THE REED LECTURE
ONE of the first results of the Lamon biography was a lecture prepared
by Rev. James A. Reed, pastor of the First Presbyterian Church of
Springfield. This lecture[35] was delivered several times, and in 1873
was published in _Scribner's Magazine_, which at that time was edited
by J. G. Holland. Holland had been horrified by the Lamon biography,
and had reviewed it with such disfavor that Herndon attributes
the failure of the book in no small part to Holland's pronounced
opposition. This lecture, published in so widely read a magazine,
produced a profound impression. A doubt which Lamon had raised and
which Herndon later had the bad taste to emphasize concerning Lincoln's
paternity turned to good advantage; and Reed produced from several of
the men whom Lamon had quoted, counter-statements declaring that they
had been misquoted. Of these was James H. Matheny, whose statement to
Herndon we are to consider in connection with the story of Lincoln's
burnt book and who wrote to Dr. Reed:
"The language attributed to me in Lamon's book is not from my pen.
I did not write it, and it does not express my sentiment of Mr.
Lincoln's entire life and character. It is a mere collection of
sayings gathered from private conversations that were only true of Mr.
Lincoln's earlier life. I would not have allowed such an article to
be printed over my signature as covering my opinion of Mr. Lincoln's
life and religious sentiments. While I do believe Mr. Lincoln to have
been an infidel in his former life, when his mind was as yet unformed,
and his associations principally with rough and skeptical men, yet I
believe he was a very different man in later life; and that after
associating with a different class of men, and investigating the
subject, he was a firm believer in the Christian religion."
Major John T. Stuart also repudiated the statement attributed to
him, and not only so but gave detailed and positive statements which
directly contradicted the more important part of what Lamon had
attributed to him.
Dr. Reed went further and set forth with a considerable degree of
precision the grounds for the statement that Lincoln's views had
undergone marked change during his life in Springfield, particularly
under the influence of Dr. Reed's predecessor, the Rev. James Smith.
Dr. Reed's lecture became the subject of acrimonious attack. His
article was flouted, belittled, and railed at. But its essential
affirmations have not been disproved. We shall devote a chapter to a
consideration of the relations of Dr. Smith to Mr. Lincoln and shall
find that Dr. Reed's claims were not extravagant.
Other controversialists took up the pen about this time in confutation
of Lamon. One of the most interesting and valuable of the contributions
which then appeared was an article by B. F. Irwin, of Pleasant Plains,
Illinois, published in the _Illinois State Journal_, for May 16,
1874.[36] He produced a considerable number of letters from men who
had known Mr. Lincoln prior to his residence in Springfield and whose
knowledge of his religious beliefs at that time was intimate and
accurate. Of these by far the most important was from Lincoln's old
teacher, Mentor Graham, which we shall quote at length in the chapter
on Lincoln's "Burnt Book."
* * * * *
Among these were letters from men who professed to have heard Lincoln
charged with infidelity and had heard him deny it. The most important
of these letters, however, aside from that of Mentor Graham, have value
for us in the light they shed upon what really constituted Lincoln's
alleged infidelity at this early period. That he had doubts and
misgivings upon various subjects was not denied, but his hostility to
the orthodox belief expressed itself chiefly in a vigorous denial of
the endlessness of future punishment. This dogma Lincoln denied upon
two grounds, as these letters affirm. First, the justice and mercy of
God; and secondly, the fact that according to the Biblical scheme of
redemption, whatever right the human race had possessed to immortality
and lost through sin, had been restored in Christ. Lincoln was,
according to the testimony of a number of these men who had known him,
not an infidel, nor even a deist, but essentially a Universalist.
Irwin had interviewed Colonel James H. Matheny and quoted Matheny as
denying that he had ever heard Lincoln admit that he was an infidel and
did not himself believe it. Irwin himself had known Lincoln personally
for many years and had known large numbers of men who were intimately
acquainted with him and he said:
"I have never yet heard one single man express the belief that Lincoln
was an infidel. Mr. Herndon, it is true, did have opportunities over
others in knowing Mr. Lincoln's religious opinions, but other men
had some opportunities, as well as Mr. Herndon, and to them I shall
have to appeal, for I do not claim to personally know anything about
Mr. Lincoln's religious faith. Though personally acquainted with Mr.
Lincoln for twenty-eight years and often in his office, I never heard
him say a word on the subject of his religious belief."
It will be noted that while the statements concerning Mr. Lincoln's
alleged infidelity have been published over the name of Lamon, Herndon
was held responsible for them in these controversies. The impetuous
Herndon possessed none of the reticence of Bateman; and while denying
that he wrote Lamon's book, rushed in as Lamon's champion and covered
himself with wounds if not with glory.
Irwin's article proceeds to quote these old neighbors and friends of
Lincoln, whose testimony, added to those adduced by Dr. Reed, was
of very great weight. I have copied these[37] from the files of
the _Illinois State Journal_ in the Library of the Illinois State
Historical Society in Springfield and here produce three of them,
reserving others for later comment.
One of the letters quoted in full by Irwin was from Thomas Mostiller,
of Pleasant Plains, Menard County, Illinois. He professed to have heard
Lincoln when he was a candidate for Congress in 1847 or 1848, when he
was charged with being an infidel and explicitly denied it. Said he:
"I was present and heard Josiah Grady ask Lincoln a question or two
regarding a charge made against Lincoln of being an infidel, and
Lincoln unqualifiedly denied the charge of infidelity, and said, in
addition, his parents were Baptists, and brought him up in the belief
of the Christian religion; and he believed it as much as anyone, but
was sorry to say he had or made no pretensions to religion himself.
I can't give his exact words, but would make oath anywhere that he
positively denied the charge made against him of infidelity. That was
the first time I ever heard the charge of infidelity against Lincoln.
Grady did not say that he would not vote for Lincoln if he was an
infidel, but my understanding from Grady was that he would not vote
for Lincoln if he was an infidel; and Grady did, as I suppose, vote
for him. I understood him that he should."
Another statement was by Jonathan Harnett. It was not made in a letter,
like the others, but was verbally stated to Mr. Irwin, who wrote it
from Harnett's dictation, and was then read to him and endorsed by
him. Mr. Harnett related an incident which he declared himself to have
witnessed in Lincoln's office in 1858, when an argument was held on
the truth of the Christian religion, a number of men participating. He
affirmed that Mr. Lincoln ended the discussion by a cogent argument
based on the restitution of all things in Christ, and the ultimate
salvation of all men.
This line of argument, attested by a number who heard Mr. Lincoln
in these discussions, will be readily understood by those who have
heard, as he had heard from his infancy, the typical argument of the
backwoods Baptist preacher, and who appreciates Mr. Lincoln's theory
of the irrevocability of the Divine will, and the relation of the
atonement to the restitution of all things. The essential difference
between Lincoln's point of view and that of these preachers was
that the preachers saw in the work of Christ the basis of personal
forgiveness of sin; and Lincoln saw in it rather a manifestation of the
irrevocable law of God for the ultimate salvation of the race.
Another of the letters included in the Irwin article was one from Isaac
Cogdal, who related a conversation in Lincoln's office in Herndon's
presence, in which Lincoln expressed himself somewhat as follows:
"He did not nor could not believe in the endless punishment of any
one of the human race. He understood punishment for sin to be a
Bible doctrine; that punishment was parental in its object, aim and
design, and intended for the good of the offender; hence it must
cease when justice was satisfied. He added that all that was lost by
the transgression of Adam was made good by the atonement; all that
was lost by the fall was made good by the sacrifice; and he added
this remark, that punishment being a 'provision of the gospel system,
he was not sure but the world would be better off if a little more
punishment was preached by our ministers, and not so much of pardon of
sin.'"
I need only add, that to me these letters carry the conviction of
reality. Lincoln had been rooted and grounded in the kind of dogma that
began with Adam and related to his fall in vital sort the atonement of
Christ. That Lincoln had some doubts concerning the person of Christ
is not in point. He believed in God, and he knew the fact of sin, and
he was dyed in the wool in arguments concerning the fall of the race
in Adam and its redemption in Christ. But he did not dwell as did the
preachers on individual forgiveness, which he sometimes doubted, but
sought to evolve a legal and moral scheme with a final restoration. I
regard these testimonies as essentially true.