno punishment beyond this world. He denied God's higher law, and wrote\non the margin of a newspaper to his friends in the Chicago convention\nin 1860, this: 'Lincoln agrees with Seward in his irrepressible-conflict\nidea; but he is opposed to Seward's _higher law_' This paper was handed\nto Judge Davis, Judge Logan, and other friends.\"\n\n\"Mr. Lincoln and a minister, whose name is kept in the dark, had a\nconversation about religion. It appears that Mr. Lincoln said that when\nhis son--bone of his bone, flesh of his flesh, and blood of his own\nheart--died, though a severe affliction, it did not arouse him to think\nof Christ; but when he saw the graves of so many soldiers--strangers to\nhim--... that sad sight aroused him to love Jesus.... It is a fine thing\nfor the reputation of the 'Illinois Clergyman' that his name is to the\nworld unknown. It is a most heartless thing, this supposed conversation\nof Lincoln with the Illinois clergyman. What! Lincoln feel more for the\n_graves_ of strangers than for the death of his once living, loving, and\nlovable son, now dead, moldering to ashes in the silent tomb! The charge\nis barbarous. To make Lincoln a lover of Jesus, whom he once ridiculed,\nthis minister makes him a savage.\" \"I wish to give an illustration\nof the uncertainty and unreliability of those loose things that float\naround in the newspapers of the day, and how liable things are to be\ninaccurate--so made even by the best of men. Mr. Lincoln on the morning\nhe started for Washington to take the oath of office, and be inaugurated\nPresident of this great Republic, gave a short farewell address to his\nold friends. It was eloquent and touching. That speech is copied in\nHolland's 'Life of Lincoln,' in Arnold's 'Lincoln and Slavery,' and in\nLamon's 'Life of Lincoln,' and no two are exactly alike. If it is hard\nto get the exact truth on such an occasion as this, how impossible is it\nto get at Mr. Lincoln's sayings which have been written out by men weeks\nand months after what he did say have passed by! All these loose and\nfoolish things that Mr. Lincoln is supposed to have said are like the\ncords of driftwood, floating on the bosom of the great Mississippi, down\nto the great gulf of--Forgetfulness. Let them go.\"\n\nHerndon's \"Life of Lincoln,\" is a most important contribution to\nbiographical literature. It will enable the present and future\ngenerations to become better acquainted with Lincoln the man than with\nany other prominent American. The author has performed substantially the\nsame work for Lincoln that Boswell performed for Johnson; only he has\nperformed it more faithfully. Political partisans and religious bigots\nmay condemn the work, but impartial critics are almost unanimous in\ntheir praise of it.\n\nThe metropolitan journals of Lincoln's and Hern-don's own state commend\nthe work. The Chicago Tribune says: \"All these loving adherents [of\nLincoln] will hail Herndon's 'Lincoln' with unmixed, unbounded joy.\" The\nChicago _Times_ says: \"Herndon's 'Life' is the best yet written.\" The\n_Inter Ocean_ says that Herndon \"knew more of Lincoln's inner life than\nany living man.\" The Chicago _Herald_ says: \"It enables one to approach\nmore closely to the great President.\" The Chicago _Evening Journal_\nsays: \"It presents a truthful and living picture of the greatest of\nAmericans.\"\n\nThe _Nation_ thus refers to it: \"The sincerity and honesty of the\nbiographer appear on every page.\" The New York _Sun_ says: \"The marks of\nunflinching veracity are patent in every line.\" The Washington _Capital_\nsays that it places \"Lincoln before the world as he really was.\" The\n_Commercial Gazette_, of Cincinnati, says: \"He describes the life of his\nfriend Lincoln just as he saw it.\" The _Morning Call_, of San Francisco,\naffirms that it \"contains the only true history of the lamented\nPresident.\" The St. Louis _Republic_ says: \"It will do more to shape the\njudgment of posterity on Mr. Lincoln's character than all that has been\nwritten or will be hereafter written.\"\n\nIn this work Mr. Herndon states in brief the substance of the articles\nalready quoted in this chapter. I quote as follows:\n\n\"No man had a stronger or firmer faith in Providence--God--than Mr.\nLincoln, but the continued use by him late in life of the word God must\nnot be interpreted to mean that he believed in a personal God. In 1854\nhe asked me to erase the word _God_ from a speech which I had written\nand read to him for criticism, because my language indicated a personal\nGod, whereas he insisted that no such personality ever existed\" (Life\nof Lincoln, pp. 445, 446).\n\n\"The world has always insisted on making an orthodox Christian of him,\nand to analyze his language or sound his belief is but to break the idol\"\n(Ibid).\n\n\"The benevolence of his impulses, the seriousness of his convictions,\nand the nobility of his character, are evidences unimpeachable that his\nsoul was ever filled with the exalted purity and the sublime faith of\nnatural religion\" (Ib.).\n\n\n\n\nCHAPTER VI. TESTIMONY OF HON. WILLIAM H. HERNDON--UNPUBLISHED TESTIMONY\n\n     Extracts from Herndon's Letters--The Books Lincoln Read--His\n     Philosophy--His Infidelity--Refutation of Christian Claims--\n     Attempts to Invalidate Herndon's Testimony--Reed's\n     Calumnies--Vindication.\n\nIn the preceding chapter has been submitted the evidence of Mr. Herndon\nthat has already been published. In this chapter will be presented some\nhitherto unpublished testimony.\n\nThe writer corresponded with Mr. Herndon for many years. Much of this\ncorrespondence related to Abraham Lincoln, and no inconsiderable portion\nof it to the subject under consideration. Permission was granted by Mr.\nHerndon to use such parts of this correspondence as may be deemed of\nvalue. The limits of this work preclude the presentation of much that is\nreally interesting, but no apology is needed for devoting space to\nthe following extracts from his letters, written at various intervals\nbetween 1880 and 1890:\n\n\"I was the personal friend of Mr. Lincoln from 1834 to the day of his\ndeath. In 1843 we entered into a partnership which was never formally\ndissolved. When he became unpopular in this Congressional district\nbecause of his speeches on the Mexican war, I was faithful to him.\nWhen he espoused the antislavery cause and in the eyes of most men had\nhopelessly ruined his political prospects, I stood by him, and through\nthe press defended his course. In these dark hours, by our unity of\nsentiment and by political ostracism we were driven to a close and\nenduring friendship. You should take it for granted, then, that I knew\nMr. Lincoln well. During all this time, from 1834 to 1862, when I last\nsaw him, he never intimated to me, either directly or indirectly, that\nhe had changed his religious opinions. Had he done so--had he let drop\none word or look in that direction, I should have detected it.\n\n\"I had an excellent private library, probably the best in the city for\nadmired books. To this library Mr. Lincoln had, as a matter of course,\nfull and free access at all times. I purchased such books as Locke,\nKant, Fichte, Lewes; Sir Wm. Hamilton's 'Discussions on Philosophy;'\nSpencer's 'First Principles,' 'Social Statics,' etc.; Buckle's 'History\nof Civilization,' and Lecky's 'History of Rationalism.' I also possessed\nthe works of Parker, Paine, Emerson, and Strauss; Gregg's 'Creed of\nChristendom,' McNaught on Inspiration, Volney's 'Ruins,' Feuerbach's\n'Essence of Christianity,' and other works on Infidelity. Mr. Lincoln\nread some of these works. About the year 1843 he borrowed 'The Vestiges\nof Creation' of Mr. James W. Keys, of this city, and read it carefully.\nHe subsequently read the sixth edition of this work, which I loaned him.\nMr. Lincoln had always denied special creation, but from his want\nof education he did not know just what to believe. He adopted the\nprogressive and development theory as taught more or less directly\nin that work. He despised speculation, especially in the metaphysical\nworld. He was purely a practical man. He adopted Locke's notions as his\nsystem of mental philosophy, with some modifications to suit his own\nviews. He held that reason drew her inferences as to law, etc., from\nobservation, experience, and reflection on the facts and phenomena\nof nature. He was a pure sensationalist, except as above. He was\na materialist in his philosophy. He denied dualism, and at times\nimmortality in any sense.\n\n\"Before I wrote my Abbott letter I diligently searched through Lincoln's\nletters, speeches, state papers, etc., to find the word _immortality_,\nand I could not find it anywhere except in his letter to his father. The\nword _immortality_ appears but once in his writings.\"\n\n\"If he had been asked the plain question, 'Do you _know_ that a God\nexists?' he would have said: 'I do _not know_ that a God exists.'\"\n\n\"At one moment of his life I know that he was an Atheist. I was\npreparing a speech on Kansas, and in it, like nearly all reformers, I\ninvoked _God_. He made me wipe out that word and substitute the word\n_Maker_, affirming that said Maker was a principle of the universe. When\nhe went to Washington he did the same to a friend there.\"\n\n\"Mr. Lincoln told me, over and over, that man has no freedom of will,\nor, as he termed it, 'No man has a freedom of mind.' He was in one sense\na fatalist, and so died. He believed that he was under the thumb of\nProvidence (which to him was but another name for fate). The longer he\nlived the more firmly he believed it, and hence his invocations of God.\nBut these invocations are no evidence to a rational mind that he adopted\nthe blasphemy that God seduced his own daughter, begat a son on purpose\nto have mankind kill him, in order that he, God, might become reconciled\nto his own mistakes, according to the Christian view.\"\n\n\"Lincoln would wait patiently on the flow and logic of events. He\nbelieved that conditions make the man and not man the conditions. Under\nhis own hand he says: 'I attempt no compliment to my own sagacity. I\nclaim not to have controled events, but confess plainly that events have\ncontroled me.' He believed in the supreme reign of law. This law\n_fated_ things, as he would express it. Now, how could a man be a\nChristian--could believe that Jesus Christ was God--could believe in the\nefficacy of prayer--and entertain such a belief?\"\n\n\"He did not believe in the efficacy of prayer, although he used\nthat conventional language. He said in Washington, 'God has his own\npurposes.' If God has his own purposes, then prayer will not change\nGod's purposes.\"\n\n\"I have often said to you, and now repeat it, that Lincoln was a\nscientific Materialist, i.e., that this was his tendency as opposed\nto the Spiritualistic idea. Lincoln always contended that general and\nuniversal laws ruled the universe--always did--do now--and ever will. He\nwas an Agnostic generally, sometimes an Atheist.\"\n\n\"That Mr. Lincoln was an Infidel from 1834 to 1861, I know, and that\nhe remained one to the day of his death, I honestly believe. I always\nunderstood that he was an Infidel, sometimes bordering on Atheism. I\nnever saw any change in the man, and the change could not have escaped\nmy observation had it happened.\"\n\n\"Lincoln's task was a terrible one. When he took the oath of office his\nsoul was bent on securing harmony among all the people of the North, and\nso he chose for his Cabinet officers his opponents for the Presidential\ncandidacy in order and as a means of creating a united North. He let all\nparties, professions, and callings have their way where their wishes did\nnot cut across his own. He was apparently pliant and supple. He ruled\nmen when men thought they were ruling him. He often said to me that the\nChristian religion was a dangerous element to deal with when aroused. He\nsaw in the Kansas affairs--in the whole history of slavery, in fact--its\nrigor and encroachments, that Christianity was aroused. It must be\ncontroled, and that in the right direction. Hence he bent to it, fed\nit, and kept it within bounds, well knowing that it would crush his\nadministration to atoms unless appeased. His oft and oft invocations\nof God, his conversations with Christians, his apparent respect for\nChristianity, etc., were all means to an end. And yet sometimes he\nshowed that he hated its nasal whines.\"\n\n\"A gentleman of veracity in Washington told me this story and vouched\nfor its truthfulness: 'A tall saddle-faced man,' said he, 'came\nto Washington to pray with Lincoln, having declared this to be his\nintention at the hotel About 10 o'clock A.M. the bloodless man, dressed\nin black with white cravat, went to the White House, sent in his card,\nand was admitted. Lincoln glanced at the man and knew his motives in an\ninstant. He said to him angrily: \"What, have you, too, come to\ntorment me with your prayers?\" The man was squelched--said, \"No, Mr.\nLincoln\"--lied out and out. Lincoln spoiled those prayers.'\"\n\n\"Mr. Lincoln was thought to be understood by the mob. But what a\ndelusion! He was one of the most reticent men that ever lived. All of\nus--Stuart, Speed, Logan, Matheny, myself, and others, had to guess at\nmuch of the man. He was a mystery to the world--a sphinx to most men.\nOne peculiarity of Mr. Lincoln was his irritability when anyone tried to\npeep into his own mind's laboratory. Considering all this, what can\nbe thought of the stories about what he is said to have confided to\nstrangers in regard to his religion?\"\n\n\"Not one of Lincoln's old acquaintances in this city ever heard of his\nconversion to Christianity by Dr. Smith or anyone else. It was never\nsuggested nor thought of here until after his death.\"\n\n\"I never saw him read a second of time in Dr. Smith's book on\nInfidelity. He threw it down upon our table--spit upon it as it\nwere--and never opened it to my knowledge.\"\n\n\"My opinion is, from what I have heard and know, that these men--Gurley\nand Simpson--refused to be a party to a fraud on the public touching\nLincoln's religion. I think that they understood each other the day that\nthe remains of Lincoln were put to rest.\"\n\n\"Holland came into my office, in 1865, and asked me this question: 'What\nabout Mr. Lincoln's Christianity?' To this, I replied: 'The less said\nabout it the better.' Holland then said to me, 'Oh, never mind, I'll fix\nthat,' and went over to Bateman and had it fixed.\"\n\n\"Lincoln never revealed to Judge Davis, Judge Matheny, Joshua F. Speed,\nJoseph Gillespie, nor myself that he was a Christian, or that he had\na change of heart, or anything like it, at any time. Now, taking into\nconsideration the fact that he was one of the most non-communicative of\nmen--that Bateman was, as it were, a mere stranger to him--that Bateman\nwas frightened, excited, conscience-smitten when I approached him on the\nsubject, and that in after years he confessed to me that his notes\nin Holland's 'Life of Lincoln' _were colored_--taking all this into\nconsideration, I say, can you believe Bateman's story to be true?\"\n\n\"I see quoted frequently a supposed speech made by Mr. Lincoln to the\ncolored people of Baltimore, on the presentation, of a Bible to him.\nThis supposed speech contains the following: 'All the good from the\nSavior of the world is communicated to us through this book.' This idea\nis false and foolish. What becomes of nine-tenths of the life of Jesus\nof which we have no history--nine-tenths of the great facts of this\ngrand man's life not recorded in this book? Mr. Lincoln was full and\nexact in his language. He never used the word Savior, unless in a\nconventional sense; in fact, he never used the word at all. Again, he is\nmade to say: 'But for this book we could not know right from wrong.' The\nlowest organized life, I was about to say, knows right from wrong in its\nparticular sphere. Every good dog that comes into possession of a bone,\nknows that that bone belongs to him, and he knows that it is wrong\nfor another dog to rob him of it. He protests with bristling hair and\nglistening teeth against such dog robbery. It requires no revelation to\nteach him right from wrong in the dog world; yet it requires a special\nrevelation from God to teach us right from wrong in the human world.\nAccording to this speech, the dog has the advantage. But Mr. Lincoln\nnever uttered such nonsense.\"\n\n\"I do think that anyone who knew Mr. Lincoln--his history--his\nphilosophy--his opinions--and still asserts that he was a Christian,\nis an unbounded falsifier. I hate to speak thus plainly, but I cannot\nrespect an untruthful man.\"\n\n\"Let me ask the Christian claimant a few questions. Do you mean to say,\nwhen you assert that Mr. Lincoln was a Christian, that he believed that\nJesus was the Christ of God, as the evangelical world contends? If so,\nwhere do you get your information? Do you mean to say that Mr. Lincoln\nwas a converted man and that he so declared? If so, where, when, and\nbefore whom did he declare or reveal it? Do you mean to say that Mr.\nLincoln joined a church? If so, what church did he join, and when did\nhe join it? Do you mean to say that Mr. Lincoln was a secret Christian,\nacting under the cloak of the devil to advance Christianity? If so,\nwhat is your authority? If you will tell me when it was that the Creator\ncaught with his almighty arms, Abraham, and held him fast while he\npoured the oil of grace on his rebellious soul, then I will know-when it\nwas that he was converted from his Infidel views to Christianity.\"\n\n\"The best evidence this side of Lincoln's own written statement that he\nwas an Infidel, if not an Atheist, as claimed by some, is the fact that\nhe never mentions the name of Jesus. If he was a Christian it could be\nproved by his letters and speeches. That man is a poor defender of\na principle, of a person, or of a thing, who never mentions that\nprinciple, person, or thing. I have never seen the name of Jesus\nmentioned by Mr. Lincoln.\"\n\n\"Mr. Lincoln never mentioned the name of Christ in his letters and\nspeeches as a Christian. I have searched for such evidence, but could\nnot find it. I have had others search, but they could not find it. This\ndead silence on the part of Mr. Lincoln is overwhelming proof that he\nwas an unbeliever.\"\n\n\"While Lincoln frequently, in a conventional way, appeals to God,\nhe never appeals to Christ nor mentions him. I know that he at first\nmaintained that Jesus was a bastard, and later that he was the son of\nJoseph and not of God.\"\n\n\"Lincoln was not a Christian in any sense other than that he lived\na good life and was a noble man. If a good life constitutes one a\nChristian, then Mill and a million other men who repudiated and denied\nChristianity were Christians, for they lived good and noble lives.\"\n\n\"If Mr. Lincoln changed his religious views he owed it to me to warn me,\nas he above all other men caused me to be an unbeliever. He said nothing\nto me, intimated nothing to me, either directly or indirectly. He\nowed this debt to many young men whom he had led astray, if astray the\nChristian calls it. I know of two young men of promise, now dead\nand gone--gone into endless misery, according to the evangelical\ncreed--caused by Mr. Lincoln's teachings. I know some of the living\nhere, men in prominent positions of life, who were made unbelievers by\nhim.\"\n\n\"One by one, these apocryphal stories go by the board. Courageous and\nremorseless criticism will wipe out all these things. There will not be\na vestige of them in fifty years to laugh at or to weep at.\"\n\nMr. Herndon's testimony, even in the absence of all other evidence, is\nconclusive. This was recognized by the Christian claimants after the\nappearance of his \"Abbott Letter.\" They employed various measures to\nbreak the force of his testimony by trying to induce him either to\nretract or modify his statements. But they were not successful. He\nwas not to be coaxed, he was not to be purchased, he was not to be\nintimidated. He had stated the truth and by the truth he proposed to\nstand. Foiled in these efforts, their last resort was to destroy his\ncredibility as a witness by destroying his character. The most brazen\nfalsehoods were invented and the most cruel calumnies circulated in\norder to crush him. Some of these stated that he was a drunkard, others\nthat he was a pauper, and still others that he had become insane.\n\nThese defamatory statements were usually first noticed in some religious\npaper or periodical. From this they were naturally copied into the\nsecular papers and sent broadcast over the land. Journalists who\nhad once known Mr. Herndon, either personally or by reputation, were\nsurprised and shocked at the announcements, and wrote articles like the\nfollowing which appeared in a Kansas paper:\n\n\"Bill Herndon is a pauper in Springfield, Ill. He was once worth\nconsiderable property. His mind was the most argumentative of any of the\nold lawyers in the state, and his memory was extraordinary.\n\n\"For several years before Lincoln was nominated for the Presidency,\nHerndon was in some respects the most active member of the firm,\npreparing the greatest number of cases for trial and making elaborate\narguments in their behalf. It is said that he worked hard with Lincoln\nin preparing the memorable speeches delivered by the man who afterward\nbecame President, during the debates between Lincoln and Douglas in\n1858, and in constructing the Cooper Institute address delivered by\nLincoln a short time before the war. Herndon, with all his attainments,\nwas a man who now and then went on a spree. This habit became worse\nafter Lincoln's death, and, like poor Dick Yates, he went down step\nby step till his old friends and associates point to him as a common\ndrunkard.\"\n\nI was in Springfield the very week that this article was published, and\npassed a day with Mr. Herndon at his home. I was prepared to testify,\nas all his neighbors were, that the charges it contained, together with\nothers that were being circulated, were false. I knew that he still\npossessed a sound and vigorous intellect; I knew that he was in\ncomfortable circumstances financially; I knew that he was an earnest\nadvocate of temperance, and that he practiced what he preached; in\nshort, I knew him to be a man of pure morals and exemplary character. At\nthe very time that he was declared to be an inmate of the insane asylum,\nthe Old Settlers' Society selected him to examine and report upon the\ncorrectness of the \"History of Sangamon County,\" which, as it included\na history of the capital of the state where, at one time or another,\nhad resided a majority of Illinois's most gifted sons, was an important\nwork, and one whose revision would not likely be intrusted to a\nlunatic. At the very time that he was said to be a pauper in the county\npoorhouse, he was entertaining such distinguished guests as William\nLloyd Garrison. At the very time that he was reported to be a common\ndrunkard, his neighbors had just appointed him guardian of the\neducational interests of their children.\n\nAll efforts to trace these slanders to their source and discover their\nauthor proved futile until 1880, when the writer of this saw in an Ohio\npaper an article on Lincoln, in which was quoted a portion of a letter\nwhich the contributor of the article stated had just been received from\nthe Rev. J. A. Reed, of Springfield. It related wholly to Mr. Herndon,\nand did not contain one fair, truthful statement. In thirty brief lines\nwere concentrated, in addition to several statements calculated and\nintended to deceive, no less than sixteen deliberate falsehoods, some of\nthem of the most cruel and infamous character. It was evident that Reed\nhad intended that the substance of his letter should be given to the\npublic without disclosing its authorship. But, thanks to the innocent\ncredulity and indiscreetness of the friend to whom it was sent, the\ndefamer was discovered and exposed. And this sneaking, cowardly assassin\nwas the \"defender of Lincoln's Christian faith!\" Could the inanimate\nremains of Abraham Lincoln have been revivified when this exposure was\nmade, he would have arisen from his mausoleum at Oak Bidge, have come\ninto the city, and have kicked this pretended \"defender,\" this base\ncalumniator of his beloved friend and associate, out of Springfield.\n\nThe cause of all the vituperation which for years had been heaped upon\nMr. Herndon was now apparent. He had replied to Reed's lecture, and\nopenly, honestly, and courteously, but effectively, refuted it; and\nbecause the latter could not come forward with a successful rejoinder,\nhe was thus heartlessly and covertly plunging a dagger into the\nreputation of his chivalrous opponent.\n\nThe intercession of friends secured for the culprit immunity from\narrest for libel, but in the newspapers of his city he received such\na castigation as he will not soon forget. The _Daily Monitor_, in an\neditorial replying to the slanders that were being circulated concerning\nMr. Herndon, said:\n\n\"Mr. Herndon is not a pauper, is not a drunkard; whisky did not ruin\nhim, and, in a word, the whole thing is a lie. Mr. Herndon lives on his\nfarm near this city. He is a great admirer of nature, loves flowers,\nand spends his whole time on the farm, except when doing his trading,\nor coming into the city to see his children and grandchildren. He don't\ndrink, he don't chew tobacco, he don't gamble, he is honorable and\ntruthful, and he is highly respected by his fellow-citizens. He is a\ngreat reader, a great thinker, loves his neighbors and his neighbors\nlove him. He has a great, big, kind heart for his fellow-man in\ndistress, and, while never worth 'considerable property,' he has always\nhad enough for his generous purposes. Just why this thing should be\nallowed we are at a loss to know, and have waited to see if some of\nthose who profess so much of the Christ-like in their composition would\nnot have enough of the man-like to be men, and not allow a good and true\nman as Mr. Herndon is to be thus infamously maligned and belied by those\nwhose works in the salvation of men would have more effect if more akin\nto Christ in practice.\"\n\nAfter a life of honest toil, much of it in behalf of the poor and the\nweak, without reward and without the expectation of reward, to be in his\nold age thus shamefully robbed of his good name, was an outrage almost\nwithout a parallel, save in the treatment received by Thomas Paine. That\nMr. Herndon was keenly sensitive to this great wrong is disclosed by the\ntone of his letters written at the time. In one he says: \"I have done\nnothing in the spirit of self-laudation. I prefer moving down the\ngrooves of time unnoticed and unknown, except to friends. I have no\nambition for fame or money. My ambition is to try to do good. I spent\nten or more years of my best life for the negro, liberty, and union,\nnot forgetting Kansas and her brave people. But let it all go; I make no\ncomplaint. I try to live a moral and a manly life, love my fellow man,\nlove freedom, love justice, and would die for the eternal right.\"\n\nAs an index of public sentiment in the community where the defamed and\nthe defamer resided, I will state two facts. On a pleasant September\nevening, in 1882, I attended Dr. Reed's church in Springfield. In that\ncommodious edifice, built to accommodate an audience of nearly one\nthousand, I found assembled to listen to this renowned \"defender of\nLincoln's Christian faith,\" an audience of forty-four persons. About\nthe same time, in the published report of a public meeting held near\nSpringfield, appeared the following: \"Five thousand people hovered\naround the speaker's stand for the purpose of listening to the able,\neloquent, and well-known Hon. W. H. Herndon.\"\n\nIt has been charged that Mr. Herndon's statements concerning Lincoln's\nunbelief were inspired by a spirit of revenge in consequence of\nLincoln's not having recognized him with an appointment. This charge and\nthis assumption are both false. There is now on file at Washington and\nat Springfield a telegram from Lincoln tendering him a judgeship, which\nhe declined.\n\nTo know Lincoln was to love him. None knew him better than Mr. Herndon,\nand none entertained a deeper affection for his memory. In a letter to\nme, dated Nov. 4, 1881, he pays this tribute to his dead friend:\n\n\"Some people say that Mr. Lincoln was an ungrateful man. This is not\ntrue, and especially when applied to myself. He was always kind, tender,\nand grateful to me--clung to me with hooks of steel. I know that I was\ntrue to him. It is said that no man is great to his valet. If I was Mr.\nLincoln's valet, the rule does not apply in this case, for my opinion of\nhim is too well known. His was a grand, noble, true, and manly life. He\ndreamed dreams of glory, and glory was justly his. He was growing and\nexpanding to the day of his death. He was slow in his development, but\nstrong and big when he did come. The last letter which I ever received\nfrom him concluded thus: 'God bless you, says your friend.--_A.\nLincoln_' He felt what he expressed, and in return I say, _God bless you,\nLincoln._\"\n\n\n\n\nCHAPTER VII. TESTIMONY OF COL. WARD H. LAMON\n\n     Lamon's \"Life of Lincoln\"--Lincoln's Early Skepticism--His\n     Investigations at New Salem--His Book on Infidelity--His\n     Religious Opinions Remain Unchanged--Holland's Condemnation\n     of Lamon's Work--Holland's and Lamon's Works Compared.\n\nIn 1872, seven years after the President's assassination, appeared the\n\"Life of Abraham Lincoln,\" written by Col. Ward H. Lamon. As a faithful\nrecord of the life of one of the most sublime characters in the world's\nhistory, this work stands unrivaled. More accomplished writers have\nwritten biography--have written the biography of Lincoln. But no writer\nhas ever been more thoroughly informed respecting his subject, and no\nwriter has ever made a more conscientious use of the information in his\npossession than has Colonel Lamon in his \"Life of Lincoln.\" In Illinois\nhe was the friend and confidant of Lincoln. When the time approached for\nLincoln to take the Executive chair, and the journey from Springfield\nto Washington was deemed a dangerous undertaking, to Colonel Lamon\nwas intrusted the responsible duty of conducting him to the national\ncapital. During the eventful years that followed, he remained at the\nPresident's side, holding an important official position in the\nDistrict of Columbia. When Lincoln died, at the great funeral pageant\nin Washington, he led the civic procession, and was, with Major General\nHunter and Judge David Davis, selected to convey the remains to their\nfinal resting-place at Springfield.\n\nThe following extract, from the preface to his work, shows what an\ninexhaustible mine of materials he had with which to prepare a full and\nauthentic record of Lincoln's life and character:\n\n\"At the time of Mr. Lincoln's death, I determined to write his history,\nas I had in my possession much valuable material for such a purpose....\nEarly in 1869, Mr. Herndon placed at my disposal his remarkable\ncollection of materials--the richest, rarest, and fullest collection\nit was possible to conceive.... Mr. Herndon had been the partner\nin business and the intimate personal associate of Mr. Lincoln for\nsomething like a quarter of a century; and Mr. Lincoln had lived\nfamiliarly with several members of his family long before their\nindividual acquaintance began. New Salem, Springfield, the old judicial\ncircuit, the habits and friends of Mr. Lincoln, were as well known\nto Mr. Herndon as to himself. With these advantages, and from the\nnumberless facts and hints which had dropped from Mr. Lincoln during the\nconfidential intercourse of an ordinary lifetime, Mr. Herndon was able\nto institute a thorough system of inquiry for every noteworthy\ncircumstance and every incident of value in Mr. Lincoln's career. The\nfruits of Mr. Herndon's labors are garnered in three enormous volumes of\noriginal manuscripts and a mass of unarranged letters and papers. They\ncomprise the recollections of Mr. Lincoln's nearest friends; of the\nsurviving members of his family and his family-connections; of the men\nstill living who knew him and his parents in Kentucky; of his\nschoolfellows, neighbors, and acquaintances in Indiana; of the better\npart of the whole population of New Salem; of his associates and\nrelatives at Springfield; and of lawyers, judges, politicians, and\nstatesmen everywhere, who had anything of interest or moment to relate.\nThey were collected at vast expense of time, labor, and money, involving\nthe employment of many agents, long journeys, tedious examinations, and\nvoluminous correspondence. Upon the value of these materials it would be\nimpossible to place an estimate. That I have used them conscientiously\nand justly is the only merit to which I lay claim.\"\n\nLamon's evidence concerning Lincoln's unbelief is complete and\nunanswerable. He did not present it because he was himself an unbeliever\nand wished to support his views with the prestige of Lincoln's great\nname. While the Freethinker regards Lincoln's rejection of Christianity\nas in the highest degree meritorious--a proof of his strong logical\nacumen, his sterling common sense, and his broad humanity--Lamon\nconsidered it a grave defect in his character. He states the fact\nbecause it is a fact, and because the purpose of his work is to disclose\nand not conceal the facts of Lincoln's life. If he devotes considerable\nspace to the subject, and exhibits a special earnestness in its\npresentation, the misrepresentations of Lincoln's Christian biographers\nhave furnished a reasonable pretext for it.\n\nIn the pages immediately following will be given the individual\ntestimony of Colonel Lamon:\n\n\"Any analysis of Mr. Lincoln's character would be defective that did not\ninclude his religious opinions. On such matters he thought deeply, and\nhis opinions were positive. But perhaps no phase of his character has\nbeen more persistently misrepresented and variously misunderstood, than\nthis of his religious belief. Not that the conclusive testimony of many\nof his intimate associates relative to his frequent expressions on such\nsubjects has ever been wanting; but his great prominence in the world's\nhistory, and his identification with some of the great questions of our\ntime, which, by their moral import, were held to be eminently religious\nin their character, have led many good people to trace in his motives\nand actions similar convictions to those held by themselves. His\nextremely general expressions of religious faith called forth by the\ngrave exigencies of his public life, or indulged in on occasions of\nprivate condolence, have too often been distorted out of relation to\ntheir real significance or meaning to suit the opinions or tickle the\nfancies of individuals or parties.\n\n\"Mr. Lincoln was never a member of any church, nor did he believe in the\ndivinity of Christ, or the inspiration of the Scriptures in the sense\nunderstood by evangelical Christians\" (Life of Lincoln, p. 486).\n\nHolland and other Christian biographers have represented Lincoln as\na youth of extreme piety, whose constant companion was the Bible. The\nconcurrent testimony of the friends of his boyhood compels Colonel Lamon\nto affirm that the reverse of this is true--that Lincoln, at an early\nage, was noted for his skepticism. He says:\n\n\"When a boy, he showed no sign of that piety which his many biographers\nascribe to his manhood.... When he went to church at all, he went to\nmock, and came away to mimic\" (Ibid, pp. 486, 487).\n\n\"At an early age he began to attend the 'preachings' roundabout, but\nprincipally at the Pigeon Creek church, with a view to catching whatever\nmight be ludicrous in the preacher's air or matter, and making it the\nsubject of mimicry as soon as he could collect an audience of idle boys\nand men to hear him. A pious stranger, passing that way on a Sunday\nmorning, was invited to preach for the Pigeon Creek congregation; but\nhe banged the boards of the old pulpit, and bellowed and groaned so\nwonderfully, that Abe could hardly contain his mirth. This memorable\nsermon was a great favorite with him; and he frequently reproduced it\nwith nasal tones, rolling eyes, and all manner of droll aggravations, to\nthe great delight of Nat Grigsby and the wild fellows whom Nat was able\nto assemble\" (lb., p. 55).\n\n\"His chronicles were many, and on a great variety of subjects. They\nwere written, as his early admirers love to tell us, 'in the Scriptural\nstyle;' but those we have betray a very limited acquaintance with the\nmodel\" (Ib., p. 63).\n\nOf his Freethought reading and theological investigations at New Salem,\nand his book on Infidelity, Lamon says:\n\n\"When he came to New Salem, he consorted with Freethinkers, joined with\nthem in deriding the gospel history of Jesus, read Volney and Paine,\nand then wrote a deliberate and labored essay, wherein he reached\nconclusions similar to theirs. The essay was burnt, but he never denied\nor regretted its composition. On the contrary, he made it the subject\nof free and frequent conversations with his friends at Springfield, and\nstated, with much particularity and precision, the origin, arguments,\nand objects of the work\" (lb., p. 487).\n\n\"The community in which he lived was preeminently a community of\nFreethinkers in matters of religion; and it was then no secret, nor has\nit been a secret since, that Mr. Lincoln agreed with the majority of his\nassociates in denying to the Bible the authority of divine revelation.\nIt was his honest belief, a belief which it was no reproach to hold\nat New Salem, Anno Domini 1834, and one which he never thought of\nconcealing. It was no distinction, either good or bad, no honor, and no\nshame. But he had made himself thoroughly familiar with the writings of\nPaine and Volney--the 'Ruins' by the one, and 'The Age of Reason' by\nthe other. His mind was full of the subject, and he felt an itching to\nwrite. He did write, and the result was a little book. It was probably\nmerely an extended essay, but it is ambitiously spoken of as 'a book' by\nhimself and by the persons who were made acquainted with its contents.\nIn this work he intended to demonstrate--\n\n\"'First, that the Bible was not God's revelation;\n\n\"'Secondly, that Jesus was not the son of God.'\n\n\"No leaf of this little volume has survived. Mr. Lincoln carried it in\nmanuscript to the store of Mr. Samuel Hill, where it was read and\ndiscussed. Hill was himself an unbeliever, but his son considered his\nbook 'infamous.' It is more than probable that Hill, being a warm\npersonal friend of Lincoln feared that the publication of the essay\nwould some day interfere with the political advancement of his favorite.\nAt all events, he snatched it out of his hand, and thrust it into the\nfire, from which not a shred escaped\" (lb., pp. 157, 158).\n\nColonel Lamon is confident that while Lincoln finally ceased to openly\npromulgate his Freethought opinions, he never abandoned them. He says:\n\n\"As he grew older, he grew more cautious; and as his New Salem\nassociates, and the aggressive Deists with whom he originally united\nat Springfield, gradually dispersed, or fell away from his side,\nhe appreciated more and more keenly the violence and extent of the\nreligious prejudices which freedom in discussion from his standpoint\nwould be sure to arouse against him. He saw the immense and augmenting\npower of the churches, and in times past had practically felt it. The\nimputation of Infidelity had seriously injured him in several of his\nearlier political contests; and, sobered by age and experience, he was\nresolved that that same imputation should injure him no more. Aspiring\nto lead religious communities, he foresaw that he must not appear as an\nenemy within their gates; aspiring to public honors under the auspices\nof a political party which persistently summoned religious people to\nassist in the extirpation of that which is denounced as the 'nation's\nsin,' he foresaw that he could not ask their suffrages whilst aspersing\ntheir faith. He perceived no reason for changing his convictions, but he\ndid perceive many good and cogent reasons for not making them public\"\n(lb., pp. 497, 498).\n\nBut he never told anyone that he accepted Jesus as the Christ, or\nperformed a single one of the acts which necessarily follow upon such a\nconviction.\n\n\"At Springfield and at Washington he was beset on the one hand by\npolitical priests, and on the other by honest and prayerful Christians.\nHe despised the former, respected the latter, and had use for both. He\nsaid with characteristic irreverence that he would not undertake to 'run\nthe churches by military authority;' but he was, nevertheless, alive to\nthe importance of letting the churches 'run' themselves in the interest\nof his party. Indefinite expressions about 'Divine Providence,' the\n'Justice of God,' 'the favor of the Most High,' were easy, and not\ninconsistent with his religious notions. In this, accordingly, he\nindulged freely; but never in all that time did he let fall from his\nlips or his pen an expression which remotely implied the slightest faith\nin Jesus as the son of God and the Savior of men\" (Ib., p. 502).\n\nLamon was Lincoln's intimate and trusted friend at Washington, and had\nhe changed his belief, his biographer, as well as Noah Brooks and the\nIllinois clergyman, would have been in possession of the fact.\n\nIn 1851 Lincoln wrote a letter of consolation to his dying father, in\nwhich he counseled him to \"confide in our great and good and merciful\nMaker.\" This letter was given to the public by Mr. Herndon, and has been\ncited by the orthodox to prove that Lincoln was a believer. Adverting to\nthis letter Lamon says:\n\n\"If ever there was a moment when Mr. Lincoln might have been expected to\nexpress his faith in the atonement, his trust in the merits of a living\nRedeemer, it was when he undertook to send a composing and comforting\nmessage to a dying man.... But he omitted it wholly. He did not even\nmention the name of Jesus, or intimate the most distant suspicion of the\nexistence of a Christ\" (Ibid., p. 497).\n\nLincoln's mind was not entirely free from superstition, but though born\nand reared in Christendom, the superstitious element in his nature was\nnot essentially Christian. His fatalistic ideas, so characteristic of\nthe faith of Islam, have already been mentioned by Mr. Herndon, and are\nthus referred to by Colonel Lamon:\n\n\"Mr. Lincoln was by no means free from a kind of belief in the\nsupernatural.... He lived constantly in the serious conviction that he\nwas himself the subject of a special decree, made by some unknown and\nmysterious power, for which he had no name\" (Ibid., p. 503).\n\n\"His mind was filled with gloomy forebodings and strong apprehensions\nof impending evil, mingled with extravagant visions of personal grandeur\nand power. His imagination painted a scene just beyond the veil of the\nimmediate future, gilded with glory yet tarnished with blood. It was\nhis 'destiny'--splendid but dreadful, fascinating but terrible. His case\nbore little resemblance to those of religious enthusiasts like Bunyan,\nCowper, and others. His was more like the delusion of the fatalist\nconscious of his star\" (Ibid,, p. 475).\n\nWhen Lamon's work appeared, Holland, backed by the Christian element\ngenerally, fell upon it like a savage and sought, as far as possible,\nto suppress it. Lamon had committed an unpardonable offense. He had\ndeclared to the world that Lincoln had died a disbeliever, and, what was\nworse, he had proved it. Holland's attack was made in an eight-column\nreview of Lamon's \"Life,\" which was published in _Scribner's Monthly_,\nfor August, 1872. In order to give an air of candor and judicial\nfairness to his venomous criticisms, he opens with this flattering\nrecognition of its merits: \"It is not difficult to see how Colonel Lamon,\nwho during Mr. Lincoln's Presidency held an office in the District of\nColumbia, which must have brought him into somewhat frequent intercourse\nwith the President, and who, indeed, had come with him from Springfield\nto the Capital, should feel that there rested on him a certain\nbiographical duty. And certainly he was in possession of a mass of\nmaterial so voluminous, so original, and so fresh that in this respect\nat least his fitness for the work was remarkably complete. Moreover, Mr.\nW. H. Herndon, who was Mr. Lincoln's partner in the practice of the law\nat Springfield, and was, of course, closely intimate with his partner\nin a business way,... added to Colonel Lamon's material the valuable\ndocuments which he had himself collected, and the memoranda which,\nwith painstaking and lawyer-like ability, he had recorded from the oral\ntestimony of living witnesses.\n\n\"As far as the story of Mr. Lincoln's childhood and early life is\nconcerned, down to the time when his political life began, it has never\nbeen told so fully, with such spirit and zest, and with such evident\naccuracy, as by Colonel Lamon.\"\n\nNearly the entire review is devoted to a denunciation of Lamon's\nexposition of Lincoln's religious opinions. He repeatedly pronounces\nthis \"an outrage on decency,\" and characterizes Lincoln's Free-thought\ncompanions as \"heathen,\" \"barbarians,\" and \"savages.\" The review\nconcludes as follows:\n\n\"The violent and reckless prejudice, and the utter want of delicacy and\neven of decency by which the book is characterized, in such instances as\nthis, will more than counterbalance the value of its new material,\nits fresh and vigorous pictures of Western life and manners, and\nits familiar knowledge of the 'inside politics' of Mr. Lincoln's\nadministration, and will even make its publication (by the famous\npublishers whose imprint imparts to it a prestige and authority which\nits authorship would fail to give) something like a national misfortune.\nIn some quarters it will be readily received as the standard life of the\ngood President. It is all the more desirable that the criticism upon it\nshould be prompt and unsparing.\"\n\nChristianity must have the support of Lincoln's great name. To secure it\nHolland is willing to misrepresent the honest convictions of Lincoln's\nlifetime, to traduce the characters of his dearest friends, and to rob a\nbrother author and a publisher of their just reward.\n\nLamon states that during the last years of Lincoln's life he ceased to\nproclaim his Infidel opinions because they were unpopular. Referring\nto this statement, Holland says: \"The eagerness with which this volume\nstrives to cover Mr. Lincoln's memory with an imputation so detestable\nis one of the most pitiable exhibitions which we have lately witnessed.\"\n\nThis outburst of righteous indignation, coming from the source it\ndoes, is peculiarly refreshing. To appreciate it, we have only to open\nHolland's work, and read such passages as the following: \"I am obliged\nto appear different to them.\" \"It was one of the peculiarities of Mr.\nLincoln to hide these religious [Christian] experiences from the eyes of\nthe world.\" \"Who had never in their whole lives heard from his lips one\nword of all these religious convictions and experiences.\" \"They [his\nfriends] did not regard him as a religious man.\" \"All this department of\nhis life he had kept carefully hidden from them.\" \"There was much of his\nconduct that was simply a cover to these thoughts--an effort to conceal\nthem\" (Holland's Life of Lincoln, pp. 239, 240).\n\nConsummate hypocrisy in a Christian is all right with this moralist;\nbut for a Freethinker to withhold his views from an intolerant religious\nworld is a detestable crime.\n\nAs a biographer of Lincoln, Holland possessed many advantages over\nLamon. His work was written and published immediately after the awful\ntragedy, when almost the entire reading public was deeply interested\nin everything that pertained to Lincoln's life. So far as Lincoln's\nreligious views are concerned, he advocated the popular side of the\nquestion; for while those outside of the church cared but little about\nthe matter, the church desired the influence of his great name, and was\nready to reward those who assisted her in obtaining it. Holland, too,\nhad an established reputation as an author--had nearly as large a class\nof readers as any writer in this country. His name alone was sufficient\nto guarantee a large circulation to any book he might produce. Lamon, on\nthe other hand, possessed but a single advantage over his rival, that of\nhaving the truth on his side. And while \"truth is mighty,\" and will in\nthe end prevail, yet how often is it \"crushed to earth\" and for the time\nobscured. In view of all this, it is not strange that the public should\nbe so slow to reject the fictions of Holland and accept the facts of\nLamon.\n\nThat Lamon's \"Life of Lincoln\" is wholly undeserving of adverse\ncriticism, is not claimed. He has, perhaps, given undue prominence to\nsome matters connected with Lincoln's private affairs which might with\npropriety have been consigned to oblivion. A larger manifestation of\ncharity, too, for the imperfections of those with whom Lincoln mingled,\nespecially in the humbler walks of life, would not have detracted from\nits merit. And yet, those who desire to know Lincoln as he really\nwas, should read Lamon rather than Holland. In Lamon's work, Lincoln's\ncharacter is a rugged oak, towering above its fellows and clothed in\nnature's livery; in Holland's work, it is a dead tree with the bark\ntaken off, the knots planed down, and varnished.\n\nIn the New York _World_ appeared the following just estimate of these\ntwo biographies:\n\n\"Mr. Ward H. Lamon is the author of one 'Life of Lincoln,' and Dr. J.\nG. Holland is the author of another. Mr. Lamon was the intimate personal\nand political friend of Mr. Lincoln, trusting and trusted, from the time\nof their joint practice in the Illinois Quarter Sessions to the moment\nof Mr. Lincoln's death at Washington. Dr. Holland was nothing to Mr.\nLincoln--neither known nor knowing. Dr. Holland rushed his 'Life' from\nthe press before the disfigured corpse was fairly out of sight, while\nthe public mind lingered with horror over the details of the\ntragedy, and, excited by morbid curiosity, was willing to pay for its\ngratification. Mr. Lamon waited many years, until all adventitious\ninterest had subsided, and then with incredible labor and pains,\nproduced a volume founded upon materials which for their fulness,\nvariety, and seeming authenticity are unrivaled in the history of\nbiographies.\n\n\"Dr. Holland's single volume professed to cover the whole of Mr.\nLincoln's career. Mr. Lamon's single volume was modestly confined to a\npart of it. Dr. Holland's was an easy, graceful, off-hand performance,\nhaving but the one slight demerit of being in all essential particulars\nuntrue from beginning to end. Mr. Lamon's was a labored, cautious,\nand carefully verified narrative which seems to have been accepted by\ndisinterested critics as entirely authentic.\n\n\"Dr. Holland would probably be very much shocked if anybody should\nask him to bear false witness in favor of his neighbor in a court of\njustice, but he takes up his pen to make a record which he hopes and\nintends shall endure forever, and in that record deliberately bears\nfalse witness in favor of a public man whom he happened to admire, with\nno kind of offense to his serene and 'cultured' conscience. If this were\nall--if Dr. Holland merely asserted his own right to compose and publish\nelaborate fictions on historical subjects--we might comfort ourselves\nwith the reflection that such literature is likely to be as evanescent\nas it is dishonest, and let him pass in silence. But this is not all. He\nmaintains that it is everybody's duty to help him to deceive the public\nand to write down his more conscientious competitor. He turns up the\nnose of 'culture' and curls the lip of 'art' at Mr. Lamon's homely\nnarrative of facts, and gravely insists that all other noses and all\nother lips shall be turned up and curled because his are. He implores\nthe public, which he insulted and gulled with his own book, to damn Mr.\nLamon's, and he puts his request on the very ground that Mr. Lamon has\nstupidly gone and narrated undeniable truths, whereby he has demolished\nan empty shrine that was profitable to many, and broken a painted idol\nthat might have served for a god.\n\n\"The names of Holland and Lamon are not of themselves and by themselves\nillustrious; but starting from the title-pages of the two Lives of\nLincoln, and representing, as they do, the two schools of biography\nwriters, the one stands for a principle and the other for the want of\nit.\"\n\n\n\n\nCHAPTER VIII. TESTIMONY OF HON. JOHN T. STUART AND COL. JAMES H. MATHENY\n\n     Testimony of Hon. John T. Stuart--Testimony of Col. James\n     H. Matheny--Stuart's Disclaimer--Matheny's Disclaimer--\n     Examination and Authorship of Disclaimers, Including the\n     Edwards and Lewis Letters.\n\nBesides his own testimony concerning Lincoln's unbelief, Colonel Lamon\ncites the testimony of ten additional witnesses: Hon. Wm. H. Herndon,\nHon. John T. Stuart, Col. James H. Matheny, Dr. C. H. Ray, Wm. H.\nHannah, Esq, Mr. Jas. W. Keys, Hon. Jesse W. Fell, Col. John G. Nicolay,\nHon. David Davis and Mrs. Mary Lincoln. The testimony of Mr. Herndon\nhaving already been presented, the testimony of Mr. Stuart and Colonel\nMatheny will next be given. This testimony was procured by Mr. Herndon\nfor the purpose of refuting the erroneous statements of Dr. Holland.\n\nHon. John T. Stuart, who was for a time a member of Congress from\nIllinois, was the first law partner of Lincoln. He says:\n\n\"Lincoln went further against Christian beliefs and doctrines and\nprinciples than any man I ever heard: he shocked me. I don't remember\nthe exact line of his argument--suppose it was against the inherent\ndefects, so called, of the Bible, and on grounds of reason. Lincoln\nalways denied that Jesus was the Christ of God--denied that Jesus was\nthe son of God, as understood and maintained by the Christian church.\nThe Rev. Dr. Smith, who wrote a letter, tried to convert Lincoln\nfrom Infidelity so late as 1858, and couldn't do it\" (Lamon's Life of\nLincoln, p. 488).\n\nCol. James H. Matheny was one of Lincoln's most intimate friends, and\nwas for many years his chief political manager. He testifies as follows:\n\n\"I knew Mr. Lincoln as early as 1834-7; know he was an Infidel. He and\nW. D. Herndon used to talk Infidelity in the Clerk's office in this\ncity, about the years 1837-40. Lincoln attacked the Bible and the\nNew Testament on two grounds: first, from the inherent or apparent\ncontradictions under its lids; second, from the grounds of reason.\nSometimes he ridiculed the Bible and the New Testament, sometimes seemed\nto scoff at it, though I shall not use that word in its full and literal\nsense. I never heard that Lincoln changed his views, though his personal\nand political friend from 1834 to 1860. Sometimes Lincoln bordered on\nAtheism. He went far that way and shocked me. I was then a young man,\nand believed what my good mother told me. Stuart and Lincoln's office\nwas in what is called Hoffman's Row, on North Fifth street, near the\npublic square. It was in the same building as the Clerk's office, and on\nthe same floor. Lincoln would come into the Clerk's office, where I and\nsome young men--Evan Butler, Newton Francis and others--were writing or\nstaying, and would bring the Bible with him; would read a chapter, argue\nagainst it. Lincoln then had a smattering of geology, if I recollect it.\nLincoln often, if not wholly, was an Atheist; at least, bordered on it.\nLincoln was enthusiastic in his Infidelity. As he grew older, he grew\nmore discreet, didn't talk much before strangers about his religion; but\nto friends, close and bosom ones, he was always open and avowed, fair\nand honest; but to strangers, he held them off from policy. Lincoln used\nto quote Burns. Burns helped Lincoln to be an Infidel, as I think; at\nleast he found in Burns a like thinker and feeler.\n\n\"From what I know of Mr. Lincoln and his views of Christianity, and from\nwhat I know as honest, well-founded rumor; from what I have heard his\nbest friends say and regret for years; from what he never denied when\naccused, and from what Lincoln has hinted and intimated, to say no\nmore, he did write a little book on Infidelity, at or near New Salem, in\nMenard county, about the year 1834 or 1835. I have stated these things\nto you often.\n\n\"Judge Logan, John T. Stuart, yourself, know what I know, and some of you\nmore.\n\n\"Mr. Herndon, you insist on knowing something which you know I possess,\nand got as a secret, and that is, about Lincoln's little book on\nInfidelity. Mr. Lincoln _did_ tell me that he _did write a little book\noil Infidelity_. This statement I have avoided heretofore; but, as you\nstrongly insist upon it--probably to defend yourself against charges of\nmisrepresentations--I give it to you as I got it from Lincoln's mouth\"\n(Life of Lincoln, pp. 487, 488).\n\nThe evidence of Stuart and Matheny, as recorded in Lamon's work, having\nbeen presented, it is now proper to state that this evidence has, in\na measure, been repudiated by them. Dr. Reed, in his lecture, produced\nletters from them disclaiming in part or modifying the statements\nimputed to them. Dr. Reed says: \"I have been amazed to find that the\nprincipal persons whose testimony is given in this book to prove that\ntheir old friend lived and died an Infidel, never wrote a word of it,\nand never gave it as their opinion or allowed it to be published as\ncovering their estimate of Mr. Lincoln's life and religious views.\"\nAlluding to Stuart's evidence, he says: \"Mr. Lamon has attributed to\nMr. Stuart testimony the most disparaging and damaging to Mr. Lincoln's\ncharacter and opinions--testimony which Mr. Stuart utterly repudiates,\nboth as to language and sentiment.\" Regarding Matheny's testimony,\nhe says: \"Mr. Matheny testifies that he never wrote a word of what is\nattributed to him; that it is not a fair representation of either his\nlanguage or his opinions, and that he never would have allowed such an\narticle to be published as covering his estimate of Mr. Lincoln's life\nand character.\"\n\nThe following is the disclaimer of Mr. Stuart:\n\n\"Springfield, Dec. 17th, 1872.\n\n\"Rev. J. A. Reed:\n\n\"Dear Sir--\n\n\"My attention has been called to a statement in relation to the\nreligious opinions of Mr. Lincoln, purporting to have been made by\nme, and published in Lamon's 'Life of Lincoln.' The language of that\nstatement is not mine; it was not written by me, and I did not see it\nuntil it was in print. I was once interviewed on the subject of Mr.\nLincoln's religious opinions, and doubtless said that Mr. Lincoln was in\nthe earlier part of his life an Infidel. I could not have said that\n'Dr. Smith tried to convert Lincoln from Infidelity so late as 1858,\nand couldn't do it.' In relation to that point I stated, in the same\nconversation, some facts which are 'omitted in that statement, and which\nI will briefly repeat. That Eddie, a child of Mr. Lincoln, died in 1848\nor 1849, and that he and his wife were in deep grief on the account That\nDr. Smith, then pastor of the First Presbyterian church of Springfield,\nat the suggestion of a lady friend of theirs, called upon Mr. and Mrs.\nLincoln, and that first visit resulted in great intimacy and friendship\nbetween them, lasting till the death of Mr. Lincoln, and continuing with\nMrs. Lincoln till the death of Dr. Smith. I stated that I had heard at\nthe time that Dr. Smith and Mr. Lincoln had much discussion in relation\nto the truth of the Christian religion, and that Dr. Smith had furnished\nMr. Lincoln with books to read on that subject, and among others one\nwhich had been written by himself, sometime previous, on Infidelity;\nand that Dr. Smith claimed that after this investigation Mr. Lincoln\nhad changed his opinions, and became a believer in the truth of the\nChristian religion; that Mr. Lincoln and myself never conversed upon\nthat subject, and I had no personal knowledge as to his alleged change\nof opinion. I stated, however, that it was certainly true that up\nto that time Mr. Lincoln had never regularly attended any place of\nreligious worship, but that after that time he rented a pew in the First\nPresbyterian church, and with his family constantly attended the worship\nin that church until he went to Washington as President. This much I\nsaid at the time, and I can now add that the Hon. Ninian W. Edwards, the\nbrother-in-law of Mr. Lincoln, has, within a few days, informed me that\nwhen Mr. Lincoln commenced attending the First Presbyterian church he\nadmitted to him that his views had undergone the change claimed by Dr.\nSmith. I would further say that Dr. Smith was a man of great ability,\nand on theological and metaphysical subjects had few superiors and\nnot many equals. Truthfulness was a prominent trait in Mr. Lincoln's\ncharacter, and it would be impossible for any intimate friend of his\nto believe that he ever aimed to deceive, either by his words or his\nconduct.\n\n\"Yours truly,\n\n\"John T. Stuart.\"\n\nCol. Matheny's disclaimer is as follows:\n\n\"Springfield, Dec. 16th, 1872.\n\n\"Rev. J. A. Reed:\n\n\"Dear Sir--\n\n\"The language attributed to me in Lamon's book is not from my pen. I\ndid not write it, and it does not express my sentiments of Mr. Lincoln's\nentire life and character. It is a mere collection of sayings gathered\nfrom private conversations that were only true of Mr. Lincoln's earlier\nlife. I would not have allowed such an article to be printed over my\nsignature as covering my opinion of Mr. Lincoln's life and religious\nsentiments. While I do believe Mr. Lincoln to have been an Infidel in\nhis former life, when his mind was as yet unformed, and his associations\nprincipally with rough and skeptical men, yet I believe he was a very\ndifferent man in later life, and that after associating with a different\nclass of men and investigating the subject, he was a firm believer in\nthe Christian religion.\n\n\"Yours truly,\n\n\"Jas. H. Matheny.\"\n\nThis disclosure startles you, my dear reader. But be patient. I will\nshow you that this apparently mortal thrust of Dr. Reed's was made, not\nwith a lance, but with a boomerang.\n\nWhen Reed made his assault upon Lamon's witnesses, all stood firm but\ntwo--two old Springfield politicians whose political aspirations had not\nyet become extinct--John T. Stuart and James H. Matheny.\n\nThese men had been among the first to testify in regard to Lincoln's\nunbelief. His Christian biographers had misrepresented his religious\nviews; they believed that the fraud ought to be exposed, and they\nwere ready and willing to aid in the work. Their testimony exhibits a\nfrankness that is truly commendable. They knew that lying was a vice,\nbut they did not know that truth-telling was a crime. They had yet\nto learn that the church tolerates murder more readily than the\npromulgation of a truth that is antagonistic to her creed. But this fact\nthey were destined to learn. Lamon's work had scarcely been issued\nfrom the press before he was anathematized and his book proscribed. The\nmerciless attack that had already been commenced upon Herndon portended\ndanger to them. Nor had they long to wait. In December, 1872, they were\napproached by Reed and his coadjutors. They were informed that the idol\nwhich their ruthless iconoclasm had helped to break must be repaired.\nThey were given to understand that if they repented of the part they had\nperformed and recanted, peace would be their portion here and endless\nbliss hereafter; but that if they did not, endless misery would begin on\nJan. 1, a.d. 1873.\n\nThe situation was critical. They did not like to tell the world that\nthey had borne false witness against the dead, nor did they, any more\nthan Galileo, wish to wear a martyr's crown. A compromise was finally\neffected. It was incidentally ascertained by Reed that their evidence as\npresented by Lamon was not originally given in the shape of a letter or\na written statement, but orally. A happy thought suggested itself--one\nworthy of the unscrupulous theological pettifogger that he is. The\nthought was this: \"Say to the public, or rather let me say it for you,\nthat you did not _write_ a word of the testimony attributed to you.\"\nJust as a witness in court might point to the stenographer's report of\nhis testimony and say, \"I did not write a word of that.\"\n\nIn addition to this, Mr. Stuart, in endeavoring to explain away, as far\nas possible, the obnoxious character of his testimony, declared that\nsome things which he did say at the time his testimony was given had\nbeen omitted; while something he did not say was inserted. They were\nboth trivial matters, hardly worthy of notice, even if true, and having\nno especial bearing upon the case. But they served an admirable\npurpose in enabling Reed to say that the testimony adduced by Lamon was\n\"abridged and distorted.\"\n\nStuart's disclaimer, then, divested of its misleading verbiage, contains\nbut two points. In the first place, he says: \"I could not have said that\n'Dr. Smith tried to convert Lincoln from Infidelity so late as 1858,\nand couldn't do it.'\" This sentence, like everything else in these\ndisclaimers, is cunningly worded and intended to deceive. One would\nnaturally suppose the idea he intends to convey is that he never\ndeclared that Dr. Smith tried to convert Lincoln and couldn't do it.\nThis, it has been ascertained, is not his meaning. What he means is\nthis: \"I could not have said that 'Dr. Smith tried to convert Lincoln\nfrom Infidelity, _so late as_ 1858, and couldn't do it.'\" His denial\nis a mere quibble about a date. He did undoubtedly say just what he is\nreported to have said. But admitting a doubt, and giving him the benefit\nof this doubt, by throwing out the disputed date, the passage is not\nless damaging than it was before: \"Dr. Smith tried to convert Lincoln\nfrom Infidelity, and couldn't do it.\" But let us omit the entire\nsentence, and the testimony of Mr. Stuart that remains, about which\nthere is no dispute, that portion of his testimony which he admits to be\ncorrect--is as follows:\n\n\"Lincoln went further against Christian beliefs and doctrines and\nprinciples than any man I ever heard; he shocked me. I don't remember\nthe exact line of his argument; suppose it was against the inherent\ndefects, so called, of the Bible, and on grounds of reason. Lincoln\nalways denied that Jesus was the Christ of God--denied that Jesus was\nthe Son of God, as understood and maintained by the Christian church.\"\n\nIn the second place, Mr. Stuart complains that the rumors concerning Dr.\nSmith's attempted conversion of Lincoln which he had mentioned to Mr.\nHerndon at the time of giving his testimony, were omitted. They were,\nand very properly, too. Mr. Stuart, or any other good lawyer, would have\nomitted them. Mr. Herndon desired him to testify about what he _knew_,\nand not about what he had _heard_, especially as he was going to\nheadquarters in regard to these rumors. He wrote to Dr. Smith himself\nabout them, received his testimony, and gave it to the public.\n\nStuart affects to believe that this story, which Ninian Edwards is\ndragged around by Reed to verify, may possibly have been true. But in\nthe same sentence, he refutes this idea, and refutes the claim itself,\nby saying: \"I had no personal knowledge as to his alleged change of\nopinion.\" Stuart was a family connection of Lincoln, and if Lincoln had\nbeen converted, he, as well as every other person in Springfield, would\nhave known it.\n\nHe states that Dr. Smith's first visit to Lincoln was \"at the suggestion\nof a lady friend.\" To have avoided another glaring contradiction in the\nevidence of his witnesses, Reed should have had Major Stuart state that\nthis \"lady friend\" was Thomas Lewis. As it is, the account given by\nStuart of Dr. Smith's first visit and acquaintance with Lincoln is\nentirely at variance with the account given by Mr. Lewis in his letter,\nquoted in chapter I.\n\nMr. Stuart evidently entertained no very kind opinion of Colonel Lamon's\nwork, and this made him all the more disposed to accede to Reed's\ndemands. His position on the slavery question, for a time, was one\nwhich, in the light of subsequent events, he had no reason to be proud\nof, and Lamon in narrating the acts of Lincoln's life found it necessary\nfrequently to refer to this. Such passages as the following were\ncalculated not only to make him offended at Lamon, but jealous of\nHerndon: \"John T. Stuart was keeping his eye on Lincoln, with the view\nof keeping him on his side--the totally dead conservative side.\" \"Mr.\nLincoln was beset by warm friends and by old coadjutors, and besought to\npause in his anti-slavery course while there was yet time. Among these\nthere was none more earnest or persuasive than John T. Stuart, who was\nbut the type of a class.... But Mr. Herndon was more than a match for\nthe full array against him. An earnest man, instant in season and out\nof season, he spoke with the eloquence of apparent truth and of real\npersonal love\" (Life of Lincoln, pp. 374, 352).\n\nColonel Matheny was not prepared to deny the correctness of a single\nstatement in his testimony, but was forced to modify its bearing as a\nwhole. He was made to say: \"It does not express my sentiments of Mr.\nLincoln's entire life and character.\" Now, anyone who reads his evidence\ncannot fail to observe that he did intend to cover Lincoln's entire\nlife and character. There is not in it the slightest intimation that he\nreferred merely to a part of his life. Indeed, there is one statement\nin his evidence which utterly precludes such an assumption. He expressly\nsays: \"I never heard that Lincoln changed his views, though his personal\nand political friend from 1834 to 1860.\" But Reed must have a sufficient\nportion of his life reserved in which to inject the story of his alleged\nconversion; and so Matheny's offense was condoned on the condition that\nhe retain the earlier part of Lincoln's life for his testimony to\nrest upon, and concede the remainder to Reed for \"The Later Life and\nReligious Sentiments of Lincoln.\" This division of Lincoln's life is\nquite indefinite, but Reed would have us believe that Colonel Matheny's\nevidence relates wholly to that portion of his life anterior to\n1848, when Dr. Smith began the task of Christianizing him. Matheny's\ndisclaimer is dated Dec. 16, 1872. On Dec. 9, 1873, he made the\nfollowing explanation, which was published in a Springfield paper:\n\n\"What I mean, in my Reed letter, by Mr. Lincoln's earlier life, is his\nwhole life and history in Illinois. In Illinois, and up to the time he\nleft for Washington, he was, as I understand it, a confirmed Infidel.\nWhat I mean by Mr. Lincoln's later life, is his Washington life, where\nhe associated with religious people, when and where I believe he thought\nhe became a Christian. I told Mr. Reed all this just before signing the\nletter spoken of. I knew nothing of Mr. Lincoln's investigation into the\nsubject of Christianity.\"\n\nHe says that his evidence \"is a mere collection of sayings gathered from\nprivate conversations.\" It is doubtless true that he had many private\nconversations with Mr. Herndon on this subject; but his published\ntestimony was all given at one sitting, and more, _he signed that\ntestimony_. Every word attributed to him in Lamon's work, and repeated\nin this chapter, originally appeared above his signature.\n\nThe concluding words of his disclaimer are as follows:\n\n\"While I do believe Mr. Lincoln to have been an Infidel in his\nformer life, when his mind was as yet unformed, and his associations\nprincipally with rough and skeptical men, yet I believe he was a very\ndifferent man in later life; and that after associating with a different\nclass of men, and investigating the subject, he was a firm believer in\nthe Christian religion.\"\n\nThese words, as modified by the following, constitute a most remarkable\nstatement:\n\n\"In Illinois, and up to the time he left for Washington, he was, as I\nunderstand it, a confirmed Infidel. What I mean by Mr. Lincoln's\nlater life, is his Washington life, where he associated with religious\npeople.\"\n\nColonel Matheny confines Lincoln's Infidelity to that portion of his\nlife \"when his mind was as yet unformed,\" and affirms that this portion\ncomprised all the years preceding his removal to Washington in 1861.\nThus during the first fifty-two years of Lincoln's life, \"his mind was\nas yet unformed.\" His enviable reputation as one of the foremost lawyers\nof Illinois was achieved while \"his mind was as yet unformed;\" when his\nfriends sent him to Congress \"his mind was as yet unformed;\" when he\nmade his Bloomington speech, \"his mind was as yet unformed;\" when he\ndelivered his famous Springfield speech, \"his mind was as yet unformed;\"\nwhen he conducted his masterly debates with Stephen A. Douglas, \"his\nmind was as yet unformed;\" when he prepared and delivered that model of\npolitical addresses, the Cooper Institute address, \"his mind was as yet\nunformed;\" when at the Chicago Convention he outstripped in the race for\nPresidential nominee such eminent leaders as Seward and Chase, \"his mind\nwas as yet unformed;\" when he was elected Chief Magistrate of this great\nnation, \"his mind was as yet unformed.\"\n\nIt was only by leaving Illinois and going to Washington that he was\nthrown into religious society. Washington politicians are noted for\ntheir piety, you know. According to Matheny et al., New Salem was a\nsecond Sodom, Springfield a second Gomorrah and Washington a sort of New\nJerusalem, inhabited chiefly by saints.\n\nNeither in Matheny's letter, nor in his interpretation of this letter,\nis there a word to indicate that he recognized the fact that Lincoln\nwent to Washington to assume the office and perform the duties of\nPresident. On the contrary, the whole tenor of his remarks is to the\neffect that he believed the people sent him there on account of his\nwickedness, and while \"his mind was as yet unformed,\" to attend a reform\nschool, and that subsequently he entered a theological seminary, and\nthere died.\n\nThe most amusing feature of Matheny's letter is that he unwittingly\ncertifies that his own character was not good. He declares that Lincoln\nwas an Infidel because his associations were \"with rough and skeptical\nmen;\" but that after removing to Washington and \"associating with a\ndifferent class of men\" he became a Christian. Now, it is well known\nthat one of the most conspicuous of his \"rough and skeptical\" associates\nin Illinois was James H. Matheny.\n\nColonel Matheny, in his explanatory remarks, says: \"I _believe_ he\n_thought_ he became a Christian;\" and in almost the next breath says,\n\"I knew nothing of Mr. Lincoln's investigation into the subject of\nChristianity.\" Can anything be more unreasonable than this? Colonel\nMatheny knowing that Lincoln was a confirmed Infidel--an Infidel when\nhe went to Washington--knowing nothing about his having afterward\ninvestigated Christianity--knowing that he had no time for such an\ninvestigation, and yet believing that Lincoln thought he became a\nChristian! Why did he not mention this when he gave his testimony? The\nfact is, he did not believe that Lincoln became a Christian; but with\nan orthodox club raised above his head, he found it very convenient to\n_profess_ to believe it.\n\nAs Mr. Reed has endeavored to prove that Lamon and Herndon did not\nfaithfully report the evidence of Stuart and Matheny, it is but just\nthat Mr. Herndon, who took down their testimony, be permitted to speak\nin his own defense. In his Springfield lecture, delivered in Major\nStuart's town, if not in his presence, referring to Stuart's testimony,\nhe says:\n\n\"Mr. Stuart did not write the note and no one ever said he did. What is\nthere stated was the substance of a conversation between Mr. Stuart and\nmyself about Mr. Lincoln's religion. I took down in a note in his office\nand in his presence his words and ideas as I did in other cases. The\nconversation spoken of took place in Mr. Stuart's office, and in the\neast room. Mr. Stuart does not deny that the note is substantially\ncorrect. He simply says he could not have said that Dr. Smith tried to\nconvert Mr. Lincoln, and couldn't do it. I well remember that he did use\nthis language. It seemed to do him good to say it.... It seems that\nMr. Stuart had heard that Mr. Lincoln and Dr. Smith had much discussion\nabout Christianity, but he failed to hear of Mr. Lincoln's conversion,\nor anything like it, and well might he say, _as he did_, that 'Dr. Smith\ntried to convert Mr. Lincoln, _but couldn't do it_.'\"\n\nAny charitably disposed person, knowing the general good character of\nboth men, instead of crying \"Fraud!\" as Reed has done, will readily\nconclude that Mr. Herndon was mistaken, or that Mr. Stuart had forgotten\njust what he did say, and is it not more reasonable to suppose that the\nlatter gentleman, in the lapse of six years, should have forgotten some\nthings he said, than that Mr. Herndon, who recorded them the moment they\nwere uttered, should be mistaken?\n\nAlluding to Colonel Matheny's evidence, in the same lecture, Mr. Herndon\nsays:\n\n\"The next gentleman introduced by Mr. Reed is Col. James H. Matheny. He\nis made to say, in a letter addressed to Mr. Reed, that he did not write\nthe statement in Lamon's 'Life of Lincoln.' I do not claim that he did.\nI wrote it in the court house--this hall--in Mr. Matheny's presence, and\nat his dictation. I read it over to him and he approved it. I wrote it\nall at once as he spoke it to me; it is not made up of scraps--'a mere\ncollection of sayings gathered from private conversations, that were\nonly true of Mr. Lincoln's earlier life.' I say that this statement\nwas written all at one time and place, and not at different times and\nplaces. Let any critic, any man of common sense, read it and he will\nsay: 'This was all written at once.' I appeal to the manner--the close\nconnection of words and ideas in which it runs--word with word, sentence\nwith sentence, and idea with idea, for the proof that it was made at one\nsitting. Mr. Matheny has often told me that Mr. Lincoln was an Infidel.\nHe admits this in his letter to Mr. Reed. He never intimated in that or\nany other conversation with me that he believed that Mr. Lincoln in his\nlater life became a Christian.\"\n\nIn a letter dated Sept. 14, 1887, Mr. Herndon writes:\n\n\"I acted in this matter honestly, and I will always abide by my notes\ntaken down at the time. I was cautious--very careful of what I did,\nbecause I knew that the church would damn me and prove me false if it\ncould. I stood on the exactness of truth squarely.\"\n\nI have thus far assumed that Stuart and Matheny really wrote the letters\nof disclaimer addressed to Reed. Mr. Reed states that he is \"amazed\nto find\" that they did not write the statements attributed to them\nby Lamon. The reader is by this time sufficiently familiar with this\nreverend gentleman's methods that he will _not_ be \"amazed to find\" that\nStuart and Matheny did not write these disclaimers. I now affirm that\nJames H. Matheny did not write a word of the letter purporting to have\nbeen written by him. _It was written by the Rev. J. A. Reed!_ We have\nnot the expressed declaration of Mr. Stuart that this is true of the\nletter imputed to him, but there is other evidence which makes it\nclearly apparent that this letter was also written by Mr. Reed.\n\nNor is this all. I shall now endeavor to show that the greater part of\nthe evidence presented by Reed, in his lecture, was composed and written\nby himself. Let us take the four letters credited respectively to\nEdwards, Lewis, Stuart, and Matheny. I shall attempt to demonstrate the\ncommon origin of these letters, first, by their form; secondly, by the\nlanguage of their contents.\n\nThe different forms employed in epistolary correspondence are numerous,\nfar more numerous than generally supposed. To illustrate: four hundred\nletters, written by as many different persons, and all addressed to the\nsame person, were, without examination, divided into one hundred parcels\nof four letters each. They were then examined in regard to the form\nemployed by the writer. The heading, the address, the introduction, and\nthe subscription were noted--no attention being paid to the body of the\nletter, or the signature. In not one of these one hundred parcels were\nfound four letters having the same form. The heading of these letters\nexhibited nine different forms; the address, fourteen; the introduction,\neight; and the subscription, eleven.\n\nAgain, nearly every writer employs certain idioms of language that are\npeculiar to him, and which reveal his identity, even though he tries to\nconceal it.\n\nLet us now institute a brief analysis of the four letters under\nconsideration. Errors will be noticed, not for the purpose of reflecting\nupon the literary attainments of the writer, but solely with a view\nof discovering his identity. These are mostly of a trivial character,\nconfined to marks of punctuation, etc.; and it is a recognized fact that\na majority of educated persons, including many professional writers, are\nmore or less deficient in the art of punctuation. In proof of the common\nauthorship of these four letters, the following reasons are submitted:\n\n1. In all of them we recognize a stiff formality--a studied effort to\nconform to one ideal standard.\n\n2. All of them were written at Springfield, Ill., and all omit the name\nof the state.\n\n3. In each of them, the day of the month is followed by the suffix,\n\"th.\" This, if not wholly improper, is not common usage. Had these\nletters been written by the four persons to whom they are ascribed, at\nleast three of them would have omitted it.\n\n4 In all, but one, the address is \"Rev. J. A. Reed,\" and in the\nexception the writer merely substitutes \"Jas.\" for \"J.\"\n\n5. In each of them the address is followed by a colon instead of a\ncomma, the proper mark to use. Had they been written by four persons, it\nis possible that a part, or even all, would have made an error, but it\nis highly improbable that all would have made the _same_ error.\n\n6. In these letters, the introductory words are uniformly \"Dear\nSir\"--the most common form of introduction, and the one that a writer,\nin drafting a letter addressed to himself, would most naturally employ.\n\n7. In every instance, the introduction is followed by a dash instead of\na colon--a uniformity of error, again.\n\n8. In the subscription, the term, \"Yours truly,\" is invariably used,\nexcept in the Lewis letter, which concludes with \"Yours, etc.\"\n\n9. The Edwards letter and the Lewis letter begin with the same idea,\nexpressed in nearly the same words. Edwards is made to say, \"A short\ntime after the Rev. Dr. Smith,\" etc.; and Lewis--\"Not long after Dr.\nSmith.\"\n\n10. Omitting the introductory sentence in the Stuart letter, which is\nmerely the expansion of an idea used in writing the Matheny letter on\nthe preceding day, the Stuart and Matheny letters begin with the same\nidea. Stuart says: \"The language of that statement is not mine; it was\nnot written by me.\" Matheny says: \"The language attributed to me... is\nnot from my pen. I did not write it.\" Reed himself uses substantially\nthe same language that is ascribed to them. Had their statements, as\npublished in Lamon's work, been forgeries, or grossly inaccurate, they\nmight have used the language quoted above. Under the circumstances they\nwould not have used it. Major Stuart and Colonel Matheny were lawyers,\nnot pettifoggers.\n\n11. These prefatory sentences of Stuart and Matheny both begin with the\nsame words--\"the language.\"\n\n12. In both the Edwards and Lewis letters, reference is made to a\ntheological work which Dr. Smith is said to have written. The writer of\nneither letter is able to state the name of the book; Dr. Reed is unable\nto state the name of it; Dr. Smith himself does not mention the name of\nit; but he does plainly state that it was a work on the Bible. For \"the\nbusiness he had on hand,\" however, it suited Reed's purpose better to\ngive a semi-erroneous impression of its character, and so he affirms\nthat it was a work on \"the evidences of Christianity.\" Curiously\nenough, in the Edwards letter and again in the Lewis letter, the book is\ndescribed as a work on \"the evidences of Christianity.\"\n\n13. The Edwards letter reports Lincoln as saying: \"I have been reading\n_a work of Dr. Smith on the evidences of Christianity_.\" The Lewis\nletter represents him as saying that \"He had seen and partially read\n_a work of Dr. Smith on the evidences of Christianity_\" Here are ten\nconsecutive words in the two letters identical.\n\n14. Mr. Reed, in his lecture, never once uses the word \"Christianity,\"\nexcept as above noticed to describe Dr. Smith's book; he always uses the\nwords \"the Christian religion\"--employing this term no less than seven\ntimes. This usage is not common. An examination of various theological\nwritings shows that \"Christianity\" is used twenty times where \"the\nChristian religion\" is used once. Yet in these letters the word\n\"Christianity\" is not to be found, except in the same sense as used\nby Dr. Reed, while \"the Christian religion\" occurs in each of the four\nletters.\n\n15. \"The truth of the Christian religion\" is a favorite phrase with\nReed, occurring three times in his lecture. This phrase also occurs\nthree times in these letters--once in the Edwards letter, and twice in\nthe Stuart letter.\n\n16. Reed has much to say about Lincoln's \"life and religious\nsentiments;\" in fact, his lecture is entitled, \"The Later Life and\nReligious Sentiments of Abraham Lincoln.\" In the Matheny letter, too, we\nfind \"Mr. Lincoln's life and religious sentiments.\"\n\n17. The words \"earlier\" and \"later\" are frequently used by Reed in\nconnection with Lincoln's life. The same words are used in the Stuart\nand Matheny letters, and in the same connection.\n\n18. The Stuart letter is, for the most part, devoted to the narration of\n\"some facts\" which Mr. Stuart is said to have presented to Mr. Herndon,\nbeginning with this: \"That Eddie, a child of Mr. Lincoln, died in 1848\nor 1849,\" etc. Now, Mr. Stuart well knew that, during all this time, Mr.\nHerndon was the intimate associate of Lincoln and thoroughly familiar\nwith every event in his history. The \"facts\" given in this letter are\nnot such as Mr. Stuart would have communicated to Mr. Herndon, but they\nare such as Mr. Reed would naturally desire to place before the public.\n\n19. Nothing in Dr. Reed's career has excited his vanity more than\nthe fact that he was pastor of the First Presbyterian Church of\nSpringfield--the church which Lincoln once attended. Consequently, the\n\"First Presbyterian Church\" is a conspicuous object in his lecture,\nand nowhere is it more conspicuous than in these letters. In the Stuart\nletter it appears three times, and the writer never fails to state that\nit was the \"First Presbyterian Church\"--the church of which Dr. Reed was\npastor.\n\n20. According to the principle of accretion, if two articles or letters\nare written on the same subject, the second will usually be longer than\nthe first. This is true of these letters. The Lewis letter, relating\nto Smith's reputed conversion of Lincoln, was written after the\nEdwards letter relative to the same subject, and is longer. The Stuart\ndisclaimer, which is the longer of the two, was written after the\nMatheny disclaimer.\n\nFrom the foregoing, is it not clearly evident that these four letters\nwere all written by the same person? If so, then knowing that Dr. Reed\nwrote one of them, the Matheny letter, does it not necessarily follow\nthat he wrote them all?\n\nIn the Gurley testimony, such expressions as \"the Christian religion\"\nand \"the truth of the Christian religion,\" together with the Reed story\nconcerning Lincoln's intention of making a profession of religion,\nreveal the authorship of this testimony also.\n\n\n\n\nCHAPTER IX. TESTIMONY OF THE REMAINING WITNESSES PRESENTED BY LAMON\n\n     Dr. C. H. Ray--Wm. H. Hannah, Esq.--James W. Keys--Hon.\n     Jesse W. Fell--Col. John G. Nicolay--Hon. David Davis--Mrs.\n     Mary Lincoln--Injustice to Mrs. Lincoln--Answer to Reed's\n     Pretended Refutation of the Testimony of Lamon's Witnesses.\n\nSeven of Lamon's witnesses--Ray, Hannah, Keys, Fell, Nicolay, Davis, and\nMrs. Lincoln--remain to testify. The testimony of these witnesses will\nnow be presented.\n\nDR. C. H. RAY.\n\nDr. Kay, editor of the Chicago Tribune, a prominent figure in Illinois\npolitics thirty years ago, and a personal friend and admirer of Lincoln,\ntestifies as follows:\n\n\"You knew Mr. Lincoln far better than I did, though I knew him well; and\nyou have served up his leading characteristics in a way that I should\ndespair of doing, if I should try. I have only one thing to ask: that\nyou do not give Calvinistic theology a chance to claim him as one of its\nsaints and martyrs. He went to the Old School Church; but, in spite of\nthat outward assent to the horrible dogmas of the sect, I have reason\nfrom himself to know that his 'vital purity.' if that means belief in\nthe impossible, was of a negative sort\" (Lamon's Life of Lincoln, pp.\n489, 490).\n\nDr. Kay states that Lincoln held substantially the same theological\nopinions as those held by Theodore Parker.\n\nWILLIAM H. HANNAH.\n\nA leading member of the Bloomington bar, when Lincoln practiced there,\nwas Wm. H. Hannah. He was an honest, truthful man, and knew Lincoln\nwell. Concerning Lincoln's views on the doctrine of endless punishment,\nMr. Hannah says:\n\n\"Since 1856 Mr. Lincoln told me that he was a kind of immortalist; but\nthat he never could bring himself to believe in eternal punishment; that\nman lived but a little while here, and that, if eternal punishment were\nman's doom, he should spend that little life in vigilant and ceaseless\npreparation by never-ending prayer\" (Life of Lincoln, p. 489).\n\nJAMES W. KEYS.\n\nMr. Jas. W. Keys, an old and respected citizen of Springfield, who\nbecame acquainted with Lincoln soon after his removal there, and who had\nmany conversations with him on the subject of theology, says:\n\n\"As to the Christian theory, that Christ is God, or equal to the\nCreator, he said that it had better be taken for granted; for, by the\ntest of reason, we might become Infidels on that subject, for evidence\nof Christ's divinity came to us in a somewhat doubtful shape\" (Life of\nLincoln, p. 490).\n\nHON. JESSE W. FELL.\n\nJesse W. Fell, who died at Bloomington in the spring of 1887, was one\nof the best known and most highly respected citizens of Illinois. He was\nSecretary of the Republican State Central Committee during the memorable\nLincoln-Douglas campaign, and was largely instrumental in bringing\nLincoln forward as a candidate for the Presidency in 1860. It was for\nhim that Lincoln wrote an autobiographical sketch of his life, which\nformed the basis of his campaign biographies, the _facsimile_ of which\nappears in Lamon's \"Life of Lincoln,\" and in the \"Lincoln Memorial\nAlbum.\" Mr. Fell was a Christian of the Unitarian denomination, and\nthere were few men for whom Lincoln had a more profound respect. The\nfollowing is his testimony:\n\n\"Though everything relating to the character of this extraordinary\npersonage is of interest, and should be fairly stated to the world, I\nenter upon the performance of this duty--for so I regard it--with some\nreluctance, arising from the fact that, in stating my convictions on the\nsubject, I must necessarily place myself in opposition to quite a\nnumber who have written on this topic before me, and whose views largely\npre-occupy the public mind. This latter fact, whilst contributing to\nmy embarrassment on this subject, is, perhaps, the strongest reason,\nhowever, why the truth in this matter should be fully disclosed; and I\ntherefore yield to your request. If there were any traits of character\nthat stood out in bold relief in the person of Mr. Lincoln, they were\nthose of truth and candor. He was utterly incapable of insincerity,\nor professing views on this or any other subject he did not entertain.\nKnowing such to be his true character, that insincerity, much more\nduplicity, were traits wholly foreign to his nature, many of his\nold friends were not a little surprised at finding, in some of the\nbiographies of this great man, statements concerning his religious\nopinions so utterly at variance with his known sentiments. True, he may\nhave changed or modified those sentiments after his removal from among\nus, though this is hardly reconcilable with the history of the man, and\nhis entire devotion to public matters during his four years' residence\nat the national capital. It is possible, however, that this may be the\nproper solution of this conflict of opinions; or, it may be, that, with\nno intention on the part of anyone to mislead the public mind, those who\nhave represented him as believing in the popular theological views of\nthe times may have misapprehended him, as experience shows to be quite\ncommon where no special effort has been made to attain critical\naccuracy on a subject of this nature. This is the more probable from the\nwell-known fact that Mr. Lincoln seldom communicated to anyone his views\non this subject. But, be this as it may, I have no hesitation whatever\nin saying that, whilst he held many opinions in common with the great\nmass of Christian believers, he did not believe in what are regarded as\nthe orthodox or evangelical views of Christianity.\n\n\"On the innate depravity of man, the character and office of the great\nhead of the church, the atonement, the infallibility of the written\nrevelation, the performance of miracles, the nature and design of\npresent and future rewards and punishments (as they are popularly\ncalled) and many other subjects, he held opinions utterly at variance\nwith what are usually taught in the church. I should say that his\nexpressed views on these and kindred topics were such as, in the\nestimation of most believers, would place him entirely outside the\nChristian pale. Yet, to my mind, such was not the true position, since\nhis principles and practices and the spirit of his whole life were of\nthe very kind we universally agree to call Christian; and I think this\nconclusion is in no wise affected by the circumstance that he never\nattached himself to any religious society whatever.\n\n\"His religious views were eminently practical, and are summed up, as\nI think, in these two propositions: 'the fatherhood of God, and\nthe brotherhood of man.' He fully believed in a superintending and\noverruling Providence that guides and controls the operations of the\nworld, but maintained that law and order, and not their violation\nor suspension, are the appointed means by which this Providence is\nexercised.\n\n\"I will not attempt any specification of either his belief or disbelief\non various religious topics, as derived from conversations with him\nat different times during a considerable period; but, as conveying a\ngeneral view of his religious or theological opinions, will state\nthe following facts: Some eight or ten years prior to his death, in\nconversing with him on this subject, the writer took occasion to refer,\nin terms of approbation, to the sermons and writings generally of Dr.\nW. E. Channing; and, finding he was considerably interested in the\nstatement I made of the opinions held by that author, I proposed to\npresent him a copy of Channing's entire works, which I soon after did.\nSubsequently, the contents of these volumes, together with the writings\nof Theodore Parker, furnished him, as he informed me, by his friend and\nlaw-partner, Mr. Herndon, became naturally the topics of conversation\nwith us; and though far from believing there was an entire harmony of\nviews on his part with either of those authors, yet they were generally\nmuch admired and approved by him.\n\n\"No religious views with him seemed to find any favor, except of the\npractical and rationalistic order; and if, from my recollections on\nthis subject, I was called upon to designate an author whose views\nmost nearly represented Mr. Lincoln's on this subject, I would say that\nauthor was Theodore Parker. As you have asked from me a candid statement\nof my recollections on this topic, I have thus briefly given them, with\nthe hope that they may be of some service in rightly settling a question\nabout which--as I have good reason to believe--the public mind has been\ngreatly misled. Not doubting that they will accord, substantially, with\nyour own recollections, and that of his other intimate and confidential\nfriends, and with the popular verdict after this matter shall have been\nproperly canvassed, I submit them\" (Life of Lincoln, pp. 490-492).\n\nMr. Fell's testimony is full and explicit. He affirms that Lincoln\nrejected nearly all the leading tenets of orthodox Christianity; the\ninspiration of the Scriptures, the divinity of Christ, the innate\ndepravity of man, the atonement, the performance of miracles, and future\nrewards and punishments. \"His expressed views on these and kindred\ntopics,\" Mr. Fell says, \"were such as, in the estimation of most\nbelievers, would place him entirely outside the Christian pale.\" Mr.\nFell, himself, was not disposed to withhold from Lincoln the appellation\nof Christian, but it was only because he stood upon the broad Liberal\nChristian, or rather non-Christian, platform which permitted him to\nwelcome a Theist, like Parker; a Pantheist, like Emerson; or even an\nAgnostic, like Ingersoll.\n\nCOL JOHN G. NICOLAY.\n\nThe next witness introduced by Lamon, is Col. John G. Nicolay, Lincoln's\nprivate secretary at the White House. Nicolay's relations with the\nPresident were more intimate than those of any other man. To quote the\nwords of Lincoln's partner, \"Mr. Lincoln loved him and trusted him.\"\nHis testimony is among the most important that this controversy has\nelicited. It proves beyond the shadow of a doubt that all these stories\nconcerning Lincoln's alleged conversation at Washington are false, that\nhe did not change his belief, that he died as he had always lived--a\nFreethinker. In a letter written May 27, 1865, just six weeks after\nLincoln's death, Colonel Nicolay says: \"Mr. Lincoln did not, to my\nknowledge, in any way, change his religious ideas, opinions or beliefs,\nfrom the time he left Springfield till the day of his death. I do not\nknow just what they were, never having heard him explain them in detail,\nbut I am very sure he gave no outward indications of his mind having\nundergone any change in that regard while here\" (Life of Lincoln, p.\n492).\n\nHON. DAVID DAVIS.\n\nOne of the most important, and in some respects the most eminent witness\nsummoned to testify in regard to this question, is the Hon. David Davis.\nIn moral character he stood above reproach, in intellectual ability,\nalmost without a peer. Every step in his career was marked by unswerving\nintegrity and freedom from prejudice. His rulings and decisions in the\nlower courts of Illinois, and on the bench of the Supreme Court of the\nUnited States, commanded universal respect. As a legislator, his love\nof truth and justice prevented him from being a political partisan. As\nUnited States Senator and Vice-President of the United States, the party\nthat elected him could obtain his support for no measure that he deemed\nunjust. Referring to his acquaintance with Lincoln, Judge Davis says: \"I\nenjoyed for over twenty years the personal friendship of Mr. Lincoln.\nWe were admitted to the bar about the same time, and traveled for many\nyears what is known in Illinois as the Eighth Judicial Circuit. In 1848,\nwhen I first went on the bench, the circuit embraced fourteen counties,\nand Mr. Lincoln went with the court to every county.\" A large portion\nof this time they passed in each other's company. They often rode in\nthe same vehicle, generally ate at the same table, and not infrequently\nslept together in the same bed. The closest intimacy existed between\nthem as long as Lincoln lived, and when he died, Mr. Davis became his\nexecutor. Judge Davis would not intentionally have misrepresented the\nopinions of an enemy, much less the opinions of his dear dead friend.\nBriefly, yet clearly, he defines the theological views of Lincoln:\n\n\"He had no faith, in the Christian sense of the term--had faith in laws,\nprinciples, causes, and effects--philosophically\" (Life of Lincoln, p.\n489).\n\nSpeaking of the many stories that had been circulated concerning\nLincoln's religious belief, such as the Bateman and Vinton interviews,\ntogether with the various pious speeches he is reported to have made\nto religious committees and delegations that visited him, such as his\nreputed speech to the Negroes of Baltimore, Judge Davis says:\n\n\"The idea that Lincoln talked to a stranger about his religion or\nreligious views, or made such speeches, remarks, &c, about it as are\npublished, is to me absurd. I knew the man so well. He was the most\nreticent, secretive man I ever saw, or expect to see\" (Ibid).\n\nMRS. MARY LINCOLN.\n\nBut one of Lamon's witnesses remains--the wife of the martyred\nPresident. Her testimony ought of itself to put this matter at rest\nforever. Mrs. Lincoln says:\n\n\"Mr. Lincoln had no hope, and no faith, in the usual acceptation of\nthose words\" (Life of Lincoln, p. 489).\n\nIn addition to what Colonel Lamon has presented, Mrs. Lincoln also\nstated the following:\n\n\"Mr. Lincoln's maxim and philosophy were, 'What is to be, will be, and\nno prayers of ours can arrest the decree.' He never joined any church.\nHe was a religious man always, I think, but was not a technical\nChristian\" (Herndon's \"Religion of Lincoln\").\n\nIt may be charged that Mrs. Lincoln subsequently repudiated a portion of\nthis testimony. In anticipation of such a charge I will here state a\nfew facts. This testimony was given by Mrs. Lincoln in 1865. When it was\ngiven, while her heart was pierced by the pangs of her great grief, her\nmind was sound. About Jan. 1, 1874, a brief article, purporting to come\nfrom her pen, appeared, in which the testimony attributed to her was in\npart denied. At the time this denial was written, Mrs. Lincoln had been\nfor more than two years insane. The chief cause in dethroning her reason\nwas the death of her universally beloved Tad (Thomas), which occurred\non July 15, 1871. Referring to this sad event, Mr. Arnold, one of the\nprincipal witnesses on the Christian side of this controversy, says:\n\"From this time Mrs. Lincoln, in the judgment of her most intimate\nfriends, was never entirely responsible for her conduct\" (Life of\nLincoln, p. 439).\n\nThe only effect of this denial on the minds of those acquainted with the\ncircumstances, was to excite a mingled feeling of pity and disgust--pity\nfor this unfortunate woman, and disgust for the contemptible methods of\nthose who would take advantage of her demented condition and make her\ncontradict the honest statements of her rational life.\n\nBefore dismissing this witness, I wish to advert to a subject with\nwhich many of my readers are familiar. For years, both before and after\nLincoln's death, the religious press of the country was continually\nabusing Mrs. Lincoln. If a ball was held at the White House, she became\nat once the recipient of unlimited abuse. If Lincoln attended the\ntheater, she was accused of having dragged him there against his will.\nIt was almost uniformly asserted that he would not have gone to the\ntheater on that fatal night had it not been for her, and in not a few\ninstances it was infamously hinted that she was cognizant of the plot\nto murder him. But even the Rev. Dr. Miner, who was acquainted with the\nfacts, is willing to vindicate her from these imputations. He says: \"It\nhas been said that Mrs. Lincoln urged her husband to go to the theater\nagainst his will. This is not true. On the contrary, she tried to\npersuade him not to go.\"\n\nLincoln's biographers have, for the most part, endeavored to do his wife\njustice, and have rebuked the insults showered upon her. Alluding to\nPresident and Mrs. Lincoln, Mr. Herndon says: \"All that I know ennobles\nboth.\" Colonel Lamon says: \"Almost ever since Mr. Lincoln's death a\nportion of the press has never tired of heaping brutal reproaches upon\nhis wife and widow, whilst a certain class of his friends thought they\nwere honoring his memory by multiplying outrages and indignities upon\nher at the very moment when she was broken by want and sorrow, defamed,\ndefenseless, in the hands of thieves, and at the mercy of spies.\" Mr.\nArnold says: \"There is nothing in American history so unmanly, so devoid\nof every chivalric impulse as the treatment of this poor, broken-hearted\nwoman.\"\n\nThe evidence of Colonel Lamon's ten witnesses has now been presented.\nThis evidence includes, in addition to the testimony of other intimate\nfriends, the testimony of his wife; the testimony of his first law\npartner, Hon. John T. Stuart; the testimony of his last law partner,\nHon. Win. H. Herndon; the testimony of his friend and political adviser,\nCol. James H. Matheny; the testimony of his private secretary, Col. John\nG. Nicolay; and the testimony of his lifelong friend and executor\nafter death, Judge David Davis. No one can read this evidence and\nthen honestly affirm that Abraham Lincoln was a Christian. This is the\nevidence, the perusal of which so thoroughly enraged that good Christian\nbiographer, Dr. J. G. Holland; this is the evidence, the truthfulness of\nwhich the Rev. J. A. Reed, unmindful of the fate of Ananias, attempted\nto deny.\n\nAs a full and just answer to this attempted refutation of Lamon's\nwitnesses by Reed, I quote from the New York _World_ the following:\n\n\"This individual testimony is clear and overwhelming, without the\ndocumentary and other evidence scattered profusely through the rest\nof the volume. How does Mr. Reed undertake to refute it? In the first\nplace, firstly, he pronounces it a 'libel,' and in the second place,\nsecondly, he is 'amazed to find'--and he says he has found--that the\nprincipal witnesses take exception to Mr. Lamon's report of their\nevidence. This might have been true of many or all of Mr. Lamon's\nwitnesses without exciting the wonder of a rational man. Few persons,\nindeed, are willing to endure reproach merely for the truth's sake,\nand popular opinion in the Republican party of Springfield, Ill., is\nprobably very much against Mr. Lamon. It would, therefore, be quite\nin the natural order if some of his witnesses who find themselves\nunexpectedly in print should succumb to the social and political\nterrorism of their place and time, and attempt to modify or explain\ntheir testimony. They zealously assisted Mr. Herndon in ascertaining the\ntruth, and while they wanted him to tell it in full they were prudently\nresolved to keep their own names snugly out of sight. But Mr. Reed's\nstatement is not true, and his amazement is entirely simulated. Two only\nout of the ten witnesses have gratified him by inditing, at his request,\nweak and guarded complaints of unfair treatment. These are John T.\nStuart, a relative of the Lincolns and Edwardses, and Jim Matheny, both\nof Springfield, whom Mr. Lincoln taught his peculiar doctrines, but who\nmay by this time be deacons in Mr. Reed's church. Neither of them helps\nMr. Reed's case a particle. Their epistles open, as if by concert,\nin form and words almost identical. They say they did not _write_ the\nlanguage attributed to them. The denial is wholly unnecessary, for\nnobody affirms that they did write it. They talked and Mr. Herndon\nwrote. His notes were made when the conversation occurred, and probably\nin their presence. At all events, they are both so conscious of the\ngeneral accuracy of his report that they do not venture to deny a single\nword of it, but content themselves with lamenting that something else,\nwhich they did _not_ say, was excluded from it. They both, however,\nin these very letters, repeat emphatically the material part of the\nstatements made by them to Mr. Herndon, namely, that Mr. Lincoln was\nto their certain knowledge, until a very late period of his life, an\n'Infidel,' and neither of them is able to tell when he ceased to be an\nInfidel and when he began to be a Christian. And this is all Mr. Reed\nmakes by his re-examination of the two persons whom he is pleased to\nexalt as Mr. Lamon's 'principal witnesses.' They are but two out of the\nten. What of the other eight? They have no doubt been tried and plied by\nMr. Reed and his friends to no purpose; they stand fast by the record.\nBut Mr. Reed is to be shamed neither by their speech nor their silence.\"\n\n\n\n\nCHAPTER X. TESTIMONY OF LINCOLN'S RELATIVES AND INTIMATE ASSOCIATES\n\n     Mrs. Sarah Lincoln--Dennis F. Hanks--Mrs. Matilda Moore--\n     John Hall--Win. McNeely--Wm. G. Green--Joshua F. Speed--\n     Green Caruthers--John Decamp--Mr. Lynan--James B.\n     Spaulding--Ezra Stringham--Dr. G. H Ambrose--J. H. Chenery--\n     Squire Perkins--W. Perkins--James Gorley--Dr. Wm. Jayne--\n     Jesse K. Dubois--Hon. Joseph Gillespie--Judge Stephen T.\n     Logan--Hon. Leonard Swett\n\nWere I to rest my case here, the evidence already adduced is sufficient,\nI think, to convince any unprejudiced mind that Lincoln was not a\nChristian. But I do not propose to rest here. I have presented the\ntestimony of half a score of witnesses; before I lay down my pen I shall\npresent the testimony of nearly ten times as many more.\n\nIn this chapter will be given the testimony of some of the relatives and\nintimate associates of Lincoln. The testimony of his relatives confirms\nthe claim that he was not religious in his youth; the others testify to\nhis unbelief while a resident of New Salem and Springfield.\n\nMRS. SARAH LINCOLN.\n\nIf there was one person to whom Lincoln was more indebted than to\nany other, it was his stepmother, Sally Lincoln, a beautiful\nwoman--beautiful not only in face and form, but possessed of a most\nlovely character. She was not highly educated, but she loved knowledge,\nand inspired in her step-son a love for books. She was a Christian, but\nshe attached more importance to deed than to creed. She loved Lincoln.\nAfter his death she said: \"He was dutiful to me always. I think he loved\nme truly. I had a son, John, who was raised with Abe. Both were good\nboys; but I must say, both now being dead, that Abe was the best boy I\never saw, or expect to see.\" Lincoln was too good and too great not to\nappreciate this woman's care and affection.\n\nWhen the materials for Lincoln's biography were being collected, Mrs.\nLincoln was considered the most reliable source from which to obtain the\nfacts pertaining to his boyhood. Her recollections of him were recorded\nwith the utmost care. His Christian biographers, in order to make a\nSunday-school hero of him, have declared him to be a youth remarkable\nfor his Christian piety and his love of the Bible. The statements of\nMrs. Lincoln disprove this claim. The substance of her testimony,\nas given by Lamon, is given as follows: \"His step-mother--herself\na Christian, and longing for the least sign of faith in him--could\nremember no circumstance that supported her hope. On the contrary, she\nrecollected very well that he never went off into a corner, as has been\nsaid, to ponder the sacred writings, and to wet the page with his tears\nof penitence\" (Life of Lincoln, pp. 486, 487).\n\n\"The Bible, according to Mrs. Lincoln, was not one of his studies; 'he\nsought more congenial books.' At that time he neither talked nor read\nupon religious subjects. If he had any opinions about them, he kept them\nto himself\" (Ibid, p. 38).\n\nDENNIS F. HANKS.\n\nThe next witness is Lincoln's cousin, Dennis Hanks. Mr. Hanks held \"the\npulpy, red, little Lincoln\" in his arms before he was \"twenty-four hours\nold,\" and remained his constant companion during all the years that\nhe lived in Kentucky and Indiana. He lived a part of the time in the\nLincoln family, and married one of Lincoln's step-sisters. I met him\nrecently at Charleston, Ill. With evident delight he rehearsed the story\nof Lincoln's boyhood, and reaffirmed the truthfulness of the following\nstatements attributed to him by Lincoln's biographers:\n\n\"Abe wasn't in early life a religious man. He was a moral man\nstrictly.... In after life he became more religious; but the Bible\npuzzled him, especially the miracles\" (Every-Day Life of Lincoln, p.\n54).\n\n\"'Religious songs did not appear to suit him at all,' says Dennis Hanks;\nbut of profane ballads and amorous ditties he knew the words of a vast\nnumber.\n\n\"Another was:\n\n     'Hail Columbia, happy land!\n     If you ain't drunk, I'll be damned,'\n\na song which Dennis thinks should be warbled only in the 'fields;' and\ntells us they knew and enjoyed all such songs as this'\" (Lamon's Life of\nLincoln, pp. 58, 59).\n\nThe fitness of the above coarse travesty to be warbled, even in the\nfields, may well be doubted. Lamon would hardly have recorded it, and\nI certainly should not quote it, but for the fact that it strikingly\nillustrates one phase of Lincoln's \"youthful piety.\"\n\nAmong the many Christian hymns which Lincoln parodied, Mr. Hanks recalls\nthe following:\n\n     \"How tedious and tasteless the hours.\"\n     \"When I can read my title clear.\"\n     \"Oh! to grace how great a debtor!\"\n     \"Come, thou fount of every blessing.\"\n\nMRS. MATILDA MOORE.\n\nLincoln's first husband was named Johnston. By him she had three\nchildren, a son and two daughters. The latter, like their mother,\ndeveloped into noble specimens of womanhood; and both loved Lincoln as\ntenderly as though he had been their own brother. The elder was married\nto Dennis Hanks; the younger, Matilda, married Lincoln's cousin, Levi\nHall, and, after his death, a gentleman named Moore.\n\nLamon says that Lincoln in his youth made a mockery of the popular\nreligion; not from any lack of reverence for what he believed to be\ngood, but because \"he thought that a person had better be without it.\"\nThat he was accustomed to turn so-called sacred subjects into ridicule\nis attested by his stepsister, Mrs. Moore. She says:\n\n\"When father and mother would go to church, Abe would take down the\nBible, read a verse, give out a hymn, and we would sing. Abe was about\nfifteen years of age. He preached and we would do the crying\" (Every-Day\nLife of Lincoln, p. 71).\n\nJOHN HALL.\n\nOn the 28th of April, 1888, the writer, in company with Mr. Charles\nBiggs, of Westfield, Ill., visited the old Lincoln homestead, near\nFarmington, Ill. We dined with Mr. John Hall, a son of Lincoln's\nstepsister Matilda, in the old log-house built by Lincoln's father sixty\nyears ago, and in which his father and step-mother died. Mr. Hall, who\nowns the homestead and preserves with zealous care this venerable relic,\nis an intelligent farmer over sixty years of age. He greatly reveres\nthe memory of his illustrious uncle and loves to dwell on his many noble\ntraits of character. He stated that the family tradition is that while\nAbe was a most honest and humane boy he was not religious. He referred\nto the mock sermons he is said to have preached. \"At these meetings,\"\nsaid Mr. Hall, \"my mother would lead in the singing while Uncle Abe\nwould lead in prayer. Among his numerous supplications, he prayed God to\nput stockings on the chickens' feet in winter.\"\n\nWILLIAM McNEELT.\n\nWilliam McNeely, of Petersburg, Ill., who became acquainted with Lincoln\nin 1831, when he arrived at New Salem on a flatboat, says:\n\n\"Lincoln said he did not believe in total depravity, and although it was\nnot popular to believe it, it was easier to do right than wrong; that\nthe first thought was: what was right? and the second--what was wrong?\nTherefore it was easier to do right than wrong, and easier to take care\nof, as it would take care of itself. It took an effort to do wrong, and\na still greater effort to take care of it; but do right and it would\ntake care of itself.\n\n\"I was acquainted with him a long time, and I never knew him to do a\nwrong act\" (Lincoln Memorial Album, pp. 393-395).\n\nWILLIAM G. GREEN.\n\nOne of Lincoln's early companions at New Salem was William G. Green.\nHe and Lincoln clerked in the same store and slept together on the same\ncot. The testimony of Mr. Green has not been preserved. We have simply\nan observation of his, incidentally made, the substance of which is thus\npresented by Lamon:\n\n\"Lincoln's incessant reading of Shakspere and Burns had much to do in\ngiving to his mind the 'skeptical' tendency so fully devoloped by the\nlabors of his pen in 1834-5, and in social conversations during many\nyears of his residence at Springfield\" (Life of Lincoln, p. 145).\n\nMr. Green's conclusion, especially in regard to Burns, is quite\ngenerally shared by Lincoln's friends. Burns's satirical poems were\ngreatly admired by-Lincoln. \"Holy Willie's Prayer,\" one of the most\nwithering satires on orthodox Christianity ever penned, was memorized by\nhim. Every one of its sixteen stanzas, beginning with the following,\nwas an Infidel shaft which he delighted to hurl at the heads of his\nChristian opponents:\n\n     \"O thou, wha in the heavens dost dwell,\n     Wha, as it pleases best thysel',\n     Sends ane to heaven and ten to hell,\n     A' for thy glory,\n     And no for ony guid or ill\n     They've done afore thee!\"\n\nJOSHUA F. SPEED.\n\nAnother of Lincoln's earliest and best friends was Joshua F. Speed. When\nhe was licensed as a lawyer and entered upon his professional career at\nSpringfield without a client and without a dollar, Speed assisted him to\nget a start. W. H. Herndon was clerking for Speed at the time, and for\nmore than a year Lincoln, Herndon and Speed roomed together. Referring\nto the religious views held by Lincoln at that time, Mr. Speed, in a\nlecture, says:\n\n\"I have often been asked what were Mr. Lincoln's religious opinions.\nWhen I knew him, in early life, he was a skeptic. He had tried hard\nto be a believer, but his reason could not grasp and solve the great\nproblem of redemption as taught.\"\n\nThis is the testimony of an orthodox Christian, and a church-member. Mr.\nSpeed, during the years that he was acquainted with Lincoln, was not\na member of any church; but late in life he united with the Methodist\nchurch. As \"the wish is father to the thought,\" Mr. Speed professed\nto believe that Lincoln before his death modified, to some extent, the\nradical views of his early manhood.\n\nGREEN CARUTHERS.\n\nSoon after Lincoln removed to Springfield, he became acquainted with Mr.\nGreen Caruthers and remained on intimate terms with him during all the\nsubsequent years of his life. Mr. Caruthers was a quiet, unobtrusive old\ngentleman, universally respected by those who knew him. The substance of\nhis testimony is as follows:\n\n\"Lincoln, Bledsoe, the metaphysician, and myself, boarded at the Globe\nhotel in this city. Bledsoe tended toward Christianity, if he was not\na Christian. Lincoln was always throwing out his Infidelity to Bledsoe,\nridiculing Christianity, and especially the divinity of Christ.\"\n\nJOHN DECAMP.\n\nAnother of Lincoln's most intimate Springfield friends was John Decamp.\nMr. Decamp was interviewed by Mr. Herndon regarding Lincoln's religious\nviews in July, 1887. His statement was brief, but to the point. He says:\n\n\"Lincoln was an Infidel.\"\n\nMR. LYNAN. In 1880, at Bismarck Grove, Kan., the writer of this\ndelivered a lecture entitled, \"Four American Infidels,\" a portion of\nwhich was devoted to a presentation of Lincoln's religious views. In\nits report of the lecture, the Lawrence _Standard_, edited by Hon. E.\nG. Ross, formerly United States Senator from Kansas, and more recently\nGovernor of New Mexico, said:\n\n\"In regard to Abraham Lincoln being an Infidel, the evidence adduced was\noverwhelming, and was confirmed by a gentleman present, Mr. Lynan, who\nhad known him intimately for thirty years. Mr. Lynan declared that none\nbut personal acquaintance could enable one to realize the nobility and\npurity of Lincoln's character, but that he was beyond doubt or question\na thorough disbeliever in the Christian scheme of salvation to the end\nof his life\" (Lawrence Standard, Sept. 4, 1880).\n\nJAMES B. SPAULDING.\n\nMr. J. B. Spaulding, well known as one of the leading nurserymen\nand horticulturists of the United States, a man of broad culture and\nrefinement, who resides near Springfield, became intimately acquainted\nwith Lincoln as early as 1851, and for a long time resided on the same\nstreet with him in Springfield. Mr. Spaulding says:\n\n\"Lincoln perpetrated many an irreverent joke at the expense of church\ndoctrines. Regarding the miraculous conception, he was especially\nsarcastic. He wrote a manuscript as radical as Ingersoll which his\npolitical friends caused to be destroyed.\"\n\nEZRA STRINGHAM.\n\nA short time since I was conversing with a party of gentlemen in\nRiverton, Ill. It being near Lincoln's old home, the subject of his\nreligious belief was introduced. An old gentleman, who up to this time\nhad not been taking part in the conversation, quietly observed: \"I think\nI knew Lincoln's religious views about as well as any other man.\" \"What\nwas he?\" said one of the party. \"An Infidel of the first water,\" was the\nprompt response. The old gentleman was Ezra Stringham, one of Lincoln's\nearly acquaintances in Illinois.\n\nDR. G. H. AMBROSE.\n\nDr. G. H. Ambrose, of Waldo, Fla., who was associated in the law\nbusiness at Springfield from 1846 to 1849 with a relative of Mrs.\nLincoln, says: \"Mr. Lincoln was an Infidel--an outspoken one.\"\n\nJ. H. CHENERY.\n\nMr. J. H. Chenery, one of Springfield's pioneers--for many years owner\nand proprietor of the leading hotel of Springfield--says:\n\n\"Reed tried to prove that Lincoln was a church man; but everybody here\nknows that he was not. Once in a great while, and only once in a great\nwhile, I saw him accompany his wife and children to church. His attacks\nupon the church were most bitter and sarcastic. He wrote a book against\nChristianity, but his friends got away with it.\"\n\nSQUIRE PERKINS.\n\nA few years ago there died near Atchison, Kan., an old gentleman named\nPerkins. He was poor, but honest, and a bright man intellectually. He\nwas a son of Major Perkins who was killed in the Black Hawk war. Lincoln\nafter the fight discovered the scalp of Major Perkins, which his savage\nassassin had taken but lost. His first impulse was to keep it and take\nit home to the family of the dead soldier. Then realizing that it would\nonly tend to intensify their grief, he opened the grave and deposited\nit with the body. This incident led to an intimate acquaintance between\nLincoln and the younger Perkins. In June, 1880, Mr. Perkins made the\nfollowing statement relative to Lincoln's religious belief:\n\n\"During all the time that I was acquainted with Abraham Lincoln I know\nthat he was what the church calls an Infidel. I do not believe that he\never changed his opinions. When Colfax was in Atchison I had a talk with\nhim about Lincoln. Among other things, I asked him if Lincoln had ever\nbeen converted to Christianity. He told me that he had not.\"\n\nW. PERKINS.\n\nMr. Perkins, an old lawyer and journalist of Illinois, who was\nacquainted with Lincoln for upward of twenty years, and who was his\nassociate counsel in several important cases, writing from Belleview,\nFla., under date of August 22, 1887, says:\n\n\"The unfair efforts that Christians have been putting forth to drag\nLincoln into their waning faith betray a pitiable imbecility. Were\nit possible for them to get the world to believe that Washington,\nJefferson, and Lincoln, all prayed, had faith, and were washed in the\nblood of the Lamb, would that prove the inspiration of their Bible,\nharmonize its contradictions, put a ray of reason in its gross\nabsurdities, or humanize the first one of its numerous bloody\nbarbarities? I knew Mr. Lincoln from the spring of 1838 till his death.\nLike Archibald Williams, our contemporary, an able Lord Coke lawyer, he\nno more believed in the inspiration of the Bible than Hume, Paine,\nor Ingersoll. Less inclined openly to denounce its absurdities and\ncruelties, or to antagonize the well-meaning credulous professors, than\nwas Williams. Mr. Lincoln had no faith whatever in the first miracle of\nthe Bible, or the scheme of bloody redemption it teaches. To attribute\nsuch sentiments to him, is to tarnish his well-earned reputation for\ncommon sense, and to impair the estimation of his countrymen and the\nworld of his high sense of humanity, justice, and honor. Two of my\nPresbyterian friends at Indian Point, near Petersburg, told me that\nthey had interviewed Mr. Lincoln to prevent his impending duel with\nShields--claiming that it was contrary to the Bible and Christianity. He\nadmitted that the dueling code was barbarous and regretted much to\nfind himself in its toils, but said he, 'The Bible is not my book, nor\nChristianity my profession.'\"\n\nIn some reminiscences of Lincoln, recently published, referring to a\ncelebrated murder case in which they were counsel for the defendant, Mr.\nPerkins says: \"I reminded him that from the first I had seen, and to him\nsaid, the case is hopeless, and that he must have expected to work\na miracle to save the accused. He answered that I did him injustice,\n_since he_ had no faith in miracles.\"\n\nAlluding to Lincoln's alleged change of heart, he writes:\n\n\"He never changed a sentiment on the subject up to his final sleep.\"\n\nJAMES GORLEY.\n\nMr. Gorley, who was the confidential friend of Lincoln, and who\nspent much time with him, both at home and abroad, made the following\nstatement:\n\n\"Lincoln belonged to no religious sect. He was religious in his own\nway--not as others generally. I do not think he ever had a change of\nheart, religiously speaking. Had he ever had a change of heart he would\nhave told me. He could not have neglected it.\"\n\nWILLIAM JAYNE, M.D.\n\nDr. Jayne, who was appointed Governor of Dakota by Lincoln, is one of\nthe most prominent citizens of Springfield, and was one of Lincoln's\nablest and most faithful political friends. He secured Lincoln's\nnomination for the Legislature once, and was one of the first to pit\nhim against Douglas. In a letter to me, dated August 18, 1887, Dr. Jayne\nsays:\n\n\"His general reputation among his neighbors and friends of twenty-five\nyears' standing was that of a disbeliever in the accepted faith of\northodox Christians. His mind was purely logical in its construction\nand action. He believed nothing except what was susceptible of\ndemonstration.... His most intimate friends here, and close to him in\nthe confidential relations of life, assert, in regard to those who claim\nfor Lincoln a faith in the orthodox Christian belief, that the claim is\na fraud and utter nonsense.\"\n\nHON. JESSE K. DUBOIS.\n\nJesse K. Dubois, for a time State Auditor of Illinois, a noble and\ngifted man, and one whom Lincoln dearly loved, once related an anecdote\nwhich shows that if Lincoln did believe in a Supreme Being, he had\nlittle reverence for the God of Christianity. In company with Dubois, he\nwas visiting a family in or near Springfield. It was summer, and while\nDubois was in the house with the family, Lincoln occupied a seat in the\nyard with his feet resting against a tree, as was his wont. The lady,\nwho was a very zealous Christian, called attention to his appearance\nand commented rather severely upon his ugliness. When they returned home\nDubois referred to the lady's remarks. Lincoln was silent for a moment,\nand then said: \"Dubois, I know that I am ugly, but she worships a God\nwho is uglier than I am.\"\n\nHON. JOSEPH GILLESPIE.\n\nJudge Gillespie, of Edwardsville, Ill., one of Lincoln's most valued\nfriends, writes as follows:\n\n\"Mr. Lincoln seldom said anything on the subject of religion. He said\nonce to me that he never could reconcile the prescience of Deity with\nthe uncertainty of events.\" \"It was difficult,\" says Judge Gillespie,\n\"for him to believe without demonstration.\"\n\nJUDGE STEPHEN T. LOGAN.\n\nLincoln was admitted to the bar in 1837, when he was twenty-eight years\nof age, Judge Logan being on the bench at the time. Soon after his\nadmission he formed a partnership with John T. Stuart which existed\nnearly four years, or until Mr. Stuart entered Congress. He then became\nthe partner of Judge Logan, and continued in business with him until\n1843, when he united his practice with that of Mr. Herndon. The\ntestimony of Mr. Stuart and Mr. Herndon has already been given. No\nformal statement of Judge Logan concerning this question has been\npreserved. All that I have been able to find is contained in a letter\nfrom Mr. Herndon dated Dec. 22, 1888. Mr. Herndon wrote in relation\nto Lincoln's letter of consolation to his dying father. In Lincoln's\nletter, while Christ and Christianity are wholly ignored, there is an\nimplied recognition of immortality and an expressed hope that he may\nmeet his father again. Lincoln's friends, for the most part, consider\nthe letter merely conventional, not an expression of his real\nsentiments, but simply an effort to console his Christian father whom\nhe could never meet again on earth. Mr. Herndon, however, is inclined to\nbelieve that while the tone of the letter is not exactly in accordance\nwith the views generally held by Lincoln, it is yet a sincere expression\nof the feelings he entertained at the time. Referring to this letter,\nMr. Herndon says:\n\n\"I showed the letter to Logan, Stuart, _et al,_ Logan laughed in my face\nas much as to say: 'Herndon, are you so green as to believe that letter\nto be Lincoln's real ideas?' I cannot give the exact words of Logan,\nbut he in substance said: 'Lincoln was an Infidel of the most radical\ntype.'\"\n\nHON. LEONARD SWETT.\n\nI close this division of my evidence with the testimony of that gifted\nlawyer and honored citizen of Illinois, Leonard Swett. Previous to his\nremoval to Chicago, in 1865, Mr. Swett resided in Bloomington, and for\na dozen years traveled the old Eighth Judicial Circuit with Lincoln.\nFew men knew Lincoln better than did Swett, and none was held in higher\nesteem by Lincoln than he. It was he who placed Lincoln in nomination\nfor the Presidency at Chicago in 1860. I quote from a letter written by\nMr. Swett in 1866:\n\n\"You ask me whether he [Lincoln] changed his religious opinions toward\nthe close of his life. I think not. As he became involved in matters of\nthe greatest importance, full of great responsibility and great doubt,\na feeling of religious reverence, a belief in God and his justice and\noverruling providence increased with him. He was always full of natural\nreligion. He believed in God as much as the most approved church member,\nyet he judged of him by the same system of generalization as he judged\neverything else. He had very little faith in ceremonials or forms. In\nfact he cared nothing for the form of anything.... If his religion were\nto be judged by the lines and rules of church creeds, he would fall far\nshort of the standard.\"\n\n\n\n\nCHAPTER XI. TESTIMONY OF FRIENDS AND ACQUAINTANCES OF LINCOLN WHO KNEW HIM IN ILLINOIS\n\n     Hon. W. H. T. Wakefield--Hon. D. W. Wilder--Dr. B. P.\n     Gardner--Hon. J. K. Vandemark--A. Jeffrey--Dr. Arch E.\n     McNeal--Charles McGrew--Edward Buller--Joseph Stafford--\n     Judge A. D. Norton--J. L. Morrell--Mahlon Ross--L. Wilson--\n     H. K. Magie--Hon. James Tuttle--Col. P. S. Rutherford--Judge\n     Robert Leachman--Hon. Orin B. Gould--M. S. Gowin--Col. R. G.\n     Ingersoll--Leonard W. Volk--Joseph Jefferson--Hon. E. B.\n     Washburn--Hon. E. M. Haines.\n\nI will next present the evidence that I have gleaned from the lips or\npens of personal friends of Lincoln who were acquainted with him in\nIllinois. The relations of these persons to Lincoln were, for the\nmost part, less intimate than were those of the persons named in the\npreceding chapter; but all of them enjoyed in no small degree his\nconfidence and esteem.\n\nHON. W. H. T. WAKEFIELD.\n\nMr. Wakefield, our first witness, is a son of the distinguished jurist,\nJudge J. A. Wakefield. He is a prominent journalist, and was the nominee\nof the United Labor party, for Vice-President, in the Presidential\ncontest of 1888. In a letter to the author, dated Lawrence, Kan., Sept.\n28, 1880, Mr. Wakefield says: \"My father, the late Judge J. A. Wakefield,\nwas a life-long friend of Lincoln's, they having served through the\nBlack Hawk war together and been in the Illinois Legislature together,\nduring which latter time Lincoln boarded with my father in Vandalia,\nwhich was then the state capital. I remember of his visiting my father\nat Galena, in 1844 or 1845. They continued to correspond until Lincoln's\ndeath. My father was a member of the Methodist church and frequently\nspoke of and lamented Lincoln's Infidelity, and referred to the many\narguments between them on the subject. The noted minister, Peter\nCartwright, boarded with my father at the same time that Lincoln\ndid, and my father and mother told me of the many theological and\nphilosophical arguments indulged in by Lincoln and Cartwright, and\nof the fact that they always attracted many interested listeners and\nusually ended by Cartwright's getting very angry and the spectators\nbeing convulsed with laughter at Lincoln's dry wit and humorous\ncomparisons.\"\n\nLincoln's legislative career at Vandalia extended from 1834 to 1837. It\nwas about the beginning of this period that he wrote his book against\nChristianity. He was thoroughly informed and enthusiastic in his Infidel\nviews, and it is not to be wondered at that on theological questions,\nhe was able to vanquish in debate even so eminent a theologian as Peter\nCartwright. Ten years later, Lincoln was the Whig, and Cartwright the\nDemocratic candidate for Congress. In this campaign a determined effort\nwas made by the church to defeat Lincoln on account of his Infidelity.\nBut his popularity, his reputation for honesty, his recognized ability,\nand his transcendent powers on the stump, carried him successfully\nthrough, and he was triumphantly elected.\n\nHON. D. W. WILDER.\n\nOne of the most gifted and honorable of Western journalists is D. W.\nWilder, of Kansas. He was Surveyor General of Kansas before it was\nadmitted into the Union, and after it became a state, he held the office\nof State Auditor. Many years ago Gen. Wilder wrote and published an\neditorial on Lincoln's religious views in which he affirmed that Lincoln\nwas a disbeliever in Christianity. The article excited the wrath of the\nclergy, among them the Rev. D. P. Mitchell, the leading Methodist\ndivine of Kansas, who replied with much warmth, but without refuting the\nstatements of Gen. Wilder. Some of my Western readers will recall the\narticle and the controversy it provoked. I have been unable to procure\na copy of it, but in its place I present the following extract from a\nletter received from Gen. Wilder, dated St. Joseph, Mo., Dec. 29, 1881:\n\n\"Lincoln believed in God, but not in the divinity of Christ. At first,\nlike Franklin, he was probably an Atheist. Although a 'forgiving' man\nhimself, he did not believe that any amount of 'penitence' could affect\nthe logical effects of violated law. He has a remarkable passage on that\ntheme.\"\n\nConcerning Lincoln's partner, Mr. Herndon, with whom he was acquainted,\nGen. Wilder says:\n\n\"Write to Wm. H. Herndon, a noble man, Springfield, Ill. Send him your\nbook ['Life of Paine']. He will reply. The stories told about him are\nlies.\"\n\nB. F. GARDNER, M.D.\n\nDr. Gardner, an old and respected resident of Atlanta, Ill., in March,\n1887, made the following statement in regard to Lincoln's views:\n\n\"I knew Lincoln from 1854 up to the time he left Springfield. He was\nan Infidel. He did not change his belief. Herndon told the truth in\nhis lecture. Lincoln did not believe that prayer moved God. When he\nrequested the prayers of his neighbors on leaving Springfield for\nWashington, he saw that & storm was coming and that he must have the\nsupport of the church.\"\n\nThese words of Lincoln in his farewell speech requesting the prayers of\nhis friends, though used merely in a conventional way, have been\ncited by Holland, Arnold, and others, to prove that he believed in the\nefficacy of prayer. That no such import was attached to them at the\ntime is admitted by Holland himself. He says: \"This parting address\nwas telegraphed to every part of the country, and was strangely\nmisinterpreted. So little was the man's character understood that his\nsimple and earnest request that his neighbors should pray for him was\nreceived by many as an evidence both of his weakness and his hypocrisy.\nNo President had ever before asked the people, in a public address,\nto pray for him. It sounded like the cant of the conventicle to ears\nunaccustomed to the language of piety from the lips of politicians. The\nrequest was tossed about as a joke--'old Abe's last'\" (Holland's Life of\nLincoln, p. 254).\n\nHON. J. K. VANDEMARK.\n\nJ. K. Vandemark, who formerly resided near Springfield, Ill., and who\nwas well acquainted with Lincoln, on the 13th of October, 1887, at\nValparaiso, Neb., testified as follows:\n\n\"I met Lincoln often--had many conversations with him in his office. To\nassert that he was a believer in Christianity is absurd. He had no faith\nin the dogmas of the church.\"\n\nMr. Vandemark at the time his testimony was given was a member of the\nState Senate of Nebraska.\n\nA. JEFFREY.\n\nMr. Jeffrey, who has resided near Waynesville, Ill., for a period of\nfifty years, and who was in the habit of attending court with Lincoln,\nyear after year, in an interview on the 1st of March, 1887, made the\nfollowing statement:\n\n\"Lincoln was decidedly Liberal. He admitted that he wrote a book against\nChristianity. In later years he seldom talked on this subject, but\nhe did not change his belief. A thrust at the doctrine of endless\npunishment always pleased him. This doctrine he abhorred.\"\n\nDR. ARCH E. McNEALL\n\nDr. McNeall, an old physician of Bowen, Ill., who was a delegate to the\nDecatur Convention which brought Lincoln forward as a candidate for the\nPresidency, says:\n\n\"I met Lincoln often during our political campaigns, and was quite well\nacquainted with him. I know that he was a Liberal thinker.\"\n\nCHARLES McGREW.\n\nDr. McGrew is a resident of Coles County, Ill.--the county in which\nnearly all of Lincoln's relatives have resided for sixty years. He is a\ncousin of Hon. Allen G. Thurman, and is a man of sterling character.\nHe was for a time related to Lincoln, in a business way, and met\nhim frequently. I met Dr. McGrew in 1888, and when I propounded the\nquestion, \"Was Lincoln a Christian?\" he replied: \"Lincoln was not a\nChristian. He was cautious and reserved and seldom said anything about\nreligion except when he was alone with a few companions whose opinions\nwere similar to his. On such occasions he did not hesitate to express\nhis unbelief.\"\n\nEDWARD BUTLER.\n\nEarly in 1858, Lincoln delivered his memorable Springfield speech which\nprepared the way for his debates with Douglas, and made him President of\nthe United States. Mr. Edward Butler, who resided in Springfield for a\nperiod of twenty-six years, and who was well acquainted with Lincoln,\nwas leader of the band which furnished the music on this occasion. In\na letter written at Lyons, Kan., Jan. 16,1890, Mr. Butler relates\nsome incidents connected with the meeting, and quotes a passage from\nLincoln's speech to the effect that from the agitation of the slavery\nquestion, truth would in the end prevail Alluding to this passage, Mr.\nButler says: \"Shortly after the meeting referred to, I chanced to be\ntalking with Lincoln and quizzingly enquired how he could reconcile this\nand similar utterances with Holy Writ? Without committing himself, he\nenquired if I had read Gregg's 'Creed of Christendom.' I informed him\nthat I had not. 'Then,' said he, 'read that book and perhaps you may\nascertain my views about truth prevailing.' I never conversed with\nLincoln afterwards, but I obtained the book, which I keep treasured\nin my library. I am well convinced that no man who is used to weighing\nevidence, especially of Lincoln's humane and unbiased disposition, can\nread the book in question without truth coming to the surface.\"\n\nIt is hardly necessary to state that Gregg's \"Creed of Christendom\" is a\nstandard work in Infidel literature, one of the most scholarly, powerful\nand convincing arguments against orthodox Christianity ever written.\n\nJOSEPH STAFFORD.\n\nJoseph Stafford, a resident of Galesburg, Ill., and an acquaintance of\nLincoln, says:\n\n\"I know that Lincoln was a Liberal.\"\n\nJUDGE A. D. MORTON.\n\nIn April, 1893, at Ardmore, I. T., I met Judge Norton, of Gainesville,\nTex., an old acquaintance of Lincoln and Douglas. Judge Norton related\nmany interesting reminiscences of these noted men. Speaking of Lincoln's\nreligion, he said:\n\n\"For nearly fifty years I was a resident of Illinois. I practiced for\nmany years in the same courts with Lincoln and knew him well. He was an\nInfidel. In his early manhood he wrote a book against Christianity which\nhis friends prevented him from publishing. Because he had become famous,\nthe church preached him from a theatre to heaven.\"\n\nJ. L MORRELL.\n\nMr. J. L. Morrell, a worthy citizen of Virden, Ill., who came to\nIllinois soon after Lincoln did, settled in the adjoining county to\nhim, and like him followed for a time the avocation of surveyor, in a\nconversation with the writer, on the 8th of February, 1889, made the\nfollowing statement:\n\n\"I knew Lincoln well--met him often. His religion was the religion of\ncommon sense. He went into this subject as deep as any man. He did not\nbelieve the inconsistencies of theology. He was not a Christian.\"\n\nMARLON ROSS, ESQ.\n\nSquire Boss, another old resident of Virden, Ill., a lawyer, and a\nwriter of some repute, says:\n\n\"I was acquainted with Lincoln, but never talked with him on religion.\nHe did not belong to church, and his friends say that he was not a\nChristian.\"\n\nLUSK WILSON.\n\nSimilar to the above is the testimony of Mr. Lusk Wilson, a prominent\nand respectable citizen of Litchfield, Ill.:\n\n\"I was acquainted with Abraham Lincoln, but never heard him give his\nviews on the subject of religion. His partner, Herndon, and other\nfriends, state that he was not a believer in Christianity.\"\n\nHON. JAMES TUTTLE.\n\nTwo miles east of Atlanta, Ill., resides one of the pioneers of\nIllinois, James Tuttle, now over eighty years of age. He was a member of\nthe Constitutional Convention of 1847, and is a man universally esteemed\nfor his love of truth and honesty. Mr. Tuttle's residence is situated\non the state road leading from Springfield to Bloomington. In going\nfrom Springfield to Bloomington, to attend court, and in returning home\nagain, Lincoln always stopped over night with Mr. Tuttle. Theological\nquestions were favorite topics with both of them, and the evening\nhours were usually spent in conversations of this character. Mr. Tuttle\naccordingly became well acquainted with Lincoln's religious views. Feb.\n26, 1887, at Minier, Ill., he made the following statement relative\nto them: \"Mr. Lincoln did not believe in Christianity. He denounced it\nunsparingly. He had the greatest contempt for religious revivals, and\ncalled those who took part in them a set of ignoramuses. He was one of\nthe most ardent admirers of Thomas Paine I ever met. He was continually\nquoting from the 'Age of Reason.' Said he, 'I never tire of reading\nPaine.'\"\n\nMr. Tuttle is confident that Lincoln always remained a Freethinker, and\nbelieves that those who claim to have evidence from him to the contrary,\nwillfully affirm what they know to be false.\n\nH. K. MAGIE.\n\nMr. Magie formerly lived in Illinois, and was for a time connected with\nthe State Department at Springfield. Writing from Brooklyn, N. T., March\n19, 1888, he says:\n\n\"My acquaintance with Mr. Lincoln was limited, as I did not reside in\nSpringfield during his residence there. I met him during his campaign\nwith Douglas at different times, and was with him once for three\ndays.... Mr. Lincoln was a Freethinker of the Thomas Paine type. There\nhave been picked up some of Mr. Lincoln's utterances about 'Providence,'\n'God,' and the like, on which an attempt is made to make him out a\nChristian. Those who knew him intimately agree in the statement that he\nwas a pronounced skeptic.\"\n\nMr. Magie also refers to the Infidel pamphlet written by Lincoln.\nHis knowledge regarding this, however, was derived, not from Lincoln\nhimself, but from his friends. He says: \"At one time he wrote a criticism\nof the New Testament which he proposed to publish and which his friends\nsucceeded in having suppressed, solely because of their regard for his\npolitical future.\"\n\nIn a recent contribution to a New York paper from Washington, D. C, Mr.\nMagie writes as follows: \"I have always been fully persuaded in my own\nmind that it would have been utterly impossible for a man possessing\nthat intuitive wisdom, keenness of logic, and discernment of truth,\nwhich were the marked characteristics of Mr. Lincoln's mind, ever to\nhave subscribed to the atrocious doctrines of the Christian church. He\nwas developed far above it, and although making no war upon the church,\nhe did not hesitate to speak his mind freely upon these subjects upon\nall proper occasions. I lived in Springfield among his old neighbors for\nmany years, and I have talked with many of them, and to those who had\ngood opportunity to know his views touching religious matters. All,\nwithout exception, classed him among the skeptics. It was not until\nafter his death that he was claimed as a Christian. I am sorry for\nNewton Bateman. He has placed himself in a most awkward predicament by\ntrying to keep out of one.... He permitted Mr. Holland to circulate\nan atrocious falsehood in his 'Life of Lincoln' rather than incur\n'unpleasant notoriety' by a firm and courageous denial.\" \"It is not a\nmatter of much importance as to just what Abraham Lincoln did believe\nconcerning God, the Bible, or the man Jesus, but when we discover an\nearnest, persistent, mean, and wicked attempt by lying and deceitful men\nto pervert the truth in this matter, in order that their 'holy religion'\nshall profit by their lies, the matter does become of some importance,\nand I am glad that Mr. -------- has taken hold of this subject with that\nzeal and earnestness which usually characterize his great ability, and\nfrom what I know in this matter I can assure all whom it may concern\nthat by the time he is through with the subject it will be deemed\nsettled that Mr. Lincoln was not a hypocrite, neither was he a believer\nin the monstrous and superstitious doctrines of the Christian church.\"\n\nThe foregoing evidence, with the exception of a portion of Mr. Magie's\ntestimony, was all given to the writer by the witnesses themselves,\neither by letter or orally, and he hereby certifies to its faithful\ntranscription. This evidence is from men whose characters as witnesses\ncannot be impeached, and it is hardly possible that one of them will\never favor the other side with a disclaimer.\n\nCOL. F. S. RUTHERFORD.\n\nI wish now to record a statement from Colonel Rutherford, a well-known\ncitizen and soldier of Illinois. It was not made to the writer, but was\nmade during the war to Mr. W. W. Fraser, a member of his regiment, and\na man of unquestionable veracity. I will let Mr. Fraser present it,\ntogether with the circumstances which called it out. I quote from a\nletter dated Ottawa, Kan., Dec. 16, 1881: \"During the siege of Vicksburg\nour colonel, F. S. Rutherford, Colonel of the 97th 111. Vol. Inft., was\nabout to leave us, and I went to see him about taking a small package to\nAlton--his home and mine. He had been sick and quite unable to do active\nservice. During our conversation I said that many of the Alton boys did\nnot like to be left under the command of ----------. Colonel Rutherford\nthen said:\n\n'If my life is worth anything I owe it as much to my family as my\ncountry, and it will be worthless to either if I stay much longer in\ncamp, but I hate to leave the boys.' Colonel Rutherford said that he\nhad stumped his district for Mr. Lincoln, and had expected, from Mr.\nLincoln's promises, something better than a colonelcy. I told Colonel\nRutherford that I was sorry to hear that, as I had always thought so\nwell of Mr. Lincoln. Mr. Rutherford then said: 'What more could you\nexpect of an Infidel?' I said:\n\n'Why, Colonel, doesn't Lincoln believe in a God?'\n\nHe replied: 'Well, he may believe in God, but he doesn't believe in the\nBible nor Christ. I know it, for I have heard him make fun of them and\nsay that Christ was a bastard if Joseph was not his father, and I\nhave some sheets of paper now at home that he wrote, making fun of the\nBible.\"\n\nJUDGE ROBERT LEACH MAN.\n\nThe venerable Southern jurist, Judge Leachman, was one of Lincoln's\nintimate and valued friends. He is a Christian, but candidly confesses\nthat Lincoln was not a believer. In the autumn of 1889, at Anniston,\nAla., Judge Leachman made the following statement to Mr. W. S. Andres,\nof Portsmouth, O.:\n\n\"Lincoln was not such a Christian as the term is used to imply by\nchurch members and church-going people. He was in the strictest sense a\nmoralist, he looked to actions and not to belief. He greatly admired the\nGolden Rule, and was one of those who thought that 'One world at a time'\nwas a good idea.... He thought this a good place to be happy as is shown\nby his wonderful love for liberty and mercy. No, I can truthfully say,\nAbraham Lincoln was not a Christian.\"\n\nHON. ORIN B. GOULD.\n\nAnother friend and admirer of Lincoln was Orin B. Gould, of Franklin\nFurnace, O. Mr. Gould was one of the noted men of Southern Ohio. He\nwas a man of sterling worth and extensive knowledge, and was familiarly\nknown as the \"Sage of the Furnace.\" He became acquainted with Lincoln\nin Illinois at an early day, and a close friendship existed between them\nwhile Lincoln lived. Mr. Gould survived his illustrious friend nearly a\nquarter of a century, dying recently at his beautiful home on the banks\nof the Ohio. Previous to his death the question of Lincoln's religion\nwas presented to him and his own views on the subject solicited. His\nresponse was as follows:\n\n\"He, like myself, recognized no monsters for Gods. He, like myself,\ndiscarded the divinity of Christ, and the idea of a hell's fire. He,\nlike myself, admired Christ as a man, and believed the devil and evil to\nbe simply 'truth misunderstood.' He, like myself, thought good wherever\nfound should be accepted and the bad rejected.\"\n\nM. S. GOWIN.\n\nMr. Gowin, an old and prominent citizen, and a Justice of the Peace, of\nMcCune, Kan., in a recent article, has this to say regarding Lincoln:\n\n\"I lived near Springfield, Ill., from the time that I was a child, and\nat the time Lincoln came before the people, and during the time he was\nPresident, his enemies called him an Infidel, and his friends did not\ndeny it.\"\n\nCOL. ROBERT G. INGERSOLL.\n\nOn the eighty-fourth anniversary of Lincoln's birth, Col. Ingersoll\ndelivered in New York his masterly oration on Abraham Lincoln. In this\noration he affirmed that the religion of Lincoln was the religion of\nVoltaire and Paine. Immediately after its delivery Gen. Collis, of New\nYork, addressed the following note to Col. Ingersoll:\n\n\"Dear Col. Ingersoll: I have just returned home from listening to your\nmost entertaining lecture upon the life of Abraham Lincoln. I thank you\nsincerely for all that was good in it, and that entitles me to be frank\nin condemning what I consider was bad. You say that Lincoln's religion\nwas the religion of Voltaire and Tom Paine. I know not where you get\nyour authority for this, but if the statement be true Lincoln himself\nwas untrue, for no man invoked 'the gracious favor of Almighty God' in\nevery effort of his life with more apparent fervor than did he, and\nthis God was not the Deists' God but the God whom he worshiped under the\nforms of the Christian Church, of which he was a member. I do not write\nthis in defense of his religion or as objecting to yours, but I think it\nwere better for the truth of history that you should blame him for what\nhe was than commend him for what he was not.\n\n\"Sincerely yours,\n\n\"Charles H. T. Collis.\"\n\nIn answer to the above Col. Ingersoll penned the following reply:\n\n\"Gen. Charles H. T. Collis,\n\n\"My dear sir:\n\n\"I have just received your letter in which you criticise a statement\nmade by me to the effect that Lincoln's religion was the religion of\nVoltaire and Thomas Paine, and you add, 'I know not where you get your\nauthority for this, but if the statement be true Lincoln himself was\nuntrue, for no man ever invoked the gracious favor of Almighty God in\nevery effort of his life with more apparent fervor than did he.'\n\n\"You seem to be laboring under the impression that Voltaire was not a\nbeliever in God, and that he could not have invoked the gracious favor\nof Almighty God. The truth is that Voltaire was not only a believer in\nGod, but even in special Providence. I know that the clergy have always\ndenounced Voltaire as an Atheist, but this can be accounted for in two\nways: (1) By the ignorance of the clergy, and (2) by their contempt of\ntruth. Thomas Paine was also a believer in God, and wrote his creed as\nfollows: 'I believe in one God and no more, and hope for immortality.'\nThe ministers have also denounced Paine as an Atheist. You will,\ntherefore, see that your first statement is without the slightest\nfoundation in fact. Lincoln could be perfectly true to himself if he\nagreed with the religious sentiments of Voltaire and Paine, and yet\ninvoke the gracious favor of Almighty God. You also say, 'This God'\n(meaning the God whose favor Lincoln invoked) 'was not the Deists' God.'\nThe Deists believe in an Infinite Being, who created and preserves the\nuniverse. The Christians believe no more. Deists and Christians believe\nin the same God, but they differ as to what this God has done, and to\nwhat this God will do. You further say that 'Lincoln worshiped his God\nunder the forms of the Christian Church, of which he was a member.'\nAgain you are mistaken. Lincoln was never a member of any church. Mrs.\nLincoln stated a few years ago that Mr. Lincoln was not a Christian.\nHundreds of his acquaintances have said the same thing. Not only so, but\nmany of them have testified that he was a Freethinker; that he denied\nthe inspiration of the Scriptures, and that he always insisted that\nChrist was not the son of God, and that the dogma of the atonement was\nand is an absurdity. I will very gladly pay you one thousand dollars for\nyour trouble to show that one statement in your letter is correct--even\none. And now, to quote you, 'Do you not think it were better for the\ntruth of history that you should state the facts about Lincoln, and that\nyou should commend him for what he was rather than for what he was not?'\n\n\"Yours truly,\n\n\"R. G. Ingersoll.\"\n\nLEONARD W. VOLK.\n\nIn the spring of 1860, just before Lincoln was nominated for the\nPresidency, the celebrated sculptor, Volk, made a bust of him. He spent\na week in Chicago and made daily sittings in the artist's studio. Mr.\nVolk relates the following incident, which hardly accords with the tales\ntold about Lincoln's reverence for the Sabbath, and his love for church\nservices: \"He entered my studio on Sunday morning, remarking that a\nfriend at the hotel had invited him to go to church. 'But,' said Mr.\nLincoln, 'I thought I'd rather come and sit for the bust. The fact is,'\nhe continued, 'I don't like to hear cut-and-dried sermons.'\"\n\nJOSEPH JEFFERSON.\n\nIt is difficult for orthodox Christians to reconcile Lincoln's fondness\nfor the play with his reputed piety. That his last act was a visit to\nthe theater is a fact that stands out in ghastly prominence to them. To\nbreak its force they offer various explanations. Some say that he went\nto avoid the office-seekers; others that Mrs. Lincoln compelled him to\ngo; and still others that he was led there by fate. The truth is he was\na frequent attendant at the theater. He went there much oftener than he\nwent to church. The visit of a clergyman annoyed him, but the society of\nactors he enjoyed. He greatly admired the acting of Edwin Booth. He sent\na note to the actor Hackett, praising him for his fine presentation\nof Falstaff. He called John McCulloch to his box one night and\ncongratulated him on his successful rendition of the part he was\nplaying.\n\nIn his autobiography, which recently appeared in the _Century Magazine_,\nJoseph Jefferson gives some interesting reminiscences of Lincoln. In the\nearlier part of his dramatic career he was connected with a theatrical\ncompany, the managers of which, one of whom was his father, built\na theater in Springfield, Ill. A conflict between the preachers and\nplayers ensued. The church was powerful then, and the city joined with\nthe church to suppress the theater. The history of the struggle and its\ntermination, as narrated by Mr. Jefferson, is as follows:\n\n\"In the midst of their rising fortunes a heavy blow fell upon them. A\nreligious revival was in progress at the time, and the fathers of the\nchurch not only launched forth against us in their sermons, but by some\npolitical maneuver got the city to pass a new law enjoining a heavy\nlicense against our 'unholy' calling; I forget the amount, but it\nwas large enough to be prohibitory. Here was a terrible condition of\naffairs--all our available funds invested, the Legislature in session,\nthe town full of people, and by a heavy license denied the privilege of\nopening the new theater!\n\n\"In the midst of their trouble a young lawyer called on the managers. He\nhad heard of the injustice, and offered, if they would place the matter\nin his hands, to have the license taken off, declaring that he only\ndesired to see fair play, and he would accept no fee whether he failed\nor succeeded. The case was brought up before the council. The young man\nbegan his harangue. He handled the subject with tact, skill, and humor,\ntracing the history of the drama from the time when Thespis acted in a\ncart to the stage of to-day. He illustrated his speech with a number of\nanecdotes, and kept the council in a roar of laughter; his good humor\nprevailed, and the exorbitant tax was taken off. This young lawyer was\nvery popular in Springfield, and was honored and beloved by all who knew\nhim, and, after the time of which I write, he held rather an important\nposition in the Government of the United States. He now lies buried\nnear Springfield, under a monument commemorating his greatness and his\nvirtues--and his name was Abraham Lincoln.\"\n\nHON. ELIHU B. WASHBURN.\n\nThe ball-room, too, had its attractions for him. Some years ago Hon. E.\nB. Washburn contributed to the _North American Review_ a lengthy article\non Lincoln. When President Taylor was inaugurated, Lincoln was serving\nhis term in Congress. Alluding to the inaugural ball, Mr. Washburn\nsays: \"A small number of mutual friends including Mr. Lincoln--made up a\nparty to attend the inauguration ball together. It was by far the most\nbrilliant inauguration ball ever given.... We did not take our departure\nuntil three or four o'clock in the morning\" (Reminiscences of Lincoln,\np. 19).\n\nHON, ELIJAH M. HAINES.\n\nIn February, 1859, Governor Bissell gave a reception in Springfield\nwhich Lincoln attended. Hon. E. M. Haines, then a member of the\nLegislature, and one of Lincoln's supporters for the Senate, referring\nto the affair, says:\n\n\"Dancing was going on in the adjacent rooms, and Mr. Lincoln invited my\nwife to join him in the dancing, which she did, and he apparently took\nmuch pleasure in the recreation\" (Every-Day Life of Lincoln, p. 308).\n\nEarly in January, 1863, President and Mrs. Lincoln gave a reception and\nball at the White House. This was a severe shock to the Christians of\nthe country, and provoked a storm of censure from the religious press.\n\nAccording to Ninian Edwards, Lincoln is converted to Christianity about\n1848. In March, 1849, he attends the inauguration ball and \"Won't go\nhome till morning.\" According to Dr. Smith, he is converted in 1858. In\nFebruary, 1859, he attends and participates in a ball at Springfield.\nAccording to Noah Brooks, he is converted in 1862. In January, 1863, he\ngives a ball himself. In every instance he retires from the altar only\nto enter the ball-room.\n\n\n\n\nCHAPTER XII. TESTIMONY OF FRIENDS AND ACQUAINTANCES OF LINCOLN WHO KNEW HIM IN WASHINGTON\n\n     Hon. Geo. W. Julian--Hon. John B. Alley--Hon. Hugh McCulloch--\n     Donn Piatt--Hon. Schuyler Colfax--Hon. Geo. S.\n     Boutwell--Hon. Wm. D. Kelly--E. H. Wood--Dr. J. J. Thompson--\n     Rev. James Shrigley--Hon. John Covode--Jas. E. Murdock--\n     Hon. M. B. Field--Harriet Beecher Stowe--Hon. J. P. Usher--\n     Hon. S. P. Chase--Frederick Douglas--Mr. Defrees--Hon. Wm.\n     H. Seward--Judge Aaron Goodrich--Nicolay and Hay's \"Life of\n     Lincoln\"--Warren Chase--Hon. A. J. Grover--Judge James M.\n     Nelson.\n\nThe evidence of more than fifty witnesses has already been adduced to\nprove that Lincoln was not a Christian in Illinois. Those who at first\nwere so forward to claim that he was, have generally recognized the\nfutility of the claim. They have abandoned it, and content themselves\nwith affirming that he became a Christian after he went to Washington.\nThese claimants, being for the most part rigid sectarians themselves,\nendeavor to convince the world that he not only became a Christian, but\nan orthodox Christian, and a sectarian; that even from a Calvinistic\nstandpoint, he was \"sound not only on the truth of the Christian\nreligion but on all its fundamental doctrines and teachings.\"\n\nThe testimony of Colonel Lamon, Judge Davis, Mrs. Lincoln, and Colonel\nNicolay, not only refutes this claim, but shows that he was not in any\njust sense of the term a Christian when he died. In addition to this\nevidence, I will now present the testimony of a score of other witnesses\nwho knew him in Washington. These witnesses do not all affirm that he\nwas a total disbeliever in Christianity; but a part of them do, while\nthe testimony of the remainder is to the effect that he was not orthodox\nas claimed.\n\nHON. GEORGE W. JULIAN.\n\nOur first witness is George W. Julian, of Indiana. Mr. Julian was for\nmany years a leader in Congress, was the Anti-Slavery candidate for\nVice-President, in 1852, and one of the founders of the party that\nelected Lincoln to the Presidency. He was one of Lincoln's warmest\npersonal friends and intimately acquainted with him at Washington.\nWriting to me from Santa Fe, N. M., under date of March 13,1888, Mr.\nJulian says: \"I knew him [Lincoln] well, and I know that he was not a\nChristian in any old-fashioned orthodox sense of the word, but only a\nreligious Theist. He was, substantially, such a Christian as Jefferson,\nFranklin, Washington, and John Adams; and it is perfectly idle to assert\nthe contrary.\"\n\nHON. JOHN B. ALLEY.\n\nIn 1886, the publishers of the _North American Review_ issued one of\nthe most unique, original, and interesting works on Lincoln that has\nyet appeared--\"Reminiscences of Abraham Lincoln.\" It was edited by Allen\nThorndike Rice, and comprises, in addition to a biographical sketch of\nLincoln's life by the editor, thirty-three articles on Lincoln written\nby as many distinguished men of his day. One of the best articles in\nthis volume is from the pen of one of Boston's merchant princes, John\nB. Alley. Mr. Alley was for eight years a member of Congress from\nMassachusetts, serving in this capacity during all the years that\nLincoln was President. To his ability and integrity as a statesman this\nremarkable yet truthful tribute has been paid: \"No bill he ever reported\nand no measure he ever advocated during his long term of service failed\nto receive the approbation of the House.\" Lincoln recognized his many\nsterling qualities, and throughout the war his relations with the\nPresident were of the most intimate character. Mr. Alley is one of the\nmany who know that Lincoln was not a Christian, and one of the few\nwho have the courage to affirm it. He says: \"In his religious views\nMr. Lincoln was very nearly what we would call a Freethinker. While\nhe reflected a great deal upon religious subjects he communicated his\nthoughts to a very few. He had little faith in the popular religion of\nthe times. He had a broad conception of the goodness and power of an\noverruling Providence, and said to me one day that he felt sure the\nAuthor of our being, whether called God or Nature, it mattered little\nwhich, would deal very mercifully with poor erring humanity in the\nother, and he hoped better, world. He was as free as possible from all\nsectarian thought, feeling, or sentiment. No man was more tolerant\nof the opinions and feelings of others in the direction of religious\nsentiment or had less faith in religious dogmas\" (Reminiscences of\nLincoln, pp. 590, 591).\n\nIn conclusion, Mr. Alley says: \"While Mr. Lincoln was perfectly honest\nand upright and led a blameless life, he was in no sense what might be\nconsidered a religious man\" (Ibid).\n\nHON. HUGH MCCULLOCH.\n\nHon. Hugh McCulloch, a member of Lincoln's Cabinet, his last Secretary\nof the Treasury, writes: \"Grave and sedate in manner, he was full of kind\nand gentle emotion. He was fond of poetry. Shakspere was his delight.\nFew men could read with equal expression the plays of the great\ndramatist. The theater had great attractions for him, but it was comedy,\nnot tragedy, he went to hear. He had great enjoyment of the plays\nthat made him laugh, no matter how absurd and grotesque, and he gave\nexpression to his enjoyment by hearty and noisy applause. He was a man\nof strong religious convictions, but he cared nothing for the dogmas of\nthe churches and had little respect for their creeds\" (Reminiscences of\nLincoln, pp. 412, 413).\n\nDONN PIATT.\n\nThe distinguished lawyer, soldier and journalist, Donn Piatt, who knew\nLincoln in Illinois and who met him often in Washington, writes: \"I soon\ndiscovered that this strange and strangely gifted man, while not at\nall cynical, was a skeptic. His view of human nature was low, but\ngood-natured. I could not call it suspicious, but he believed only what\nhe saw\" (Reminiscences of Lincoln, p. 480).\n\nThose who are disposed to believe that Lincoln's Christian biographers\nhave observed an inflexible adherence to truth in their statements\nconcerning his religious belief would do well to ponder the following\nwords of Mr. Piatt: \"History is, after all, the crystallization of\npopular beliefs. As a pleasant fiction is more acceptable than a naked\nfact, and as the historian shapes his wares, like any other dealer, to\nsuit his customers, one can readily see that our chronicles are only a\nduller sort of fiction than the popular novels so eagerly read; not that\nthey are true, but that they deal in what we long to have--the truth.\nPopular beliefs, in time, come to be superstitions, and create gods and\ndevils. Thus Washington is deified into an impossible man, and Aaron\nBurr has passed into a like impossible monster. Through the same process\nAbraham Lincoln, one of our truly great, has almost gone from human\nknowledge\" (Ibid, p. 478).\n\nHON. SCHUYLER COLFAX.\n\nPrevious to the war no class of persons were louder in their\ndenunciation of Abolitionism than the clergy of the North. When at last\nit became evident that the institution of slavery was doomed, in their\neagerness to be found on the popular side, they were equally loud in\ntheir demands for its immediate extirpation. In September, 1862, a\ndeputation of Chicago clergymen waited upon the President for\nthe purpose of urging him to proclaim the freedom of the slave.\nNotwithstanding he had matured his plans and was ready to issue his\nProclamation, he gave them no intimation of his intention. In connection\nwith their visit, Colfax relates the following: \"One of these ministers\nfelt it his duty to make a more searching appeal to the President's\nconscience. Just as they were retiring, he turned, and said to Mr.\nLincoln, 'What you have said to us, Mr. President, compels me to say\nto you in reply, that it is a message to you from our Divine Master,\nthrough me, commanding you, sir, to open the doors of bondage that the\nslave may go free!' Mr. Lincoln replied, instantly, 'That may be, sir,\nfor I have studied this question, by night and by day, for weeks and for\nmonths, but if it is, as you say, a message from your Divine Master, is\nit not odd that the only channel he could send it by was that roundabout\nroute by that awfully wicked city of Chicago?\" (Reminiscences of\nLincoln, pp. 334, 335).\n\nIn a lecture delivered in Brooklyn, N. T., in 1886, Mr. Colfax stated\nthat Lincoln was not a Christian, in the evangelical sense. To a\ngentleman who visited him at his home in South Bend, Ind., he declared\nthat Lincoln was not a believer in orthodox Christianity. Again at\nAtchison, Kan., he informed Mr. Perkins that Lincoln had never been\nconverted to Christianity, as claimed.\n\nHON. WILLIAM O. KELLEY.\n\nWilliam D. Kelley, for thirty years a member of Congress from\nPennsylvania, relates an incident similar to the one related by Mr.\nColfax. A \"Quaker preacher\" called at the White House to urge the\nPresident to proclaim at once the freedom of the slave. To illustrate\nher argument and emphasize her plea, she cited the history of\nDeborah. \"Having elaborated this Biblical example,\" says Mr. Kelley,\n\"the speaker assumed that the President was, as Deborah had been, the\nappointed minister of the Lord, and proceeded to tell him that it\nwas his duty to follow the example of Deborah, and forthwith abolish\nslavery, and establish freedom throughout the land, as the Lord had\nappointed him to do.\n\n\"'Has the Friend finished?' said the President, as she ceased to speak.\nHaving received an affirmative answer, he said: 'I have neither time\nnor disposition to enter into discussion with the Friend, and end this\noccasion by suggesting for her consideration the question whether, if it\nbe true that the Lord has appointed me to do the work she has indicated,\nit is not probable that he would have communicated knowledge of the fact\nto me as well as to her'\" (Reminiscences of Lincoln, pp. 284, 285).\n\nHON. GEORGE S. BOUTWELL.\n\nA great many pious stories have been circulated in regard to the\nEmancipation Proclamation. We are told that he made a \"solemn vow to\nGod\" that if Lee was defeated at Antietam he would issue the Preliminary\nProclamation. And yet this document contains no recognition of God. He\neven completed the draft of it on what Christians are pleased to regard\nas God's holy day. Mr. Boutwell states that Lincoln once related to\nhim the circumstances attending the promulgation of the instrument. He\nquotes the following as Lincoln's words: \"The truth is just this: When\nLee came over the river, I made a resolution that if McClellan drove him\nback I would send the Proclamation after him. The battle of Antietam was\nfought Wednesday, and until Saturday I could not find out whether we\nhad gained a victory or lost a battle. It was then too late to issue the\nProclamation that day, and the fact is _I fixed it up a little Sunday_,\nand Monday I let them have it\" (Reminiscences of Lincoln, p. 126).\n\nE. H. WOOD.\n\nMr. E. H. Wood, one of Lincoln's old Springfield neighbors, who visited\nhim at Washington during the war, made the following statement to Mr.\nHern-don, in October, 1881:\n\n\"I came from Auburn, N. Y.--knew Seward well--knew Lincoln very\nwell--lived for three years just across the alley from his residence. I\nhad many conversations with him on politics and religion as late as\n1859 and '60. He was a broad religionist--a Liberal. Lincoln told me\nFranklin's story. Franklin and a particular friend made an agreement\nthat when the first one died he would come back and tell how things\nwent. Well, Franklin's friend died, but never came back. 'It is a\ndoubtful question,' said Lincoln, 'whether we get anywhere to get back.'\nLincoln said, 'There is no hell.' He did not say much about heaven. I\nmet him in Washington and saw no change in him.\"\n\nI have given the testimony of two of Lincoln's nearest neighbors in\nSpringfield, Isaac Hawley and E. H. Wood. Mr. Hawley _believes_ that\nLincoln was a Christian; Mr. Wood _knows_ that he was not. Mr. Hawley\nnever heard Lincoln utter a word to support his belief; Mr. Wood\nobtained his knowledge from Lincoln himself. Mr. Hawley's belief is of\nlittle value compared with Mr. Wood's knowledge. Mr. Hawley never heard\nLincoln defend Christianity and probably never heard him oppose it.\nLincoln knew that Mr. Hawley was a Christian--that he had no sympathy\nwith his Freethought views. He did not desire to offend or antagonize\nhim, and hence he refrained from introducing a subject that he knew was\ndistasteful to him. Mr. Wood, on the other hand, was a man of broad and\nLiberal ideas, and Lincoln did not hesitate to express to him his views\nwith freedom.\n\nJ. J. THOMPSON, M.D.\n\nDr. J. J. Thompson, an old resident of Illinois, now in Colorado, in a\nletter, dated March 18, 1888, writes as follows: \"I knew Abraham Lincoln\nfrom my boyhood up to the time of his death. I was in his law office\nmany times and met him several times in Washington. He was a Liberal,\noutspoken, and seemed to feel proud of it.\"\n\n\"This great and good man,\" concludes Dr. Thompson, \"claimed Humanity as\nhis religion.\"\n\nREV. JAMES SHRIGLEY.\n\nRev. Jas. Shrigley, of Philadelphia, who was acquainted with President\nLincoln in Washington, and who received a hospital chaplaincy from him,\nsays: \"President Lincoln was also remarkably tolerant. He was the friend\nof all, and never, to my knowledge, gave the influence of his great\nname to encourage sectarianism in any of its names and forms\" (Lincoln\nMemorial Album, p. 335).\n\nHON. JOHN COVODE.\n\nIn connection with Mr. Shrigley's appointment, the following anecdote\nis related. Mr. Shrigley was not orthodox, and when it became known that\nhis name had been sent to the Senate, a Committee of \"Young Christians\"\nwaited upon the President for the purpose of inducing him to withdraw\nthe nomination. Hon. John Covode, of Pennsylvania, was present during\nthe interview and gave it to the press. It is as follows:\n\n\"'We have called, Mr. President, to confer with you in regard to the\nappointment of Mr. Shrigley, of Philadelphia, as hospital chaplain.'\n\n\"The President responded: 'Oh, yes, gentlemen; I have sent his name to\nthe Senate, and he will no doubt be confirmed at an early day.'\n\n\"One of the young men replied: 'We have not come to ask for the\nappointment, but to solicit you to withdraw the nomination.'\n\n\"'Ah,' said Lincoln, 'that alters the case; but on what ground do you\nask the nomination withdrawn?'\n\n\"The answer was, 'Mr. Shrigley is not sound in his theological\nopinions.'\n\n\"The President inquired: 'On what question is the gentleman unsound?'\n\n\"Response: 'He does not believe in endless punishment; not only so, sir,\nbut he believes that even the rebels themselves will finally be saved.'\n\n\"'Is that so?' inquired the President.\n\n\"The members of the committee both responded, 'Yes,' 'Yes.'\n\n\"'Well, gentlemen, if that be so, and there is any way under heaven\nwhereby the rebels can be saved, then, for God's sake and their sakes,\nlet the man be appointed'\" (L. M. A., pp. 336, 337).\n\nAnd he was appointed.\n\nJAMES E. MURDOCH.\n\nIt is claimed that few public men have made greater use of the Bible\nthan Lincoln. This is true. He was continually quoting Scripture or\nalluding to Scriptural scenes and stories, sometimes to illustrate or\nadorn a serious speech, but more frequently to point or emphasize a\njoke. The venerable actor and elocutionist, James E. Murdoch, who had\nmet Lincoln, both in Springfield and Washington, relates an anecdote of\nhim while at Washington which serves to illustrate this propensity: \"One\nday a detachment of troops was marching along the avenue singing the\nsoul-stirring strain of 'John Brown.' They were walled in on either side\nby throngs of citizens and strangers, whose voices mingled in the roll\nof the mighty war-song. In the midst of this exciting scene, a man had\nclambered into a small tree, on the sidewalk, where he clung, unmindful\nof the jeers of the passing crowd, called forth by the strange antics\nhe was unconsciously exhibiting in his efforts to overcome the swaying\nmotion of the slight stem which bent beneath his weight. Mr. Lincoln's\nattention was attracted for a moment, and he paused in the serious\nconversation in which he was deeply interested and in an abstracted\nmanner, yet with a droll cast of the eye, and a nod of the head in the\ndirection of the man, he repeated, in his dry and peculiar utterance,\nthe following old-fashioned couplet:\n\n     'And Zaccheous he did climb a tree,\n     His Lord and Master for to see.'\"\n\n     (L. M. A., pp. 349, 350).\n\nMr. Murdoch states that in connection with this incident Lincoln was\ncharged \"with turning sacred subjects into ridicule.\" He apologizes\nfor, and attempts to palliate this levity, and affects to believe that\nLincoln was a Christian. But almost daily Lincoln indulged in jokes at\nthe expense of the Bible and Christianity, many of them ten-fold more\nsacrilegious in their character than this trifling incident related\nby Mr. Murdoch. If the scrupulously pious considered this simple jest,\nuttered in the midst of a mixed crowd, irreverent, what would have been\ntheir horror could they have listened to some of his remarks made\nwhen alone with a skeptical boon companion? With Christians and with\nstrangers he was generally guarded in his speech, lest he should give\noffense; but with his unbelieving friends, up to the end of his career,\nhis keenest shafts of wit were not infrequently aimed at the religion\nof his day. This shows that the popular faith had no more sacredness\nfor Lincoln, the President, in Washington, than it had for Lincoln, the\nfarmer's boy, who mocked and mimicked it in Indiana, or Lincoln, the\nlawyer, who scoffed at it and argued against it in Illinois.\n\nHON. MAUNSELL B. FIELD.\n\nMr. Field, who had met nearly all the noted characters of his day,\nboth of Europe and America, in his \"Memories of Many Men,\" has this\nsignificant sentence respecting Lincoln:\n\n\"Mr. Lincoln was entirely deficient in what the phrenologists call\n_reverence [veneration]_.\"\n\nThis made it easy for him to emancipate himself from the slavery of\npriestcraft and become and remain a Freethinker. Professor Beall, one of\nthe ablest of living phrenological writers, says:\n\n\"No man can 'enjoy religion,' as the Methodists express it, unless he\nhas well developed veneration and wonder\" (The Brain and the Bible,\np. 109). \"All those who rebel against any form of government which\nin childhood they were taught to revere, must of necessity do so in\nopposition to the faculty of veneration. Thus it is obvious that the\nless one possesses of the conservative restraining faculties, the\nmore easily he becomes a rebel or an Infidel to that which his\nreason condemns. On the other hand, the profoundly conscientious and\nreverential man, who sincerely regards unbelief as a sin, of course\ninstinctively antagonizes every skeptical thought, and is thus likely to\nremain a slave to the religion learned at his mother's knee\" (Ibid, p.\n228).\n\nMr. Field also relates the following anecdote of Lincoln: \"I was once\nin Mr. Lincoln's company when a sectarian controversy arose. He himself\nlooked very grave, and made no observation until all the others had\nfinished what they had to say. Then with a twinkle of the eye he\nremarked that he preferred the Episcopalians to every other sect,\nbecause they are equally indifferent to a man's religion and his\npolitics.\"\n\nHARRIET BEECHER STOWE.\n\nThe noted author of \"Uncle Tom's Cabin\" had several interviews with the\nPresident. She wrote an article on him which has been cited in proof\nof his \"deeply religious nature.\" But if her words prove anything, they\nprove that he was not an evangelical Christian. They are as follows:\n\n\"But Almighty God has granted to him that clearness of vision which he\ngives to the true-hearted, and enabled him to set his honest foot in\nthat promised land of freedom which is to be the patrimony of all men,\nblack and white; and from henceforth nations shall rise up and call him\nblessed. _We believe he has never made any religions profession_, but we\nsee evidence that in passing through this dreadful national crisis,\nhe has been forced by the very anguish of the struggle to look upward,\nwhere any rational creature must look for support. No man in this agony\nhas suffered more and deeper, albeit with a dry, weary, patient pain,\nthat seemed to some like insensibility. 'Whichever way it ends,' he said\nto the writer, 'I have the impression that I shan't last long after it's\nover'\" (Every-Day Life of Lincoln, pp. 575, 576).\n\nMrs. Stowe was herself an orthodox Christian communicant, but her\nstore of good sense was too great to allow her to inflict her religious\nnotions upon the unbelieving President, and, as a consequence, she did\nnot see him rush out of the room with a Bible under his arm to--I was\ngoing to say--pray God to deliver him from an intolerable nuisance.\n\nThat the mighty burden which pressed upon Lincoln made him a sadder\nand more serious man at Washington than he had been before is true.\nChristians are always mistaking sadness for penitence and seriousness\nfor piety, and so they claim that he experienced a change of heart.\n\nHON. JOHN P. USHER.\n\nChristians and Theists are wont to speak of Lincoln's constant and firm\nreliance upon God. But it is a little remarkable that in the preparation\nof his greatest work he did not rely upon God. In the supreme moments\nof his life he forgot God. Dr. Barrows says: \"When he wrote his immortal\nProclamation, he invoked upon it... 'the gracious favor of Almighty\nGod.'\"\n\nWhen he wrote his immortal Proclamation he had no thought of God. Judge\nUsher, a member of his Cabinet, tells us how God came to be invoked: \"In\nthe preparation of the final Proclamation of Emancipation, of January 1,\n1863, Mr. Lincoln manifested great solicitude. He had his original draft\nprinted and furnished each member of his Cabinet with a copy, with the\nrequest that each should examine, criticise, and suggest any amendments\nthat occurred to them. At the next meeting of the Cabinet Mr. Chase\nsaid: 'This paper is of the utmost importance--greater than any state\npaper ever made by this Government. A paper of so much importance, and\ninvolving the liberties of so many people, ought, I think, to make some\nreference to Deity. I do not observe anything of the kind in it.' Mr.\nLincoln said: 'No; I overlooked it. Some reference to Deity must be\ninserted. Mr. Chase, won't you make a draft of what you think ought\nto be inserted?' Mr. Chase promised to do so, and at the next meeting\npresented the following: 'And upon this Act, sincerely believed to be an\nact of justice warranted by the Constitution upon military necessity,\nI invoke the considerate judgment of mankind and the gracious favor of\nAlmighty God'\" (Reminiscences of Lincoln, pp. 91, 92).\n\nHON. SALMON P. CHASE.\n\nIn the New York _Tribune_ of Feb. 22d, 1893, appeared an article on \"How\nthe Emancipation Proclamation was made,\" written by Mrs. Janet Chase\nHoyt, daughter of Salmon P. Chase. In this article Mrs. Hoyt gives\nthe following extract from a letter written to her by her father in\n1867: \"Looking over old papers, I found many of my memoranda, etc.,\nof the war, and among them my draft of a proclamation of emancipation\nsubmitted to Mr. Lincoln the day before his own was issued. He asked\nall of us for suggestions in regard to its form and I submitted mine in\nwriting, and among other sentences the close as it now stands, which he\nadopted from my draft with a modification. It may be interesting to you\nto see precisely what I said, and I copy it. You must remember that in\nthe original draft there was no reference whatever to Divine or human\nsanction of the act. What I said was this at the conclusion of my\nletter: 'Finally, I respectfully suggest that on an occasion of such\ninterest there can be no imputation of affectation against a solemn\nrecognition of responsibility before men and before God, and that\nsome such close as this will be proper: \"And upon this act, sincerely\nbelieved to be an act of justice warranted by the Constitution (and\nof duty demanded by the circumstances of the country), I invoke the\nconsiderate judgment of mankind and the gracious favor of Almighty\nGod.'\" Mr. Lincoln adopted this close, substituting only for the words\ninclosed in parentheses these words: 'upon military necessity,' which I\nthink was not an improvement.'\"\n\nMR. DEFREES.\n\nDuring his Presidency the clergy petitioned him to recommend in his\nmessage to Congress an amendment to the Constitution recognizing the\nexistence of God. In preparing his message it seems that he inserted\nthe request. Referring to this, Mr. Defrees, Superintendent of Public\nPrinting during Lincoln's administration, says: \"When I assisted him in\nreading the proof he struck it out, remarking that he had not made up\nhis mind as to its propriety\" (_Westminster Review_, Sept. 1891).\n\nHON. WILLIAM H. SEWARD.\n\nIn his \"Travels Around the World,\" Seward records one of Lincoln's\nsarcastic hits at the doctrine of endless punishment. Speaking of\nEngland's jealousy of the United States in certain matters, Seward says:\n\n\"That hesitation and refusal recall President Lincoln's story of the\nintrusion of the Universalists into the town of Springfield. The several\northodox churches agreed that their pastors should preach down the\nheresy. One of them began his discourse with these emphatic words: 'My\nBrethren, there is a dangerous doctrine creeping in among us. There are\nthose who are teaching that all men will be saved; but my dear brethren,\n_we_ hope for better things'\" (Travels Around the World, p. 513).\n\nJUDGE AARON GOODRICH.\n\nJudge Goodrich, of Minnesota, Lincoln's minister to Belgium, who was one\nof the most accomplished scholars in the West, and an author of note,\nand who was on terms of close intimacy with Lincoln, both before and\nafter he became President, says:\n\n\"He [Lincoln] believed in a God, i.e., Nature; but he did not believe in\nthe Christ, nor did he ever affiliate with any church.\"\n\nFREDERICK DOUGLAS.\n\nAbraham Lincoln believed in a Supreme Being, but he did not believe in\nthe God of Christians. The God of Christians was to him the most hideous\nmonster that the imagination of man had ever conceived. There were\ntwo doctrines taught in connection with this deity which he especially\nabhorred--the doctrine of endless punishment, and the doctrine\nof vicarious atonement. That the innocent should suffer for the\nguilty--that God should permit his sinless son to be put to a cruel\ndeath to atone for the sins of wicked men--was to him an act of the\nmost infamous injustice. His whole nature rebelled against the idea.\nFrederick Douglas narrates an incident which, while it has no direct\nreference to this theological doctrine, yet tends to disclose his\nabhorrence of the idea. Mr. Douglas was engaged in recruiting colored\ntroops and visited the President for the purpose of securing from him\na pledge that colored soldiers would be allowed the same privileges\naccorded white soldiers. As the Confederate Government had declared\nthat they would be treated as insurgents, he also urged upon him the\nnecessity of retaliating, if colored prisoners were put to death. But to\nthe latter proposition Lincoln would not listen. Mr. Douglas says:\n\n\"I shall never forget the benignant expression of his face, the tearful\nlook of his eye and the quiver of his voice, when he deprecated a resort\nto retaliatory measures. He said he could not take men out and kill them\nin cold blood for what was done by others. If he could get hold of the\npersons who were guilty of killing the colored prisoners in cold blood,\nthe case would be different, but _he could not kill the innocent for the\nguilty_\" (Reminiscences of Lincoln, pp. 188, 189).\n\nNICOLAY AND HAY'S \"LIFE OF LINCOLN.\"\n\nOf the numerous biographies of Lincoln that have been published,\nthe authors of three, above all others, were specially qualified\nand possessed the necessary materials for a reliable biography of\nhim--Herndon, Lamon, and Nicolay and Hay.\n\nAs Colonel Lamon's \"Life\" covers but a part of Lincoln's career, and\nas Mr. Herndon's \"Life\" deals more with his private life than with his\npublic history, the biography of Lincoln that is likely to be\naccepted as the standard authority, is the work written by his private\nsecretaries, Col. John G. Nicolay and Col. John Hay, which originally\nappeared in the _Century Magazine_. In the chapter on \"Lincoln and the\nChurches,\" the religious phase of Lincoln's character is presented. In\ndealing with this question the authors have carefully avoided the\nrock upon which Lamon's \"Life\" was wrecked, and at the same time have\nrefrained from repeating the misrepresentations of Holland and Arnold.\nThey do not offend the church by openly declaring that Lincoln was\nan Infidel; neither do they outrage truth by asserting that he was\na Christian. They affirm that during the latter years of his life\nhe recognized a \"superior power,\" but they do not intimate that he\nrecognized Jesus Christ as this power, or any part of it, nor that\nhe accepted the Bible as a special revelation of this power. In the\nfollowing passage they impliedly deny both his alleged Atheism and his\nalleged orthodoxy: \"We have no purpose of attempting to formulate his\ncreed; we question if he himself ever did so. There have been swift\nwitnesses who, judging from expressions uttered in his callow youth,\nhave called him an Atheist, and others who, with the most laudable\nintentions, have remembered improbable conversations which they bring\nforward to prove at once his orthodoxy and their own intimacy with him.\"\n\nAs it is not claimed that Lincoln was an Atheist, especially during the\nlast years of his life, the above can very properly be brought forward\nin support of the negative of this question. In the last clause it\nis intended by the authors to administer a sarcastic rebuke to\nsuch witnesses as Brooks, Willets and Vinton, as well as deny the\ntruthfulness of their statements.\n\nIn regard to Lincoln's youth, the following from Nicolay and Hay's work\ncorroborates Lamon's statements and refutes those of Holland: \"We are\nmaking no claim of early saintship for him. He was merely a good boy,\nwith sufficient wickedness to prove his humanity.... It is also reported\nthat he sometimes impeded the celerity of harvest operations by making\nburlesque speeches, or worse than that, comic sermons, from the top\nof some tempting stump, to the delight of the hired hands and the\nexasperation of the farmer.\"\n\nHON. WARREN CHASE.\n\nIn 1888, I received a brief letter from Warren Chase pertaining to\nLincoln's religious belief. Mr. Chase was acquainted with Lincoln in\nWashington. His letter has been mislaid, but I recall the principal\npoints in it, which are as follows: 1. Lincoln was not a believer\nin Christianity; 2. He was much interested in the phenomena of\nSpiritualism.\n\nHON. A. J. GROVER.\n\nA. J. Grover, a life-long reformer, an old-time Abolitionist, an able\nadvocate of human liberty, and a personal friend and admirer of Lincoln,\nin a letter written April 13, 1888, sends me the following as his\ntestimony:\n\n\"Mr. Lincoln was not a religious man in the church sense. He was an\nAgnostic. He did not believe in the Bible as the infallible word of God.\nHe believed that Nature is God's word, given to all men in a universal\nlanguage which is equally accessible to all, if all are equally\nintelligent. That this great lesson, God's word in his works, is\ninfinite, and that men have only learned a very little of it, and have\nyet the most to learn. That the religions of all ages and peoples are\nonly very feeble and imperfect attempts to solve the great problems\ninvolved in nature and her laws. Mr. Lincoln heartily disliked the\nnarrow and silly pretensions of the church and priesthood who now\nfalsely claim him, as they do Washington, Franklin and others.\n\n\"I knew Mr. Lincoln from the Douglas campaign in Illinois in 1858 until\nhis death, and I never heard him on any occasion use a single pious\nexpression in the sense of the church--not a word that indicated that\nhe believed in the church theology. But I have heard him use many\nexpressions that indicated that he did not know much, or pretend to know\nmuch, and had no settled convictions concerning the great questions that\ntheology deals so flippantly with, and pretends to know all about. And\nI know to my own knowledge that the claim the church now sets up that he\nwas a Christian is false--as false as it is in regard to Washington.\"\n\nWriting to me again under date of Jan. 12, 1889, Mr. Grover says: \"I knew\nMr. Lincoln in Illinois and in Washington. I was in the War office,\nfor a time, in a department which had charge of the President's\nbooks, so-called. I met him in passing between the White House and the\nbuildings then occupied by the War Department, almost every day. I\noften had to go to Mr. Stanton's office, and have often seen Mr. Lincoln\nthere. I frequently had to go to the White House to see him. It was\nknown to all of his acquaintances that he was a Liberal or nationalist.\"\n\nJUDGE JAMES M. NELSON.\n\nThe last, and in some respects the most important, of our Washington\nwitnesses is Judge James M. Nelson. Judge Nelson for many years has been\na resident of New York, but he formerly lived in Kentucky and Illinois,\nLincoln's native and adopted states. He is a son of Thomas Pope Nelson,\na distinguished member of Congress from Kentucky, and the first United\nStates Minister to Turkey. His great grandfather was Thomas Nelson, Jr.,\na signer of the Declaration of Independence from Virginia. He was long\nand intimately acquainted with Lincoln both in Illinois and Washington.\nAbout the close of 1886, or early in 1887, Judge Nelson published his\n\"Reminiscences of Abraham Lincoln\" in the Louisville, Ky., _Times_.\nIn reference to Lincoln's religious opinions he says: \"In religion, Mr.\nLincoln was about of the same belief as Bob Ingersoll, and there is no\naccount of his ever having changed. He went to church a few times with\nhis family while he was President, but so far as I have been able to\nfind out he remained an unbeliever.\" \"Mr. Lincoln in his younger days\nwrote a book,\" says Judge Nelson, \"in which he endeavored to prove the\nfallacy of the plan of salvation and the divinity of Christ.\"\n\nI have yet another passage from Judge Nelson's \"Reminiscences\" to\npresent, a passage which, more than anything else in this volume,\nperhaps, is calculated to provoke the wrath of Christian claimants.\nTo lend an air of plausibility to their claims these claimants are\ncontinually citing expressions of a seemingly semi-pious character\noccasionally to be met with in his speeches and state papers. These\nexpressions, in a measure accounted for by Mr. Herndon, Colonel Lamon,\nand others, are still further explained by a revelation from his own\nlips. Judge Nelson says: \"I asked him once about his fervent Thanksgiving\nMessage and twitted him with being an unbeliever in what was published.\n'Oh,' said he, 'that is some of Seward's nonsense, and it pleases the\nfools.'\"\n\n\n\n\nCHAPTER XIII. OTHER TESTIMONY AND OPINIONS\n\n     New York World--Boston Globe--Chicago Herald--Manford's\n     Magazine--Herald and Review--Chambers's Encyclopedia--\n     Encyclopedia Britannica--People's Library of Information--\n     The World's Sages--Every-Day Life of Lincoln--Hon. Jesse W.\n     Weik--Chas. W. French--Cyrus O. Poole--A Citizen of\n     Springfield--Henry Walker--Win. Bissett--Frederick Heath--\n     Rev. Edward Eggleston--Rev. Robert Collyer--Allen Thorndike\n     Rice--Robert C. Adams--Theodore Stanton-Geo. M. McCrie--Gen.\n     M. M. Trumbull--Rev. David Swing, D.D.--Rev. J. Lloyd Jones--\n     Rev. John W. Chadwick.\n\nThe matter selected for this chapter is of a miscellaneous nature,\nconsisting of the statements of those who, for the most part, are not\nknown to have been personally acquainted with Lincoln. It embraces the\nopinions of journalists, encyclopedists, biographers, and others. If\ntheir words cannot be accepted as the testimony of competent witnesses,\nthey may at least be regarded as the verdict of honest jurors.\n\nNEW YORK WORLD.\n\nIn the New York _World_, fifteen years ago, appeared the\nfollowing: \"While it may fairly be said that Mr. Lincoln entertained many\nChristian sentiments, it cannot be said that he was himself a Christian\nin faith or practice. He was no disciple of Jesus of Nazareth. He did\nnot believe in his divinity and was not a member of his church. He\nwas at first a writing Infidel of the school of Paine and Volney, and\nafterward a talking Infidel of the school of Parker and Channing.\"\n\nAlluding to the friendly attitude he assumed toward the church and\nChristianity during the war, this article concludes:\n\n\"If the churches had grown cold--if the Christians had taken a stand\naloof--that instant the Union would have perished; Mr. Lincoln regulated\nhis religious manifestations accordingly. He declared frequently that he\nwould do _anything_ to save the Union, and among the many things he did\nwas the partial concealment of his individual religious opinions.\nIs this a blot upon his fame? Or shall we all agree that it was a\nconscientious and patriotic sacrifice?\"\n\nBOSTON GLOBE.\n\nAs evidence of Lincoln's piety, we are referred to a picture where\nLincoln, with his son Tad, is supposed to be reverentially poring over\nthe pages of the Bible. The history of this picture, however, has often\nbeen explained, and its apparently religious character shown to be quite\nsecular. The Boston _Globe_, in a recent issue, says: \"The pretty little\nstory about the picture of President Lincoln and his son Tad reading\nthe Bible is now corrected for the one-hundredth time. The Bible was\nPhotographer Brady's picture album, which the President was examining\nwith his son while some ladies stood by. The artist begged the President\nto remain quiet and the picture was taken. The truth is better than\nfiction, even if its recital conflicts with a pleasing theory.\"\n\nCHICAGO HERALD.\n\nDuring February, 1892, the Chicago _Herald_ published an editorial\non Lincoln's religion. Being one of the latest contributions to this\nsubject, and appearing in one of the principal journals of Lincoln's own\nstate, it is of especial importance. It is a candid statement of what\nnearly every journalist of Illinois knows or believes to be the facts.\nFrom it I quote as follows: \"He was without faith in the Bible or its\nteachings. On this point the testimony is so overwhelming that there\nis no basis for doubt. In his early life Lincoln exhibited a powerful\ntendency to aggressive Infidelity. But when he grew to be a politician\nhe became secretive and non-committal in his religious belief. He was\nshrewd enough to realize the necessity of reticence with the convictions\nhe possessed if he hoped to succeed in politics.\n\n\"It is matter of history that in 1834, at New Salem, Ill., Lincoln read\nand circulated Volney's 'Ruins' and Paine's 'Age of Reason,' giving to\nboth books the sincere recommendation of his unqualified approval.\nAbout that time or a little later he wrote an extensive argument against\nChristianity, intending to publish it. In this argument he contended\nthat the Bible was not inspired and that Jesus Christ was not the son of\nGod. He read this compilation of his views to numerous friends, and\non one occasion when so engaged his friend and employer, Samuel Hill,\nsnatched the manuscript from the author's hands and threw it into the\nstove, where it was quickly consumed. A Springfield friend said of him\nin 1838, 'Lincoln was enthusiastic in his Infidelity.' John T. Stuart,\nwho was his first law partner, declares: 'Lincoln was an avowed and open\nInfidel. He went further against Christian belief than any man I ever\nheard. He always denied that Jesus was the Christ of God.' David Davis\nstated that 'Lincoln had absolutely no faith in the Christian sense\nof the term.'\n\n\"These authorities ought to be conclusive, but there is further\ntestimony. This latter is important as explanatory of Lincoln's frequent\nallusions in his Presidential messages and proclamations to the Supreme\nBeing. To the simplicity of his nature there was added a poetic\ntemperament. He was fond of effective imagery, and his references to the\nDeity are due to the instinct of the poet. After his death Mrs. Lincoln\nsaid: 'Mr. Lincoln had no faith and no hope in the usual acceptation of\nthose words. He never joined a church.' She denominates what has been\nmistaken for his expressions of religious sentiment as 'a kind of poetry\nin his nature,' adding 'he was never a Christian.' Herndon, who was his\nlatest law partner and biographer, is even more explicit. He says: 'No\nman had a stronger or firmer faith in Providence--God--than Mr. Lincoln,\nbut the continued use by him late in life of the word God must not be\ninterpreted to mean that he believed in a personal God. In 1854 he asked\nme to erase the word 'God' from a speech which I had written and read to\nhim for criticism, because my language indicated a personal God, whereas\nhe insisted no such personality ever existed.' So it must be accepted as\nfinal by every reasonable mind that in religion Mr. Lincoln was a\nskeptic. But above all things he was not a hypocrite or pretender. He\nwas a plain man, rugged and earnest, and he pretended to be nothing\nmore. He believed in humanity, and he was incapable of Phariseeism. He\nhad great respect for the feelings and convictions of others, but he was\nnot a sniveler. He was honest and he was sincere, and taking him simply\nfor what he was, we are not likely soon to see his like again.\"\n\nMANFORD'S MAGAZINE.\n\nThere are two Christian publications that have had the fairness to admit\nthe truth respecting Lincoln's belief. _Manford's Magazine_, a religious\nperiodical published in Chicago, in its issue for January, 1869,\ncontained the following: \"That Mr. Lincoln was a believer in the\nChristian religion, as understood by the so-called orthodox sects of the\nday, I am compelled most emphatically to deny; that is, if I put\nfaith in the statements of his most intimate friends in this city\n[Springfield]. All of them with whom I have conversed on this subject,\nagree in indorsing the statements of Mr. Herndon. Indeed, many of them\nunreservedly call him an Infidel.\" \"The evidence on this subject is\nsufficient, the writer says, to place the name of Lincoln by the side\nof Franklin, Washington, Jefferson, and [Ethan] Allen, of Revolutionary\nnotoriety, as Rationalists; besides being in company with D'Alembert,\nthe great mathematician, Diderot, the geometrician, poet, and\nmetaphysician; also with Voltaire, Hume, Gibbon, and Darwin.\"\n\nReferring to the Infidel book, written by Lincoln, the writer says: \"This\nwork was subsequently thrown in Mr. Lincoln's face while he was stumping\nthis district for Congress against the celebrated Methodist preacher,\nRev. Peter Cartwright. But Mr. Lincoln never publicly or privately\ndenied its authorship, or the sentiments expressed therein. Nor was he\nknown to change his religious views any, to the latest period of his\nlife.\"\n\nThe article concludes with these truthful words:\n\n\"Mr. Lincoln was too good a man to be a Pharisee; too great a man to be\na sectarian; and too charitable a man to be a bigot.\"\n\nHERALD AND REVIEW.\n\nThis work, in an abridged form, originally appeared in the _Truth\nSeeker_ in 1889 and 1890. After its appearance, the Adventist _Herald\nand Review_, one of the fairest and most ably conducted religious\njournals in this country, said:\n\n\"The _Truth Seeker_ has just concluded the publication of a series of\nfifteen contributed articles designed to prove that Abraham Lincoln,\ninstead of being a Christian, as has been most strongly claimed by some,\nwas a Freethinker. The testimony seems conclusive.... The majority of\nthe great men of the world have always rejected Christ, and, according\nto the Scriptures, they always will; and the efforts of Christians to\nmake it appear that certain great men who never professed Christianity\nwere in reality Christians, is simply saying that Christianity cannot\nstand on its merits, but must have the support of great names to entitle\nit to favorable consideration.\"\n\nCHAMBERS'S ENCYCLOPEDIA.\n\nAlden's American Edition of \"Chambers's Encyclopedia,\" one of the most\npopular as well as one of the most reliable of encyclopedias, says: \"He\n[Lincoln] was never a member of a church; he is believed to have had\nphilosophical doubts of the divinity of Christ, and of the inspiration\nof the Scriptures, as these are commonly stated in the system of\ndoctrines called evangelical. In early life he read Volney and Paine,\nand wrote an essay in which he agreed with their conclusions. Of modern\nthinkers he was thought to agree nearest with Theodore Parker\" (Art.\nLincoln, Abraham).\n\nENCYCLOPEDIA BRITANNICA.\n\nBy whom the article on Lincoln in \"Chambers's Encyclopedia\" was written,\nwhether by one of Lincoln's personal friends, or by a stranger, I\nknow not. The article in the \"Britannica\" was written by his private\nsecretary, Colonel Nicolay. In this article his religion is briefly\nsummed up in the following words: \"His [Lincoln's] nature was deeply\nreligious, but he belonged to no denomination; he had faith in the\neternal justice and boundless mercy of Providence; and made the Golden\nRule of Christ his practical creed\" (Am. Ed., vol. xiv, p. 669).\n\nThis statement at first glance presents a Christian appearance, and the\nreader is liable to infer that the writer aims to state that Lincoln was\na Christian. But he does not. He aims to state in the least offensive\nmanner possible that he was not--that he was simply a Deist. A person\nmay have a \"deeply religious\" nature, and not be a Christian. He may\nhave \"faith in the eternal justice and boundless mercy of Providence,\"\nand yet have no faith whatever in Christianity. He may make \"the Golden\nRule of Christ [or Confucius] his practical creed,\" and at the same time\nwholly reject the dogma of Christ's divinity. The above statement is\nsubstantially true as applied to Lincoln, and it would be equally true\nif applied to that prince of Infidels, Thomas Paine. His nature was\ndeeply religious; he had faith in the justice and mercy of Providence;\nand he, too, made the Golden Rule his practical creed.\n\nPEOPLE'S LIBRARY OF INFORMATION.\n\nMrs. Lincoln was nominally a Presbyterian, and frequently, though not\nregularly, attended the Rev. Dr. Gurley's church in Washington. Lincoln\nusually accompanied her, not because he derived any pleasure or benefit\nfrom the services, but because he believed it to be a duty he owed to\nhis wife who, in turn, generally accompanied him when he went to his\nchurch, the theater. \"The People's Library of Information\" contains the\nfollowing relative to his church attendance:\n\n\"Lincoln attended service once a day. He seemed always to be in\nagony while in church.... His pastor, Dr. Gurley, had the 'gift\nof continuance,' and the President writhed and squirmed and gave\nunmistakable evidence of the torture he endured.\"\n\nTHE WORLD'S SAGES.\n\nIn \"The World's Sages,\" Mr. Bennett writes as follows concerning\nLincoln's belief: \"Upon the subject of religious belief there is some\ndiversity of claims. All his friends and acquaintances readily admit\nthat in early manhood and middle age he was an unbeliever, or a Deist.\nIn fact, he wrote a book or pamphlet vindicating this view. His most\nintimate friends that knew him best, claim that his opinions underwent\nno change in this respect; while a certain number of Christians have,\nsince his death, undertaken to make out that he had become a convert\nto Christianity\" (World's Sages, p. 773). \"When the contradictory\ncharacter of the evidence is taken into consideration, together with the\nfact that his nearest and most intimate friends would be most likely\nthe ones to know of Mr. Lincoln's change, had any such taken place, the\nincredibility of the asserted change is easily appreciated\" (Ibid,\np-774).\n\nTHE EVERY-DAY LIFE OF LINCOLN.\n\nIn the Emancipation Proclamation appears the following paragraph,\nwhich contains the only allusion to Deity to be found in this immortal\ndocument: \"And upon this act, sincerely believed to be an act of justice,\nwarranted by the Constitution, upon military necessity, I invoke the\nconsiderate judgment of mankind and the gracious favor of Almighty God.\"\n\nThe appearance of the above paragraph in the Proclamation is thus\naccounted for in Francis F. Brown's \"Every-Day Life of Lincoln,\" and\nagrees with Judge Usher's and Chief Justice Chase's account of it:\n\n\"It is stated that Mr. Lincoln gave the most earnest study to the\ncomposition of the Emancipation Proclamation. He realized, as he\nafterward said, that the Proclamation was the central act of his\nadministration, and the great event of the Nineteenth Century. When the\ndocument was completed, a printed copy of it was placed in the hands of\neach member of the Cabinet, and criticisms and suggestions were invited.\nMr. Chase remarked: 'This paper is of the utmost importance, greater\nthan any state paper ever made by this Government. A paper of so much\nimportance, and involving the liberties of so many people, ought, I\nthink, to make some reference to Deity. I do not observe anything of the\nkind in it\" (Every-Day Life of Lincoln, pp. 549,550).\n\nThe amendment suggested was allowed by the President, and Mr. Chase\nrequested to supply the words he desired to be inserted. The paragraph\nquoted was accordingly prepared by him and included in the Proclamation.\nThis fact is also admitted by Holland in his \"Life of Lincoln\" (p. 401).\n\nHON. JESSE W. WEIK.\n\nJudge Weik, of Greencastle, Ind., who was associated with Mr. Herndon\nin the preparation of his \"Life of Lincoln,\" in a lecture on \"Lincoln's\nBoyhood and Early Manhood,\" delivered in Plymouth Church, Indianapolis,\nFeb. 4, 1891. said:\n\n\"As a young man he sat back of the country store stove and said\nthe Bible was not inspired, and Christ was not the Son of God\"\n(Indianapolis News, Feb. 5, '91).\n\nCHARLES WALLACE FRENCH.\n\nOne of the last biographies of Lincoln that has appeared is \"Abraham\nLincoln The Liberator,\" written by Charles W. French. After citing with\napproval some of Mr. Herndon's statements regarding Lincoln's belief,\nMr. French says:\n\n\"The world was his [Lincoln's] church. His sermons were preached in\nkindly words and merciful deeds\" (p. 91).\n\nCYRUS O. POOLE.\n\nI quote next from a monograph on \"The Religious Convictions of Abraham\nLincoln,\" written by Cyrus O. Poole. Referring to Arnold's and Holland's\nbiographies of Lincoln, Mr. Poole says: \"Most sectarians now think,\nwrite, and act as if they had a copyright to apply 'Christian' to\neverything good and God-like about this President; yet no one presumed\nto call him a Christian until after his death. It may be a soul-saving\nprocess like the ancient one of Pope Gregory in the sixth century. It\nis related that one day he was meditating on an anecdote of the Pagan\nEmperor Tragan's having turned back, when at the head of his legions on\nhis way to battle, to render justice to a poor widow who flung herself\nat his horse's feet. It seemed to Gregory that the soul of a prince so\ngood could not be forever lost, Pagan though he was; and he prayed\nfor him, till a voice declared Tragan to have been saved through his\nintercession. And thus, through the prayer of a Christian Pope, a pagan\nof the first, was materialized into a Christian in the sixth century,\nand was, of course, transferred from hell to heaven. Now behold how a\nmodern politician [Arnold] can play theologian in Christianizing Abraham\nLincoln.\n\n\"There is now hope for Benjamin Franklin, John Adams, and Thomas\nJefferson, as well as the chieftains, Red Jacket, Tecumseh, and Black\nHawk.\"\n\nRespecting Lincoln's message to his dying father, Mr. Poole, himself\na firm believer in the doctrine of immortality, says: \"This prophetic\naffirmation of a continued existence, is the only written evidence of\nhis views on this momentous question that can be found.\"\n\nIn addition to the above, I cull from the same work the following brief\nextracts:\n\n\"He lived in a remarkably formative and progressive period, and was\nin all matters fully abreast with his time. As a truthful thinker, he\ngreatly excelled any of the statesmen of his day.\"\n\n\"Lincoln, like Socrates, was a man so natural, so thoughtful, rational,\nand sagacious, that he clearly saw that the popular traditional theology\nof his day and age was not religion.\"\n\nA CITIZEN OF SPRINGFIELD.\n\nA gentleman residing in Springfield, Ill., who was intimately acquainted\nwith Lincoln from the time he located in that city up to the time he\nremoved to Washington, a period of nearly twenty-five years, in a letter\ndated Aug. 20, 1887, writes as follows: \"I will say in regard to Mr.\nLincoln's religious views that he was not orthodox in his belief, unless\nhe changed after he left Springfield. He was heterodox--did not believe\nin the divinity of Christ--in short, was a Freethinker. Now I do not\nwant to be brought into public notice in this matter.\"\n\nIn deference to this writer's request his name is omitted, and this\nomission destroys, to a great extent, the value of his testimony. It\nis inserted not because it adds any particular weight to the evidence\nalready adduced, but as a specimen of a very large amount of evidence\nof the same character that must be withheld simply because the persons\nwriting or interviewed shrink from publicity. A chapter, yes, a volume,\nof this anonymous testimony might be given. At least a hundred personal\nfriends of Lincoln, living in and about Springfield, privately and\nconfidentially assert that he was an Infidel, but will not permit their\nnames to be used. Twenty years ago a majority of them would not have\nobjected to their statements being published: but the relentless war\nwaged by the church against those who have publicly certified to the\nfacts has sealed their lips.\n\nHENRY WALKER.\n\nI now present to the reader another citizen of Springfield, one who is\nnot afraid to publicly express an honest opinion. Mr. Henry Walker, who\nhas resided in that city for many years, writes as follows concerning\nLincoln's religious belief: \"After inquiring of those who were intimate\nand familiar with him, I arrive at the conclusion that he was a Deist.\"\n\"There is a rumor current here that he once wrote an anti-Christian\npamphlet, but his friends persuaded him not to publish it.\"\n\nMr. Walker was not personally acquainted with Lincoln. His conclusion\nis simply based upon the information obtained from those who were\nacquainted with him. His statement, like the preceding one, is\nintroduced not so much because of any especial value attaching to it as\nmere testimony, but because it fairly represents the common sentiment of\nthose who have investigated this subject, and particularly those who\nare on familiar terms with Lincoln's old associates in Illinois. The\nknowledge of our anonymous witness was shared by Dr. Smith, Mr. Arnold,\nand Mr. Edwards; the opinion expressed by Mr. Walker was the opinion\nprivately entertained by Dr. Holland, it is the opinion privately\nentertained by Mr. Bateman, yes, and unquestionably the opinion\nprivately entertained by Mr. Reed himself.\n\nWILLIAM BISSETT.\n\nAn article on Lincoln's religion written by Mr. Wm. Bissett, of Santa\nAna, Cal., and recently published in the _Truth Seeker_, contains\nsome evidence that deserves to be recorded. Mr. Bissett narrates the\nfollowing: \"In the Spring of 1859 we moved into Livingston county, Mo.,\nnear Chillicothe. We at once became acquainted with a man by the name\nof William Jeeter. Mr. Jeeter was a native of Kentucky, and if I mistake\nnot, was born and raised in the same part of the country that Mr.\nLincoln was but about that I am not sure. Mr. Jeeter told me that\nLincoln and himself settled in Illinois when they were young men, and\nboarded together for a number of years. He says he knew every act of\nLincoln's life up to the time he (Jeeter) left Illinois, a few years\nbefore Mr. Lincoln's nomination for the Presidency. I was helping Jeeter\nbuild a house for himself when we received the news of Mr. Lincoln's\nnomination; that is why we came to speak so particularly about him.\n\n\"Mr. Jeeter told me that Mr. Lincoln was not a believer in the Christian\nreligion; that is, he did not believe the Bible was an inspired work,\nnor that Jesus Christ was the son of God. 'Nevertheless,' said Mr.\nJeeter,' he was one of the most honest men I ever knew. If I had a\nmillion dollars I wouldn't be afraid to trust it to Lincoln without\nthe scratch of a pen, I know the man so well.' Mr. Jeeter was a strong\nbeliever in the Christian religion and a mem-bier of the Cumberland\nPresbyterian church, and a very fine and reliable man.\"\n\nFREDERICK HEATH.\n\nThe following is from an article on Lincoln by Mr. Frederick Heath, of\nMilwaukee, Wis.:\n\n\"Two years ago I was associated with Major Geo. H. Norris, a wealthy\norange-grower of Florida, in that state, and was in a degree his\n_confidant_. In earlier years, while a lawyer in Illinois, Major Norris\n(he was at one time mayor of Ottawa, Ill.) was quite closely associated\nwith Mr. Lincoln, and he gave me to understand that Mr. Lincoln was an\nextreme skeptic. They were thrown together a good deal at Springfield,\nwhere they were trying cases before the supreme court. Lincoln would\nfrequently keep them from sleep by his stories and arguments, and\nfrequently spoke of religious matters in a way that showed he was\nconvinced of the delusion of faith. I wish I could quote the Major's\nwords as to Lincoln's remarks on religion, but will not venture to frame\nthem, as this is a subject that demands truth and exactness.\"\n\nREV. EDWARD EGGLESTON.\n\nWhen Lincoln went to New York in the winter of 1860, to deliver his\nCooper Institute address, he had occasion to remain over Sunday in that\ncity. At the suggestion of a friend, he visited the famous Five Points,\nand attended a Sunday-school where the spawn of New York's worst\ninhabitants to the number of several hundred were assembled. Importuned\nfor a speech, he made a few remarks to the children, and the fact was\npublished in the papers. The idea of this Infidel politician addressing\na Sunday-school was so ludicrous that it caused much merriment among\nhis friends at Springfield. When he returned home one of them,\nprobably Colonel Matheny, called on him to learn what it all meant.\nThe conversation that followed, including Lincoln's explanation of\nthe affair, is thus related by the noted preacher and author, Edward\nEggleston: \"He started for 'Old Abe's' office; but bursting open the\ndoor impulsively, found a stranger in conversation with Mr. Lincoln. He\nturned to retrace his steps, when Lincoln called out, 'Jim! What do you\nwant?' 'Nothing.' 'Yes, you do; come back.'\n\n\"After some entreaty Jim approached Mr. Lincoln, and remarked, with a\ntwinkle in his eye, 'Well, Abe, I see you have been making a speech to\nSunday-school children. What's the matter?' 'Sit down, Jim, and I'll\ntell you all about it.' And with that Lincoln put his feet on the stove\nand began: 'When Sunday morning came, I didn't know exactly what to do.\nWashburne asked me where I was going. I told him I had nowhere to go;\nand he proposed to take me down to the Five Points Sunday-school, to\nshow me something worth seeing. I was very much interested by what\nI saw. Presently, Mr. Pease came up and spoke to Mr. Washburne, who\nintroduced me. Mr. Pease wanted us to speak. Washburne spoke, and then I\nwas urged to speak. I told them I did not know anything about talking to\nSunday-schools, but Mr. Pease said many of the children were friendless\nand homeless, and that a few words would do them good. Washburne said\nI must talk. And so I rose to speak; but I tell you, Jim, I didn't know\nwhat to say. I remembered that Mr. Pease said that they were homeless\nand friendless, and I thought of the time when I had been pinched\nby terrible poverty. And so I told them that I had been poor; that I\nremembered when my toes stuck out through my broken shoes in winter;\nwhen my arms were out at the elbows; when I shivered with the cold. And\nI told them there was only one rule.\n\n\"That was, always do the very best you can. I told them that I had always\ntried to do the very best I could; and that, if they would follow\nthat rule, they would get along somehow. That was about what I said'\"\n(Every-Day Life of Lincoln, pp. 322, 323).\n\nThe foregoing is significant. Lincoln was not an advocate of\nSunday-schools. He had probably never visited one before. As generally\nconducted, he regarded them as simply nurseries of superstition. He\ncould not indorse the religious ideas taught in them, and he was\nnot there that day to antagonize them. As a consequence, this ready\ntalker--this man who had been making speeches all his life--was, for\nthe first time, at a loss to know what to say. He could not talk to them\nabout the Bible--he could not tell them that \"it is the best gift which\nGod has given to man\"--that \"all the good from the Savior of the world\nis communicated to us through this book\"--that \"but for this book we\ncould not know right from wrong\"--he could not tell them how Jesus had\ndied for little children, and all this, because he did not believe it.\nBut he obeyed his own life-long rule, did the best he could under the\nembarrassing circumstances, and gave them a little wholesome advice\nentirely free from the usual Sunday-school cant.\n\nREV. ROBERT COLLYER.\n\nRobert Collyer states that Lincoln, just before he was elected\nPresident, visited the office of the Chicago _Tribune_, and picking up a\nvolume of Theodore Parker's writings, turned to Dr. Ray and remarked: \"I\nthink that I stand about where that man stands.\"\n\nALLEN THORNDIKE RICE.\n\nThe lamented Allen Thorndike Rice, whose brilliant editorial management\nof the _North American Review_ has placed this periodical in the front\nrank of American magazines, in his Introduction to the \"Reminiscences\nof Lincoln,\" says: \"The Western settlers had no respect for English\ntraditions, whether of Church or of State. Accustomed all their lives to\ngrapple with nature face to face, they thought and they spoke, with all\nthe boldness of unrestrained sincerity, on every topic of human interest\nor of sacred memory, without the slightest recognition of any right\nof external authority to impose restrictions, or even to be heard in\nprotest against their intellectual independence. As their life developed\nthe utmost independence of creed and individuality, he whose originality\nwas the most fearless and self-contained was chief among them. Among\nsuch a people, blood of their blood and bone of their bone, differing\nfrom them only in stature, Abraham Lincoln arose to rule the American\npeople with a more than kingly power, and received from them a more than\nfeudal loyalty.\"\n\nSo eager is the church for proofs of Lincoln's piety that the most\nincredible anonymous story in support of this claim is readily accepted\nand published by the religious press as authentic history. By this means\nthe masses have gradually come to regard Lincoln as a devout Christian.\nIt is evident that Mr. Rice had these fabulous tales in mind when he\nwrote the following: \"Story after story and trait after trait, as varying\nin value as in authenticity, has been added to the Lincolniana, until\nat last the name of the great war President has come to be a biographic\nlodestone, attracting without distinction or discrimination both the\ntrue and the false.\"\n\nROBERT C. ADAMS.\n\nThe noted author, Capt. Robert C. Adams, of Montreal, Can., says: \"It is\nsignificant that in political revolution it is the Freethinker who is\nusually the leader. Franklin, Paine, Jefferson, Washington, were the\nchief founders of the American Republic, and _Lincoln presided at its\nsecond birth_ Mazzini and Garibaldi are the heroes of United Italy;\nRousseau, Voltaire, and Victor Hugo have been the chief inspirers of\nDemocratic France \"(_New Ideal_).\n\nTHEODORE STANTON\n\nIn the _Westminster Review_ for September, 1891, Mr. Stanton had an\narticle discussing the moral character and religious belief of Abraham\nLincoln. Of his religious belief, he says: \"If Lincoln had lived and died\nan obscure Springfield lawyer and politician he would unquestionably\nhave been classed by his neighbors among Freethinkers. But, as is\ncustomary with the church, whether Roman Catholic or Protestant, when\nLincoln became one of the great of the world an attempt was made to\nclaim him. In trying to arrive at a correct comprehension of Lincoln's\ntheology this fact should be borne in mind in sifting the testimony.\n\n\"Another very important warping influence which should not be lost\nsight of was Lincoln's early ambition for political preferment. Now, the\nshrewd American politician with an elastic conscience joins some\nchurch, and is always seen on Sunday in the front pews. But the shrewd\npolitician who has not an elastic conscience--and this was Lincoln's\ncase--simply keeps mum on his religious views, or, when he must touch on\nthe subject, deals only in platitudes.\"\n\nAfter citing the testimony of many of Lincoln's friends, Mr. Stanton\nconcludes: \"A man about whose theology such things can be said is of\ncourse far removed from orthodoxy. It may even be questioned whether he\nis a Theist, whether he is a Deist. That he is a Freethinker is evident;\nthat he is an Agnostic is probable.\"\n\nGEO. M. CRIE.\n\nIn the _Open Court_ for Nov. 26, 1891, Mr. McCrie contributes an article\non \"What Was Abraham Lincoln's Creed?\" Concerning Lincoln's allusions\nto God, he says: \"A Deity thus shelved or not shelved, according to the\ndictates of political expediency, or of individual opinion as to the\n'propriety' of either course is no Deity at all. He is as fictional as\nthe 'John Doe' or 'Richard Roe' of a legal writ, and anyone making use\nof such a creation--the puppet, not the parent, of his own Egoity--is\nsupposed to know with what he is dealing. Orthodox religionism may well\ndespair of Abraham Lincoln as of George Washington, Benjamin Franklin,\nor President Jefferson.\"\n\nGEN. M. M. TRUMBULL\n\nGen. Trumbull, of Chicago, in the _Open Court_ of Dec. 3,1891,\nwrites: \"The religion that begs the patronage of presidents doubts its\nown theology, for the true God needs not the favor of men.... Some of\nhis [Lincoln's] tributes to Deity are merely rhetorical emphasis, but\nothers were not. Cicero often swore 'By Hercules,' as in the oration\nagainst Catiline, although he believed no more in Hercules than Abraham\nLincoln believed in any church-made God.\"\n\nREV. DAVID SWING, D.D.\n\nIn a sermon on \"Washington and Lincoln,\" the most eminent and popular\ndivine of Chicago, Dr. Swing, said:\n\n\"It is often lamented by the churchmen that Washington and Lincoln\npossessed little religion except that found in the word 'God.' All that\ncan here be affirmed is that what the religion of those two men lacked\nin theological details it made up in greatness. Their minds were born\nwith a love of great principles.... There are few instances in which\na mind great enough to reach great principles in politics has been\nsatisfied with a fanatical religion.... It must not be asked for\nWashington and Lincoln that, having reached greatness in political\nprinciples, they should have loved littleness in piety.\"\n\nREV. JENKIN LLOYD JONES.\n\nThe Rev. J. Lloyd Jones, one of Chicago's most eloquent divines, in a\nsermon preached in All Souls Church, Dec. 9, 1888, gave utterance to the\nfollowing:\n\n\"Are there not thousands who have loved virtue who did not accept Jesus\nChrist in any supernatural or miraculous fashion, who if they knew of\nhim at all knew of him only as the Nazarine peasant--the man Jesus? Such\nwas Abraham Lincoln, the tender prophet of the gospel of good will upon\nearth; Charles Sumner, the great apostle of human liberty; Gerrit Smith,\nthe St. John of political reform; William Ellery Channing, our sainted\npreacher; Theodore Parker, the American Luther, hurling his defiance at\nthe devils of bigotry; John Stuart Mill and Harriet Martineau--yes, to\ntake an extreme case, the genial and over-satirical Robert G. Ingersoll,\nare among those who love goodness and foster nobility, though they have\nno clear vision into futurity and confess no other lordship in him of\nNazareth save the dignity of aim and tenderness of life.\"\n\nREV. JOHN W. CHADWICK.\n\nIn an address delivered in Tremont Temple, Boston, May 30, 1872, the\nRev. John W. Chadwick, of Brooklyn, N. Y., referring to the proposed\nreligious amendment to the Constitution of the United States, said: \"Of\nthe six men who have done most to make America the wonder and the joy\nshe is to all of us, not one could be the citizen of a government so\nconstituted; for Washington and Franklin and Jefferson, certainly the\nthree mightiest leaders in our early history, were heretics in their\nday, Deists, as men called them; and Garrison and Lincoln and Sumner,\ncertainly the three mightiest in these later times, would all be\ndisfranchised by the proposed amendment.\n\n\"Lincoln could not have taken the oath of office had such a clause been\nin the Constitution.\"\n\n\n\n\nCHAPTER XIV. EVIDENCE GATHERED FROM LINCOLN'S LETTERS SPEECHES, AND CONVERSATIONS\n\n     The Bible and Christianity--Christ's Divinity--Future\n     Rewards and Punishments--Freedom of Mind--Fatalism--\n     Providence--Lines in Copy-book--Parker--Paine--Opposition of\n     Church--Clerical Officious-ness Rebuked--Irreverent Jokes--\n     Profanity--Temperance Reform--Indorsement of Lord\n     Bolingbroke's Writings--Golden Rule.\n\nThe testimony of one hundred witnesses will now be supplemented by\nevidence from the tongue and pen of Lincoln himself. The greater portion\nof what he wrote and uttered against Christianity has perished; but\nenough has been preserved to demonstrate, even in the absence of other\nevidence, that he was not a Christian. From his letters, speeches,\nand recorded conversations, the following radical sentiments have been\nextracted.\n\nNotwithstanding the efforts of Holland and Bate-man to prove that\nLincoln was a believer in Christianity, it is admitted that in his\nconversation with Bateman, he said:\n\n\"I am not a Christian\" (Holland's Life of Lincoln, pp. 236, 237).\n\nWhen his Christian friends at Petersburg interfered to prevent his\nproposed duel with Shields, and told him that it was contrary to the\nteachings of the Bible and Christianity, he remarked:\n\n\"The Bible is not my book, nor Christianity my profession\" (Letter of\nW. Perkins). While at Washington, in a letter to his old friend, Judge\nWakefield, written in 1862, in answer to inquiries respecting his belief\nand the expressed hope that he had become convinced of the truth of\nChristianity, he replied as follows:\n\n\"My earlier views of the unsoundness of the Christian scheme of\nsalvation and the human origin of the Scriptures have become clearer and\nstronger with advancing years and I see no reason for thinking I shall\never change them.\"\n\nIn a discussion touching upon the paternity of Jesus, he said:\n\n\"There must have been sexual intercourse between man and woman, and not\nbetween God and his daughter.\"\n\nThe above words were uttered in the presence of Mr. Green Caruthers and\nMr. W. A. Browning, of Springfield.\n\nLincoln contended that Jesus was either the son of Joseph and Mary, or\nthe illegitimate son of Mary.\n\nIn a conversation with his friend, Mr. E. H.\n\nWood, of Springfield, concerning the doctrine of endless punishment, he\nsaid:\n\n\"There is no hell.\"\n\nIn regard to this subject, he often observed: \"If God be a just God, all\nwill be saved or none\" (_Manford's Magazine_).\n\nThe orthodox idea of God--a God that creates poor, fallible beings, and\nthen forever damns them for failing to believe what it is impossible for\nthem to believe--he abhorred. The Golden Rule was his moral standard,\nand by this standard he measured not only the conduct of man, but of God\nhimself. Like the irrepressible Dr. T. L. Brown, he wanted God to\n\"damn others as he would be damned himself.\" He delighted to repeat the\nepitaph of the old Kickapoo Indian, Johnnie Kongapod:\n\n     \"Here lies poor Johnnie Kongapod;\n     Have mercy on him, gracious God,\n     As he would do if he were God\n     And you were Johnnie Kongapod.\"\n\nLincoln thought that God ought at least to be as merciful as a\nrespectable savage.\n\nMany contend that the doctrine of future rewards and punishments, even\nif untrue, has a restraining influence upon the masses of mankind. That\nLincoln did not share this fallacious opinion, is shown by the following\nextract from an address delivered in Springfield in 1842: \"Pleasures to\nbe enjoyed, or pains to be endured, after we shall be dead and gone, are\nbut little regarded.... There is something so ludicrous, in promises\nof good, or threats of evil, a great way off, as to render the whole\nsubject with which they are connected, easily turned into ridicule.\n'Better lay down that spade you're stealing, Paddy--if you don't, you'll\npay for it at the Day of Judgment.' 'Be the powers, if ye'll credit me\nso long I'll take another'\" (Lincoln Memorial Album, p. 91).\n\nCommenting upon the question of one's returning and communicating with\nhis friends after death, he observed: \"It is a doubtful question whether\nwe ever get anywhere to get back\" (Statement of E. H. Wood).\n\nHe did not believe in the freedom of the will. An observation which he\nrepeatedly made was the following:\n\n\"No man has a freedom of mind\" (Testimony of W. H. Herndon).\n\nHis fatalistic notions are confirmed by his own words: \"I have all my\nlife been a fatalist. What is to be will be; or, rather, I have found\nall my life, as Hamlet says:\n\n      'There's a divinity that shapes our ends,\n      Rough-hew them how we will.'\"\n\n      (Every-Day Life of Lincoln, p. 198).\n\nThe following was a favorite maxim with him:\n\n\"What is to be will be, and no prayers of ours can arrest the decree\"\n(Statement of Mrs. Lincoln).\n\nIn a speech on Kansas, delivered in 1856, he used the following words\nin regard to Providence: \"Friends, I agree with you in Providence; but\nI believe in the Providence of the most men, the largest purse, and the\nlongest cannon\" (Lincoln's Speeches, p. 140).\n\nThe writer has in his possession, among others of Lincoln's papers, a\nleaf from his copybook, tattered and yellow from age, on which, seventy\nyears ago, Lincoln, a school-boy of fourteen, wrote the following\ncharacteristic lines:\n\n     \"Abraham Lincoln, his hand and pen;\n     He will be good, but God knows when.\"\n\nIf by _good_ he meant _pious_, the prophecy was never fulfilled.\n\nBut a short time before he was elected President, he said to Dr. Ray: \"I\nthink that I stand about where that man [Theodore Parker] stands\"\n(Statement of Rev. Eobert Collyer).\n\nThe author whose writings exerted the greatest influence upon Lincoln's\nmind, in a theological way, was Thomas Paine. Ah! that potential \"Age of\nReason!\" Criticise it as you may, no one ever yet carefully perused its\npages and then honestly affirmed that the Bible is the infallible word\nof God. Hern-don and others declare that Paine was a part of Lincoln\nfrom 1834 till his death. To a friend he said:\n\n\"I never tire of reading Paine\" (Statement of James Tuttle).\n\nIn the later years of his life, when the subject of religion was\nmentioned, with a knowing smile, he was wont to remark:\n\n\"It will not do to investigate the subject of religion too closely, as\nit is apt to lead to Infidelity\" (_Manford's Magazine_).\n\nIt has been stated that Lincoln was opposed in his political campaigns\non account of his disbelief. This is confirmed by a letter he wrote to\nMartin M. Morris, of Petersburg, Ill., March 26,1843. In this letter, he\nsays:\n\n\"There was, too, the strangest combination of church influence against\nme. Baker is a Campbellite; and therefore, as I suppose, with few\nexceptions, got all that church. My wife has some relatives in the\nPresbyterian churches, and some with the Episcopal churches; and\ntherefore, wherever it would tell, I was set down as either the one or\nthe other, while it was everywhere contended that no Christian ought\nto go for me, because I belonged to no church--was suspected of being a\nDeist.... Those influences levied a tax of a considerable per cent\nupon my strength throughout the religious controversy\" (Lamon's Life of\nLincoln, p. 271).\n\nHe never changed his opinions, and the church never ceased to oppose\nhim. In the Bateman interview, seventeen years later, he was compelled\nto note its relentless intolerance:\n\n\"Here are twenty-three ministers of different denominations, and all\nof them are against me but three; and here are a great many prominent\nmembers of the churches, a very large majority of whom are against me\"\n(Holland's Life of Lincoln, p. 236).\n\nFor thirty years the church endeavored to crush Lincoln, but when, in\nspite of her malignant opposition, he achieved a glorious immortality,\nthis same church, to hide the mediocrity of her devotees, attempts to\nsteal his deathless name.\n\nIn a speech delivered in Springfield, in 1857, alluding to the negro,\nhe said: \"All the powers of the earth seem rapidly combining against him.\nMammon is after him,... and the theology of the day is fast joining in\nthe cry\" (Lincoln Memorial Album, p. 100).\n\nThe theology of the day was orthodox Christianity. \"In this sentence,\"\nsays Mr. Herndon, \"he intended to hit Christianity a left-handed blow,\nand a hard one.\"\n\nIn his Second Inaugural address, referring to the contending Christian\nelements in the civil war, he says: \"Both read the same Bible and pray to\nthe same God, and each invokes his aid against the other.\"\n\nWhat a commentary upon the hypocritical assumption that Christians\npossess an infallible moral standard, is contained in the above words!\n\nThe \"Lincoln Memorial Album\" pretends to give the Second Inaugural\ncomplete, but omits the words quoted. As this address comes almost\nimmediately after his reputed speech to the \"Illinois clergyman,\" the\neditor probably noticed a lack of harmony between the two, and thought\nthat the retention of these heretical words would cast suspicion upon\nthe genuineness of that remarkable confession. The \"Memorial Album\" is\na meritorious work, but had Mr. Oldroyd manifested as great a desire to\npresent the genuine utterances of Lincoln as the apocryphal, its value\nwould have been enhanced. The unmutilated version of the last Inaugural\nmay be found in Holland's \"Life of Lincoln,\" pp. 503, 504; Arnold's\n\"Life of Lincoln,\" pp. 403, 404; Arnold's \"Lincoln and Slavery,\" pp.\n625-627; and \"The Every-Day Life of Lincoln,\" pp. 681, 682.\n\nNo President, probably, was ever so much annoyed by the clergy as\nLincoln. The war produced an increased religious fervor, and theological\ntramps innumerable, usually labeled \"D. D.,\" visited the\nWhite House, each with a mission to perform and a precious morsel\nof advice to offer. In the following caustic words, he expresses his\ncontempt for their officiousness: \"I am approached with the most opposite\nopinions and advice, and by religious men who are certain they represent\nthe Divine will.... I hope it will not be irreverent in me to say, that\nif it be probable that God would reveal his will to others, on a point\nso connected with my duty, it might be supposed he would reveal it\ndirectly to me\" (Religious Convictions of Abraham Lincoln).\n\nEqually pertinent, and, indeed, similar was his language to a pious\nlady, a Friend, who came as God's agent to instruct him what to do: \"I\nhave neither time nor disposition to enter into discussion with the\nFriend, and end this occasion by suggesting for her consideration the\nquestion, whether, if it be true that the Lord has appointed me [she\nclaimed that he had] to do the works she has indicated, it is [(is it)\nPG Ed.] not probable that he would have communicated knowledge of the\nfact to me as well as to her?\" (Every-Day Life of Lincoln, pp. 536,\n537).\n\nHe steadily prohibited his generals from meddling with the religious\naffairs of those residing within the limits of their respective\ndepartments, and at the same time counseled them not to permit the\npretended sanctity of the church to shield offenders from justice.\n\nIn a letter to General Curtis, censuring the provost marshal of St.\nLouis for interfering with church matters, he writes: \"The United States\nGovernment must not undertake to run the churches. When an individual in\na church, or out of it, becomes dangerous to the public interest he must\nbe checked\" (Nicolay and Hay's Life of Lincoln).\n\nIn an order relating to a church in Memphis, issued May 13, 1864, he\nsaid: \"If there be no military need for the building, leave it alone,\nneither putting any one in or out of it, except on finding some one\npreaching or practicing treason, in which case lay hands upon him, just\nas if he were doing the same thing in any other building\" (Ibid).\n\nDuring the war his attention was called to the notoriously bad character\nof army chaplains. He expressed his contempt for them, and for\northodox preachers generally, by relating the following story: \"Once, in\nSpringfield, I was going off on a short journey, and reached the depot\na little ahead of time. Leaning against the fence just outside the depot\nwas a little darky boy, whom I knew, named Dick, busily digging with his\ntoe in a mud-puddle. As I came up, I said, 'Dick, what are you about?\n'Making a church,' said he. 'A church?' said I; 'what do you mean?'\n'Why, yes,' said Dick, pointing with his toe, 'don't you see? there\nis the shape of it; there's the steps and front door--here's the pews,\nwhere the folks set--and there's the pulpit.' 'Yes, I see,' said I, 'but\nwhy don't you make a minister?' 'Laws,' answered Dick, with a grin, 'I\nhain't got _mud_ enough'\" (Anecdotes of Lincoln, p. 86).\n\nThe most highly aristocratic church in Washington is St John's Episcopal\nchurch. So very aristocratic is it that applicants for membership deem\nit necessary to give references respecting their social standing in the\ncommunity. The New York _Star_ relates the following joke which Lincoln\nonce perpetrated at the expense of this church: \"One day during the war\na young officer called on him to secure an appointment in the army, and\nbrought with him letters of recommendation signed by the F. E. V.'s\nin the District of Columbia. There had been no application for office\nbefore President Lincoln so strongly supported by the aristocracy, and,\nturning to the young man, he said he would give him the appointment\nand handed him back the papers. 'Don't you want to place the papers on\nfile?' asked the office-seeker. 'I supposed that was the custom.' 'Yes,\nthat is the custom,' said President Lincoln, 'but you had better take\nthem with you, as you might want to join St. John's church.'\"\n\nDid Lincoln ever use profane language? If he did, this fact will afford\nno evidence to Freethinkers that he was a disbeliever in Christianity.\nFreethinkers are as free from this vice, if vice it be, as Christians.\nVery pious persons, however, such as Lincoln is represented to have\nbeen by his Christian biographers, are very careful about their use of\nprofane words. Christ commanded his followers to pray in private, and\nbade them swear not at all. Devout Christians usually pray in public and\nswear in private. Lincoln was but little addicted to profanity, but if\nhe had occasion to use a word of this character he did not go to his\ncloset to use it. In a business letter to a friend, he said:\n\n\"A d------d hawk-billed Yankee is here besetting me at every turn\"\n(Lamon's Life of Lincoln, p. 316).\n\nIn a letter to Speed, concerning an alleged murder case, he wrote:\n\n\"Hart, the little drayman that hauled Molly home once, said it was too\n_damned_ bad to have so much trouble and no hanging\" (Ibid, p. 321).\n\nFor the sake of pleasing the \"fools,\" he attached his signature to \"the\npious nonsense of Seward,\" With equal readiness he indorsed the profane\nnonsense (?) of Stanton. During the war the patriotic Lovejoy had\ndevised a military scheme which he believed would prove beneficial\nto the Union cause, and obtained an order from the President for its\nexecution. He took the order to Stanton, but all that ever resulted from\nit was the following spirited colloquy:\n\n\"'Did Lincoln give you an order of that kind?' said Stanton. 'He did,\nsir.' 'Then he is a d------d fool,' said the irate Secretary. 'Do\nyou mean to say the President is a d------d fool?' asked Lovejoy,\nin amazement. 'Yes, sir, if he gave you such an order as that.' The\nbewildered Illinoisan betook himself at once to the President, and\nrelated the result of his conference. \"Did Stanton say I was a d------d\nfool?' asked Lincoln at the close of the recital. 'He did, sir, and\nrepeated it.' After a moment's pause, and looking up, the President\nsaid:\n\n'If Stanton said I was a d------d fool, then _I must be one_, for he is\nnearly always right, and generally says what he means'\" (Every-Day Life\nof Lincoln, pp. 483, 484).\n\nAt a Cabinet meeting, in 1863, when a conflict between the President and\nCongress regarding the admission of certain representatives from loyal\ndistricts of the South, which he favored, was threatened, he turned to\nSecretary Chase, and exclaimed: \"There it is, sir. I am to be bullied by\nCongress, am I? If I do I'll be d------d!\"\n\nWhen Lincoln visited New Orleans he attended a slave sale. A beautiful\ngirl, almost white, was placed upon the auction block and exposed to the\ngrossest indignities. As he turned to leave, boiling with indignation,\nhe exclaimed:\n\n\"By God, if I ever get a chance to hit that institution, I will hit it\nhard\" (Arnold's Life of Lincoln, Note).\n\nThirty years later the chance came. He struck the blow--a mortal one.\n\nThe following is a prayer which Lincoln, while at the White House,\nput into the mouth of a belated traveler who was caught in a violent\nthunderstorm:\n\n\"O Lord, if it is all the same to you, give us a little more light and a\nlittle less noise!\" (Six Months at the White House, p. 49).\n\nIs it possible that a Christian and a Calvinist would repeat such an\nirreverent, not to say blasphemous, supplication? According to the\nBrooklyn Calvinist, God visits such supplicants with paralysis and\npetrifaction.\n\nLike most Freethinkers, Lincoln was a genuine reformer. The Antislavery\nreform was not the only reform that enlisted his support. At an early\nday he espoused the Temperance cause. When the church was the ally of\nintemperance as it was of slavery--when, to use his own words, \"From\nthe sideboard of the parson down to the ragged pocket of the houseless\nloafer intoxicating liquor was constantly found,\" he was laboring and\nlecturing in behalf of the Washingtonian movement. With the fervor of an\nenthusiast, he exclaims in true Free-thought language: \"Happy day, when,\nall appetites controlled, all passions subdued, all matter subjugated,\nmind, all-conquering mind, shall live and move, the monarch of the\nworld! Glorious consummation! Hail, fall of fury! _Reign of Reason, all\nhail!_\" (Lincoln Memorial Album, p. 96).\n\nTo sumptuary laws and to the denunciatory methods so common among\northodox Christians to-day, he was, however, strenuously opposed. He\nsays: \"It is not much in the nature of man to be driven to anything;\nstill less to be driven about that which is exclusively his own\nbusiness\" (Ibid, p. 86).\n\n\"When the conduct of men is designed to be influenced, persuasion, kind,\nunassuming persuasion, should ever be adopted\" (lb., p. 87).\n\nHis nephew, Mr. Hall, informed me that Lincoln once made it cost a\nmeddlesome clergyman, of Coles County, eighty dollars for seizing and\ndestroying a quart of whisky, valued at twelve and a half cents, and\nbelonging to a relative of theirs.\n\nIn this chapter I wish to present some radical thoughts, not from the\npen of Lincoln himself, but which in the work from which they are taken\nbear unmistakable signs of his approval. Mr. D. W. C. Shattuck, an old\nand respected merchant of Way-land, Mich., has in his possession a book\nwhich belonged to Lincoln. Its history is as follows: Shortly after\nLincoln's election to the Presidency a young man from Springfield, Ill.,\nand a relative or intimate acquaintance of Lincoln's, came to board with\nMr. Shattuck, who then resided in Kalamazoo. Looking over the contents\nof his trunk one day the young man picked up a book and at the same time\nremarked: \"That book belongs to Abe Lincoln. I forgot to return it to\nhim before leaving Springfield. It is his favorite book, and I must not\nfail to return it.\" Mr. Shattuck expressing a desire to peruse the work,\nit was handed to him, and the young man being soon after unexpectedly\ncalled away, it was forgotten. It proved to be a volume of the writings\nof Lord Bolingbroke, the great English Infidel. On a fly-leaf was the\nsignature of Abraham Lincoln. In the work certain passages which seem\nto have especially impressed Lincoln are marked with a pencil and in a\nmanner peculiar to him. The following are the passages he marked,\nwhich I have copied from the book, and which evidently received his\nunqualified indorsement:\n\n\"Abbadie says in his famous book, that the Gospel of St. Matthew is\ncited by Clemens Bishop of Borne, a disciple of the Apostles; that\nBarnabas cites it in his epistle; that Ignatius and Polycarp receive\nit; and that the same Fathers, that give testimony for Matthew, give\nit likewise for Mark. Nay, your lordship will find, I believe, that the\npresent Bishop of London, in his third pastoral letter, speaks to the\nsame effect. I will not trouble you nor myself with any more instances\nof the same kind. Let this, which occurred to me as I was writing,\nsuffice. It may well suffice; for I presume the fact advanced by the\nminister and the Bishop is a mistake. If the Fathers of the First\nCentury do mention some passages that are agreeable to what we read in\nour Evangelists, will it follow that these Fathers had the same gospels\nbefore them? To say so is a manifest abuse of history, and quite\ninexcusable in writers that knew, or should have known, that these\nFathers made use of other gospels, wherein such passages might be\ncontained, or they might be preserved in unwritten tradition. Besides\nwhich I could almost venture to affirm that these Fathers of the First\nCentury do not expressly name the gospels we have of Matthew, Mark,\nLuke, and John.\" \"Writers of the Roman religion have attempted to show,\nthat the text of the Holy Writ is on many accounts insufficient to be\nthe sole criterion of orthodoxy; I apprehend too that they have shown\nit. Sure I am that experience, from the first promulgation of Christianity\nto this hour, shows abundantly with how much ease and success the most\nopposite, the most extravagant, nay the most impious opinions, and\nthe most contradictory faiths, may be founded on the same text; and\nplausibly defended by the same authority. Writers of the Reformed\nreligion have erected their batteries against tradition; and the only\ndifficulty they had to encounter in this enterprise lay in leveling and\npointing their cannon so as to avoid demolishing, in one common ruin,\nthe traditions they retain, and those they reject. Each side has been\nemployed to weaken the cause and explode the system of his adversary;\nand, whilst they have been so employed, they have jointly laid their\naxes to the root of Christianity; for thus men will be apt to reason\nupon what they have advanced. 'If the text has not that authenticity,\nclearness, and precision which are necessary to establish it as a divine\nand a certain rule of faith and practice; and if the tradition of the\nchurch from the first ages of it till the days of Luther and Calvin, has\nbeen corrupted itself, and has served to corrupt the faith and practice\nof Christians; there remains at this time no standard at all of\nChristianity. By consequence either this religion was not originally\nof divine institution, or else God has not provided effectually\nfor preserving the genuine purity of it, and the gates of hell have\nprevailed, in contradiction to his promise, against the church.'\" \"I\nhave read somewhere, perhaps in the works of St. Jerome, that this\nFather justifies the opinion of those who think it impossible to fix\nany certain chronology on that of the Bible; and this opinion will be\njustified still better, to the understanding of every man that considers\nhow grossly the Jews blunder whenever they meddle with chronology.\" \"The\nresurrection of letters was a fatal period; the Christian system has\nbeen attacked, and wounded too, very severely since that time.\"\n\nWhen interrogated as to why he had never united with any church, Lincoln\nreplied: \"When you show me a church based on the Golden Rule as its only\ncreed, then I will unite with it.\"\n\nHe never joined a church, because of all the Christian sects, not one\ncould show such a creed. The Golden Rule--conceding to others the same\nrights he claimed for himself--was, however, the very cornerstone of\nFreethought, and hence he remained a Freethinker.\n\n\n\n\nCHAPTER XV. RECAPITULATION AND CONCLUSION\n\n     Character of Christian Testimony--Summary of Evidence\n     Adduced in Proof of Lincoln's Unbelief--Douglas an\n     Unbeliever--Theodore Parker's Theology--Fallacy of Claims\n     Respecting Lincoln's Reputed Conversion--His Invocations of\n     Deity--His Alleged Regard for the Sabbath--The Church and\n     Hypocrisy--Lincoln's Religion.\n\nIn the prosecution of this inquiry, the testimony of one hundred and\ntwenty witnesses has been presented. The testimony of twenty of these\nwitnesses is to the effect that Lincoln was a Christian; the testimony\nof one hundred is to the effect that he was not.\n\nOf those who have testified in support of the claim that Lincoln was a\nChristian, ten admit that during a part of his life he was a disbeliever\nin Christianity, while not one of the remaining ten disputes the fact.\nIf he never changed his belief then he died an unbeliever. Did he change\nhis belief and become a convert to Christianity? It devolves upon those\nwho affirm that he did to prove it. Have they done this? They have\nnot. Their attempts have been in every instance pitiable failures. The\nunreasonable and conflicting character of the testimony adduced refutes\nitself. When was he converted? No less than five different dates have\nbeen assigned. One witness states that it was in 1848; one, that it was\nin 1858; another, that it was in 1862; another, that it was in July,\n1863; and still another, that it was in November, 1863.\n\nThe remarkable character of the statements recorded in Chapter\nI.--remarkable when compared with the statements given in the preceding\nten chapters, and not less remarkable when compared with each other--may\nbe variously accounted for. A part of them are based upon a false\npremise, an erroneous conception of what the term _Christian_ means;\na portion of them are merely the expressions of beliefs unsupported\nby actual knowledge; while a not inconsiderable share of them are the\nstatements of those who have knowingly and deliberately borne false\nwitness. These witnesses comprise: 1. Those who do not know what\nconstitutes a Christian--who confound Christianity with morality--who\naffirm that he was a Christian simply because he was a moral man. 2.\nThose who do not know what his religious views were, but who infer that\nhe was a Christian because others have declared that he was, and because\nof the frequent allusions to Deity that occur in his speeches and state\npapers. 3. Those who know that he was not a Christian, but who believe\nit to be right and proper to lie for the glory of Christianity and the\nprofit of its priests.\n\nThe testimony advanced in support of the claim of Lincoln's Christianity\nis, for the most part, the testimony of orthodox Christians--a majority\nof them orthodox clergymen. Dr. Holland, the chief of these Christian\nclaimants, says: \"The fact is a matter of history that he never exposed\nhis own religious life to those who had no sympathy with it.\" This, so\nfar as the later years of his life are concerned, is substantially true;\nand this very fact precludes the possibility of these orthodox witnesses\nbeing able to state from personal knowledge what his religious views\nwere.\n\nIn refutation of this claim, I have presented the testimony of those who\nwere nearest to Lincoln, in the confidential relations of life. I have\npresented the testimony of his wife, the testimony of his stepmother,\nthe testimony of his step-sister, the testimony of his cousin, the\ntestimony of his nephew, the testimony of his three law partners, the\ntestimony of four members of his Cabinet, the testimony of his private\nsecretary, the testimony of his executor, the testimony of seven of his\nbiographers, and the testimony of many more of his most intimate friends\nboth in Illinois and at Washington.\n\nThat he was not an orthodox Christian, as claimed, is attested by nearly\nall of the one hundred witnesses whose testimony has been given; that he\nwas not in any sense of the term a Christian is proved by the testimony\nof a majority of them.\n\nI affirmed that he was not religious in his youth--that he was a\nskeptic in Indiana. In proof of this I have adduced the testimony of his\nstep-mother, Sarah Lincoln; his step-sister, Matilda Moore; his cousin,\nDennis F. Hanks; his nephew, John Hall; his law partner, W. H. Herndon,\nand his biographer, Col. Ward H. Lamon.\n\nI affirmed that he was an Infidel or Freethinker, during the thirty\nyears that he resided in Illinois. In support of this I have given the\ntestimony of Colonel Lamon, W. H. Herndon, Maj. John T. Stuart, Col.\nJames H. Matheny, Dr. C. H. Ray, W. H. Hannah, James W. Keys, Jesse W.\nFell, Judge David Davis, Wm. McNeely, Mr. Lynan, Wm. G. Green, Joshua\nF. Speed, Green Caruthers, Squire Perkins, Judge Gillespie, John Decamp,\nJames Gorley, Dr. Wm. Jayne, Jesse K. Dubois, Judge Logan, Leonard\nSwett, W. H. T. Wakefield, D. W. Wilder, Dr. B. F. Gardner, J. K.\nVandemark, Judge Leachman, Orin B. Gould, Edward Butler, M. S. Go win,\nJ. H. Chenery, J. B. Spalding, Ezra Stringham, Col. R. G. Ingersoll, A.\nJeffrey, Dr. McNeal, Charles McGrew, J. L. Morrell, Judge A. D. Norton,\nW. W. Perkins, H. K. Magie, James Tuttle, Leonard Volk, Col. F. S.\nRutherford, E. H. Wood, Dr. J. J. Thomson, A. J. Grover, Judge Nelson,\nand others.\n\nI affirmed that he did not change his belief after leaving\nIllinois--that he was not converted to Christianity at Washington--that\nhe died an unbeliever. In confirmation of this I have presented the\ntestimony of his wife, Mary Lincoln; of his private secretary, Colonel\nNicolay; of his executor, Judge Davis; of his biographer, Colonel Lamon;\nand of his intimate associates, Geo. W. Julian, John B. Alley, Schuyler\nColfax, Hugh McCulloch, A. J. Grover, Donn Piatt, Judge Nelson, and\nothers.\n\nMany of these witnesses simply testify to his disbelief in the Christian\nsystem as a whole without reference to his particular views concerning\nits individual tenets. Every statement of his unbelief as presented in\nthe introduction has, however, been substantiated by the testimony of\none or more witnesses. That he did not believe in the Christian Deity,\nthat he even held Agnostic and Atheistic views, at times, is proved by\nthe testimony of W. H. Herndon, Colonel Matheny, Judge Nelson, Jesse K.\nDubois, and D. W. Wilder\n\nThat he was an Agnostic in regard to the immortality of the soul is\nattested by E. H. Wood, Judge Nelson, and W. H. Herndon.\n\nThat he did not believe that the Bible is the word of God is affirmed\nby Colonel Lamon, John T. Stuart, Judge Matheny, W. H. Herndon, Jesse\nW. Fell, Dennis Hanks, W. Perkins, Colonel Rutherford, and Chambers'\nEncyclopedia.\n\nThat he did not believe that Jesus Christ was the son of God is affirmed\nby Colonel Lamon, W. H. Herndon, Jesse W. Fell. Colonel Matheny, John\nT. Stuart, Jas. W. Keys, Judge Nelson, D. W. Wilder, Green Caruthers,\nColonel Rutherford, Rev. J. Lloyd Jones, Chambers' Encyclopedia, and the\nNew York _World_.\n\nThat he did not believe in a special creation, the statements of Mr.\nHerndon clearly prove.\n\nThat he accepted the theory of Evolution, so far as this theory had been\ndeveloped in the \"Vestiges of Creation\" and other writings of his day,\nis attested by the same witness.\n\nThat he did not admit the possibility of miracles is confirmed by the\nstatement of Jesse W. Fell, W. Perkins, Dennis Hanks, and Mr. Herndon.\n\nThat he rejected the Christian doctrine of total or inherent depravity,\nWilliam McNeely and Jesse W. Fell affirm.\n\nThat he repudiated the doctrine of vicarious atonement is sustained by\nthe testimony of Jesse W. Fell, Joshua F. Speed, W. Perkins, and Colonel\nLamon.\n\nThat he condemned the doctrine of forgiveness for sin, General Wilder\nand Mr. Herndon both testify.\n\nThat he opposed the doctrine of future rewards and punishments, Win. H.\nHannah, E H. Wood, A. Jeffrey, Jesse W. Fell, and _Manford's Magazine_,\nall testify.\n\nThat he denied the freedom of the will, Mr. Herndon explicitly affirms.\n\nThat he did not believe in the efficacy of prayer is fully established\nby the evidence of Mrs. Lincoln, Mr. Herndon, and Dr. Gardner.\n\nThat he was a disciple of Thomas Paine and Theodore Parker is shown by\nthe evidence of Colonel Lamon, W. H. Herndon, James Tuttle, Jesse W.\nFell, Dr. Ray, Robert Collyer, the New York _World_, and Chambers'\nEncyclopedia.\n\nThat he wrote a book against Christianity is sustained by the testimony\nof Colonel Matheny, Judge Nelson, W. H. Herndon, Colonel Lamon, J.\nB. Spalding, A. Jeffrey, J. H. Chenery, Chicago _Herald_, _Manford's\nMagazine_, and Chambers' Encyclopedia.\n\nThat Lincoln did not believe in the inspiration of the Scriptures, that\nhe did not believe in the divinity of Christ, that he did not believe in\nthe freedom of the will, that he did not believe in future rewards and\npunishments, that he did not believe in the efficacy of prayer, that he\nwas, in short, a disbeliever in Christianity, is also attested by the\nevidence cited from his own recorded words.\n\nIn connection with this controversy the significance of the following\nfacts cannot be overlooked: 1. Notwithstanding the strong temptation to\ncredit Lincoln to the popular faith, a majority of his biographers have\neither declared that he was not a Christian, or have refrained from\naffirming that he was. 2. The secular press, fearing to offend the\nchurch, has generally been silent regarding the question. When it has\nventured to express an opinion, however, it has been to concede\nhis unbelief. 3. The leading encyclopedias, such as the Britannica,\nChambers', New American, etc., have either admitted that he was a\nFreethinker, or have made no reference to his religious belief. 4. In\nthe \"Lincoln Memorial Album\" appear two hundred tributes to Lincoln, the\ngreater portion of them from the pens of Christians. In but two of\nthese two hundred tributes is it claimed that Lincoln was a believer\nin Christianity. 5. The \"Reminiscences of Lincoln\" contain thirty-three\narticles on Lincoln, written by as many distinguished men who were\nacquainted with him. In not a single instance in this work, is it\nasserted that he was a Christian. 6. In none of the leading eulogies\npronounced upon his character, at the time of his demise, is it affirmed\nthat he accepted Christ.\n\nIt is stated that during the last years of his life Lincoln held\nsubstantially the same theological opinions held by Theodore Parker. His\nown words are, referring to Parker: \"I think that I stand about where\nthat man stands.\" Where did Theodore Parker stand? The following\nextracts from his writings will show: \"To obtain a knowledge of duty, a\nman is not sent away, outside of himself, to ancient documents; for the\nonly rule of faith and practice, the Word, is very nigh him, even in\nhis heart, and by this Word he is to try all documents.\" \"There is no\nintercessor, angel, mediator, between man and God; for man can speak and\nGod hear, each for himself. He requires no advocates to plead for men.\"\n\"Manly, natural religion--it is not joining the church; it is not\nto believe in a creed--Hebrew, Christian, Catholic, Protestant,\nTrinitarian, Unitarian, Nothingarian. It is not to keep Sunday idle;\nto attend meeting; to be wet with water; to read the Bible; to offer\nprayers in words; to take bread and wine in the meeting-house; love a\nscapegoat Jesus, or any other theological claptrap.\"\n\nIf Lincoln was known to be a Freethinker, it may be asked why this\nfact was not more generally published and urged against him during the\nPresidential campaign of 1860. The answer is easy. His chief opponent,\nDouglas, was himself a Freethinker. Stephen A. Douglas, like Abraham\nLincoln, died an unbeliever. Like Washington, he declined the services\nof a clergyman in his last hours. The following is an extract from\na monograph on \"The Deathbed of Douglas,\" published in the Boston\n_Budget_: \"When Stephen A. Douglas lay stricken with death at Chicago,\nhis wife, who was a devout Roman Catholic, sent for Bishop Duggan, who\nasked whether he had ever been baptized according to the rites of any\nchurch. 'Never,' replied Mr. Douglas. 'Do you desire to have mass said\nafter the ordinances of the holy Catholic church?' inquired the Bishop.\n'No, sir!' answered Douglas; 'when I do I will communicate with you\nfreely.'\n\n\"The Bishop withdrew, but the next day Mrs. Douglas sent for him again,\nand, going to the bedside, he said: 'Mr. Douglas, you know your own\ncondition fully, and in view of your dissolution do you desire the\nceremony of extreme unction to be performed?' 'No!' replied the dying\nman, 'I have no time to discuss these things now.'\n\n\"The Bishop left the room, and Mr. Rhodes, who was in attendance, said:\n'Do you know the clergymen of this city?' 'Nearly every one of them.'\n'Do you wish to have either or any of them call to see you to converse\non religious topics?' 'No, I thank you,' was the decided answer.\"\n\nAmong America's most eminent statesmen none probably ever possessed a\nmore logical mind than Lincoln. Judge Davis says: \"His mind was\nlogical and direct.\" James G. Blaine says: \"His logic was severe and\nfaultless.\" George S. Boutwell says: \"He takes rank with the first\nlogicians and orators of every age.\" In his funeral oration at\nSpringfield, Bishop Simpson said: \"If you ask me on what mental\ncharacteristic his greatness rested, I answer, on a quick and ready\nperception of facts; on a memory unusually tenacious and retentive; and\non a logical turn of mind, which followed sternly and unwaveringly\nevery link in the chain of thought on every subject he was called to\ninvestigate.\"\n\nLincoln was once called to investigate the subject of Christianity. He\n\"followed sternly and unwaveringly every link in the chain of thought\"\nsuggested by this subject, and the result was its rejection by him.\n\nIf he was subsequently converted to Christianity, it was only after a\nreexamination and a thorough and exhaustive investigation of its\nclaims. This his friends positively state never took place, and the\ncircumstances associated with each and every period assigned for his\nreputed conversion confirm their statements. In 1848 he was a member\nof Congress, his mind absorbed with the novelties, the duties, and the\naspirations that usually attend a first term in this important capacity.\nIn 1858, and for years preceding and following, the great political\nquestions of the day occupied his mind. He was engaged in a mortal\nstruggle with one of the most powerful intellectual athletes of his\ntime. He was contending with Douglas for a prize, and that prize was the\nPresidency. He must be ever on the alert. He must crush his antagonist\nor his antagonist would crush him. Think of Lincoln sitting down in the\nvery crisis of this conflict and engaging in the study of theology! In\n1862, and 1863, the other years assigned for his conversion, he was in\nthe midst of the great Rebellion, all his thoughts and all his energies\nenlisted in the mighty task of saving the Union.\n\nThat Lincoln was a Freethinker in Illinois, that he was for a time a\nzealous propagandist of his faith, that he was instrumental in making\nunbelievers of many of his associates, it is useless to deny. If he was\nafterward converted to Christianity, his friends were ignorant of his\nconversion. He failed to notify them of his previous mistake and warn\nthem of their impending danger. If it could be shown that he renounced\nhis former views and became a Christian, this fact would be one of the\nmost damaging arguments against Christianity that could be advanced.\nAs a Freethinker he was one of the most tender and humane of men,\never solicitous for the welfare of his fellow-beings. Did Christianity\ntransform him into a selfish, heartless being, who coolly disregarded\neven the eternal welfare of his best and dearest friends? Think of a man\ndirecting a friend to take a road which he afterward discovers leads to\ncertain death, and then not lifting a finger of warning to save him from\ndestruction, when it is in his power to do so!\n\nThe Freethinker will require no other evidence to convince him that\nLincoln died a disbeliever than the fact that he once fully investigated\nthis subject and proclaimed himself an Infidel. The mere skeptic who\nhas no settled convictions--who has never examined the evidences against\nhistorical Christianity--may become a sincere believer in the Christian\nreligion. The confirmed Freethinker never can, albeit a Thomas Cooper,\na Joseph Barker and a George Chainey may profess to. As Col. Thomas\nWentworth Higginson happily expresses it: \"You may take the robin's egg\nfrom the nest in yonder tree, and so near is the bird to being hatched\nyou may crack it with the edge of your nail, and the bird is free. But\nall your power, and all your patient fidelity, and all the mucilage and\nsticking plaster you can put on it, will never get that birdling back\ninto that little egg again. So complete is the sense of satisfaction,\nsuch is the feeling of freedom, which comes from once finding yourself,\nnot merely out of these little sectarian names, but out of the name of\nthe larger and grander sect, which is Christianity, that you will find\nwhen the egg is once broken, the _bird_ is free forever.\"\n\nFrom the church steward's standpoint, there is nothing so desirable as\nthe early conversion of one who is destined to become rich. From\nthe evangelist's point of view, there is nothing like the deathbed\nrepentance of one who has become great. Had the bullet of the assassin\nnot immediately destroyed consciousness, all these stories that we have\nheard about Lincoln's conversion--the Edwards story, the Smith story,\nthe Brooks story, the Willets story, the Vinton story, and the story of\nthe Illinois clergyman--would never have been invented. Instead of these\nwe would have the story of some domestic, or some intruding priest who\nsaw him during his dying hours. Aaron Burr was kinder to the church than\nJohn Wilkes Booth.\n\nBut whatever the religious opinions of Lincoln were when he died,\nwhether he had changed his belief or not, in view of the fact that he\nnever thought enough of the church to unite with it, the frantic efforts\nof clergymen and church-members to claim him seem quite uncalled for, if\nnot ridiculous.\n\nThe opinion of a writer previously quoted in this work, is that the\nbitter war waged against the persons who have declared that Lincoln was\nnot a Christian arises, not from a belief that they have stated what\nis false, but from a consciousness that they have \"demolished an empty\nshrine that was profitable to many, and broken a painted idol that\nmight have served for a god.\" It is strange how Christians tend toward\nfetichism. Not satisfied with three Gods, they must canonize and deify\nmen and make saints and demi-gods. They have already deified three\nAmericans--Washington, Grant, and Lincoln--and what is remarkable, in\neach instance they have selected an unbeliever--an Infidel. It is said\nthat men have stolen the livery of heaven in which to serve the devil;\nbut it seems hardly consistent with the pretensions of the church that\nshe should be compelled to appropriate the beadroll of Infidelity in\norder to make her appear respectable.\n\nLincoln's speeches and state papers contain many allusions to Deity. As\nColonel Lamon observes, \"These were easy, and not inconsistent with his\nreligious notions.\" But it is a mistake to attribute all the Deistic\nexpressions that appear in his state papers to him. Just how much\nof this was the work of his private secretaries, how much of it was\n\"Seward's nonsense,\" or how much of it was suggested by Chase and other\nCabinet ministers, can never be determined. It is significant, however,\nthat in those documents of least importance, those which he would most\nlikely leave to his secretaries or other officials to draft, these\nexpressions are chiefly to be found. In his debates with Douglas, and\nhis other great political speeches delivered in Illinois, he seldom\nrefers to Deity. In his carefully prepared Cooper Institute address,\nthat model of political addresses, the name of Deity does not once\noccur. In his First Inaugural Address, he refers to God, and makes\na complimentary reference to Christianity intended to conciliate\nthe church and gain for his administration its support in the coming\nstruggle with the South. One paragraph of the second Inaugural contains\nallusions to Deity and quotations from the Bible; but in this address he\nmakes no recognition of Christ or Christianity. Even his quotations from\nthe Bible are made in a guarded manner which clearly indicates that\nhe did not believe in its divinity. In the Preliminary Proclamation of\nEmancipation, which was drafted by himself, the name of Deity does not\nappear. In the final Proclamation, an acknowledgment of God was\ninserted only at the urgent request of Secretary Chase. The Emancipation\nProclamation, with the possible exception of the Declaration of\nIndependence and the Constitution of the United States, is the most\nimportant political document ever issued in America. He knew that this\nwas the crowning act of his career, that it would place him among the\nimmortals. In the preparation of this work he expended much thought\nand labor, and it was his desire that it should be free from religious\nverbiage. In that masterpiece of eloquence, the Gettysburg oration,\nthe name of God occurs but once, while not the remotest reference\nto Christianity or even immortality appears. When we take into\nconsideration the fact that this address was made at the dedication of a\ncemetery, the significance of this omission can not be overlooked. This\nspeech was the product of Lincoln's own mind free from the suggestions\nand emendations of others, and the occasion was too sacred to indulge in\npious cant in which he did not believe.\n\nThe clergy parade Lincoln's recognitions of a Supreme Being as a\ntriumphant refutation of the claim that he was an Infidel. Yet, at\nthe same time, they do not hesitate to denounce as Infidels, Paine and\nVoltaire, when they know, or ought to know, that two more profound\nand reverential believers in God never lived and wrote than Paine and\nVoltaire.\n\nIf Infidelity and Atheism were synonymous terms it would be difficult to\nmaintain that Lincoln, during the last years of his life at least, was\nan Infidel. But Infidelity and Atheism are not synonymous terms. An\nAtheist is an Infidel, but an Infidel is not necessarily an Atheist. A\nPresbyterian is a Christian, but all Christians are not Presbyterians.\nChristians themselves coined the word _Infidel_, and they have used\nit to denote a disbeliever in Christianity. A disbelief or denial of\nChristianity is not necessarily a denial of God. Christians, many of\nthem, regard the term as odious and as carrying with it the idea of\nimmorality, notwithstanding the most intelligent and the most highly\nmoral class in Christendom are these so-called Infidels. \"Who are\nto-day's Infidels?\" says the Rev. William Ohanning Gannett. He answers:\n\"Very many of the brightest minds, the warmest hearts, the most loyal\nconsciences, the most zealous seekers after God, the most honest tellers\nof what they find--yes, and the most successful finders. Infidels to\nwhat are they? Not to morality: Infidels to morality are too wise to\ntrain with them.\"\n\nIt is not claimed that Lincoln was wholly free from a belief in the\nsupernatural. He possessed in some respects a simple, childlike\nnature, and carried with him through life some of the superstitions of\nchildhood. But the dogmas of Christianity were not among them; these he\nhad examined and discarded.\n\nAs a proof of Lincoln's regard for Christian institutions, great\nprominence is given to his proclamation to the army enjoining the\nobservance of the Sabbath. This document gives expression to sentiments\nregarding the sanctity of the Christian Sabbath that Lincoln personally\ndid not entertain. It was issued to appease the clamor of the clergy\nwho demanded it, and was drafted, not by Lincoln, but by some pious\nSabbatarian. Lincoln himself attached no more sanctity to Sunday than to\nother days. He worked on Sunday himself. In Springfield his Sundays were\nfrequently spent in preparing cases for court. In company with his boys\nhe often passed the entire day making excursions into the country or\nrambling through the woods that skirted the Sangamon. He seldom went to\nchurch either in Springfield or Washington, the claims of some of his\nChristian biographers to the contrary notwithstanding. Previous to\nhis nomination, in 1860, we find him sitting for a bust on Sunday in\npreference to attending church. On the Sunday immediately following\nhis nomination an artist was busy with him molding his hands and taking\nnegatives for a statue. The draft of the preliminary Proclamation of\nEmancipation was finished on Sunday. The last Sunday of his life was\nspent, not in studying the Scriptures, but in reading his beloved\nShakespere.\n\nIt was stated by friends of Lincoln that he generally refrained from\ngiving publicity to his religious opinions while in public life because\nof their unpopularity. In answer to this the Christian claimant retorts:\n\"If this be true then he was a hypocrite.\" But let us be honest. Nearly\nevery person entertains opinions which he does not deem it discreet or\nnecessary to make public. You, my Christian friend, entertain doubts and\nheresies concerning your creed which you keep a secret or disclose\nonly to your most intimate associates. If you, in private life, and not\ndependent upon the public, hide your unpopular thoughts from the world,\ncan you consistently blame Lincoln for his silence when the fate of a\nnation depended upon him and the alienation even of a few bigots might\nturn the scales against him? A Christian general does not hesitate to\ndeceive the enemy or withhold his plans even from his own soldiers.\nAgain, the clergy are forever advising and entreating men not to publish\ntheir doubts and heresies. Is it consistent in them to condemn a man for\nfollowing their advice?\n\nThe church should learn to respect honesty herself before she charges\nothers with dishonesty. It is the shame of Christianity that men have\nbeen obliged to conceal their honest convictions in order to escape\nostracism and persecution. When the church herself becomes honest\nenough to tolerate and respect the honest opinions of those who cannot\nconscientiously accept her creed, then will it be time for her to charge\nLincoln with hypocrisy for having partially withheld his unpopular views\nfrom religious ruffians. It does not evince a want of honesty, nor even\na lack of moral courage, to flee from a tiger or avoid a skunk.\n\nTo do good was Lincoln's religion. To live an honest, manly life--to add\nto the sum of human happiness--to make the world better for his having\nlived--this was the aspiration of his life and the essence of his faith.\n\nIn youth, the meanest creature found in him a friend, and if need be, a\ndefender. He wrote essays and made speeches against cruelty to animals,\nand sought to impress upon his playmates' minds the sacredness of life.\nThe same tender regard for the weak and unfortunate characterized his\nmanhood. Whilst riding through a forest once with a party of friends,\nhe saw a brood of young birds on the ground which a storm had blown from\ntheir nest. He dismounted from his horse, and after a laborious search,\nfound the nest and placed the birdlings snugly in their little home.\nWhen he reached his companions, and was chided by them for his delay, he\nsaid: \"I could not have slept to-night if I had not given those birds to\ntheir mother.\"\n\nThe narration of his many deeds of kindness and mercy while at\nWashington would fill a volume. He loved to rescue an erring soldier boy\nfrom the jaws of death and fill a mother's eyes with tears of joy. He\nloved to dispel the clouds of sorrow from a wife's sad heart and warm\nit with the sunshine of happiness. He loved to take the child of poverty\nupon his knee and plant within its little breast the seeds of confidence\nand hope.\n\nA giant in stature, and a lion in strength and courage, he possessed\nthe gentleness of a child and the tenderness of a woman. The sufferings,\neven of a stranger, would fill his eyes with tears, and the death of a\nfriend would overwhelm him. In his tenth year his mother died, and for\na time his heart was desolate and he could not be consoled. In his\nfifteenth year his only sister, a lovely, fragile flower, just blooming\ninto womanhood, drooped and died, and life seemed purposeless to him\nagain. Of his four children, two died while he was living--Eddie, a\nfair-haired babe, and his beloved Willie. When death took these his\nsorrow was unutterable. The untimely death of his young friend, the\ngallant Colonel Ellsworth, at Alexandria, and the death of his life-long\nfriend, the lamented Edwin F. Baker, at Ball's Bluff, were blows that\nstaggered him. At the death of his good friend, Bowlin Green, he was\nchosen to deliver a funeral address. When the hour arrived, and he\nstepped forward to perform the sacred task, his eyes fell upon the\ncoffin of his dead friend and for a time he stood transfixed--helpless\nand speechless. The only tribute he could pay was the tribute of\nhis tears. When he turned for the last time from the bedside of the\nbeautiful Ann Rut-ledge, his betrothed, it was with a broken heart and\na mind dethroned. \"Oh! I can never be reconciled to have the snow, the\nrain, and the storm beat upon her grave,\" was the pitiful burden of his\nplaint for weeks. Reason after a time returned, but his wonted gladness\nnever; and down through all those eventful years to that fatal April\nnight when his own sweet life-blood slowly oozed away, beneath that\nsparkling surface of feigned mirth, drifted the memory and the agonies\nof that great grief.\n\nIn the social relations of life, he was a most exemplary man. He was\na devoted husband, an indulgent father, an obliging neighbor, and a\nfaithful friend. Mrs. Colonel Chapman, a lady who lived for a time in\nhis family, pays this tribute to his private life: \"He was all that a\nhusband, father, and neighbor should be, kind and affectionate to his\nwife and child, and very pleasant to all around him. Never did I hear\nhim utter an unkind word.\" \"His devotion to wife and children,\" says\nGeorge W. Julian, \"was as abiding and unbounded as his love of country.\"\nThe strong attachment always manifested by him for his friends has often\nbeen remarked. Rich and poor, great and humble, all were equally dear\nto him and alike the recipients of his regard and love. The prince he\ntreated like a man, the humblest man he treated like a prince. Nothing\nin his career exhibits the greatness and nobleness of his character in\na loftier degree than the cordial and unaffected manner in which, at\nWashington, in the midst of wealth, and splendor, and refinement, he\nwas accustomed to receive and entertain the plain, uncultured friends of\nother days.\n\nUpon his rugged honesty, I need not dwell. The _sobriquet_ of \"Honest\nAbe\" was early won by him and never lost. In his profession--a\nprofession in which, too often, cunning and deceit, falsehood and\ndishonesty, are the means, and robbery the end--a profession in which,\ntoo often, Injustice is a purpled Dives sitting at a bounteous board,\nand Justice, a ragged Lazarus lying at the gate--he never wavered in his\nloyalty to truth, to justice, and to honesty. Engaged in a just cause,\nhe was one of the most powerful advocates that ever addressed a judge or\njury; engaged in an unjust cause, he was the weakest member of his bar.\nIn fact, he could not be induced to plead a cause in which he did not\nsee some element of justice, even though the technicalities of law\ninsured success. To one who had sought his services and had stated\nhis case, he replied: \"Yes, I can win it; but there are some things\n_legally_ right that are not _morally_ right; this is one: I cannot take\nyour case.\" He was once employed to defend a person accused of murder.\nAs the trial progressed, it became apparent to him that his client\nhad done the deed. Turning to his associate counsel, with a look of\ndisappointment and pain, he said: \"Swett, the man is guilty; you defend\nhim; I cannot.\" On another occasion, when he discovered that his client\nhad grossly imposed upon his confidence and instituted an unjust\nsuit, he left the court-room, and when the bailiff called for him,\nhe answered: \"Tell Judge Treat that I can't come; _I have to wash my\nhands_.\"\n\nHe was the most magnanimous of men. William H. Seward, his chief\nopponent for the Presidential nomination, he made the Premier of his\nCabinet. Secretary Chase became his political, if not his personal,\nenemy. Yet, recognizing his fitness for the place, he waived all\npersonal grievances and appointed him to the exalted position of Chief\nJustice of the United States, the highest gift within the power of\na President to bestow. During his professional career he was sent to\nCincinnati to assist Edwin M. Stanton in an important legal case.\nThe grim Stanton had never met this plain, Western lawyer before, and\ndispleased at his uncouth appearance, and apparent lack of ability,\ntreated him so discourteously that Lincoln's self-respect compelled\nhim to practically withdraw from the case. It was a brutal affront, too\npoignant for him ever to forget, but not to forgive, and linked together\non one of the most momentous pages of history stand the names of Lincoln\nand Stanton, an enduring witness to his sublime magnanimity.\n\nThe murder of this loving savior of our Union was a disastrous blow,\nnot to the victorious North alone, but to the vanquished South as well.\nCould he have lived, the balm of his great, kindly nature would have\nquickly healed the nation's wounds. At the commencement of the conflict,\nin pleading tones, he said: \"We are not enemies, but friends.\" And at\nits close, notwithstanding all the cruel, bitter anguish he had endured\nduring those four long years of fratricidal strife, \"With malice toward\nnone, with charity for all,\" he died, and many a brave Confederate\ndeplored\n\n     The deep damnation of his taking off.\n\nWhen Stonewall Jackson died, he paid a touching tribute to his\ngallantry, and said: \"Let us forget his errors over his fresh-made\ngrave.\" in the darkness of night, on a bloody field of the Peninsula,\nhe bent beside the prostrate form of a dying soldier of the South, and\nwhile the hot tears rolled down his furrowed cheeks, soothed him with\nwords of tender-est sympathy, and, by the dim rays of a lantern, took\ndown from his lips a message to his mother, and sent it by a flag of\ntruce into the enemies' lines to be transmitted to his home.\n\nGlorious apostle of humanity! When shall we look upon his like again? so\nhonest, so truthful, so just, so charitable, so loving, so merciful! Law\nwas his God, justice his creed, and liberty his heaven. If he sinned,\nmercy prompted him. In the presence of such a man, and in the presence\nof such a religion, how contemptible your puny theologians and their\nnarrow creeds appear! Born in the cabin of a Western wild, dying in\na nation's capital, its honored chief, enshrined in the hearts of an\nadmiring world, Abraham Lincoln stands to-day the gentlest, purest,\nnoblest character in human history. Millenniums may pass away,\nunnumbered generations come and go, creeds rise and fall; but the divine\nfaith of Freedom's martyr--a faith based upon immutable law, eternal\njustice, universal liberty--a faith formulated not in perishable words,\nbut in immortal deeds, will live through all the years to come, a torch\nof hope to every son of toil.","title":"Abraham Lincoln: Was He a Christian?","tradition":"scripture-revelation","translated_text":null,"word_count":70277}