This was the Dreyfus case of the Civil War. Stone was never tried and

never vindicated. He was eventually released upon parole and after many

tantalizing disappointments permitted to rejoin the army. What gives the

event significance is its evidence of the power, at that moment, of

the Committee, and of the relative weakness of the President. Lincoln's

eagerness to protect condemned soldiers survives in many anecdotes. Hay

confides to his diary that he was sometimes "amused at the eagerness

with which the President caught at any fact which would justify"

clemency. And yet, when Stanton informed him of the arrest of Stone,

he gloomily acquiesced. "I hope you have good reasons for it," he said.

Later he admitted that he knew very little about the case. But he did

not order Stone's release.

Lincoln had his own form of ruthlessness. The selfless man, by dealing

with others in the same extraordinary way in which he deals with

himself, may easily under the pressure of extreme conditions become

impersonal in his thinking upon duty. The morality of such a state

of mind is a question for the philosopher. The historian must content

himself with pointing out the only condition that redeems it--if

anything redeems it The leader who thinks impersonally about others

and personally about himself-what need among civilized people to

characterize him? Borgia, Louis XIV, Napoleon. If we are ever to pardon

impersonal thinking it is only in the cases of men who begin by effacing

themselves. The Lincoln who accepted Stanton as a Cabinet officer, who

was always more or less overshadowed by the belief that in saving the

government he was himself to perish, is explicable, at least, when

individual men became for him, as at times they did, impersonal factors

in a terrible dream.

There are other considerations in the attempt to give a moral value to

his failure to interfere in behalf of Stone. The first four months of

1862 are not only his feeblest period as a ruler, the period when he

was barely able to hold his own, but also the period when he was least

definite as a personality, when his courage and his vitality seemed

ebbing tides. Again, his spirit was in eclipse. Singularly enough, this

was the darkness before the dawn. June of 1862 saw the emergence, with a

suddenness difficult to explain, of the historic Lincoln. But in

January of that year he was facing downward into the mystery of his last

eclipse. All the dark places of his heredity must be searched for clues

to this strange experience. There are moments, especially under strain

of a personal bereavement that fell upon him in February, when his will

seemed scarcely a reality; when, as a directing force he may be said

momentarily to have vanished; when he is hardly more than a ghost among

his advisers. The far-off existence of weak old Thomas cast its parting

shadow across his son's career.

However, even our Dreyfus case drew from Lincoln another display of that

settled conviction of his that part of his function was to be scapegoat.

"I serve," which in a way might be taken as his motto always, was

peculiarly his motto, and likewise his redemption, in this period of his

weakness. The enemies of the Committee in Congress took the matter up

and denounced Stanton. Thereupon, Wade flamed forth, criticizing Lincoln

for his leniency, venting his fury on all those who were tender of their

enemies, storming that "mercy to traitors is cruelty to loyal men."(12)

Lincoln replied neither to Wade nor to his antagonists; but, without

explaining the case, without a word upon the relation to it of the

Secretary and the Committee, he informed the Senate that the President

was alone responsible for the arrest and imprisonment of General

Stone.(13)

XX. IS CONGRESS THE PRESIDENT'S MASTER?

The period of Lincoln's last eclipse is a period of relative silence.

But his mind was not inactive. He did not cease thinking upon the deep

theoretical distinctions that were separating him by a steadily widening

chasm from the most powerful faction in Congress. In fact, his mental

powers were, if anything, more keen than ever before. Probably, it was

the very clearness of the mental vision that enfeebled him when it came

to action. He saw his difficulties with such crushing certainty. During

this trying period there is in him something of Hamlet.

The reaction to his ideas, to what is either expressed or implied, in

the first and second messages, was prompt to appear. The Jacobins did

not confine their activities within the scope of the terrible Committee.

Wade and Chandler worked assiduously undermining his strength in

Congress. Trumbull, though always less extreme than they, was still the

victim of his delusion that Lincoln was a poor creature, that the only

way to save the country was to go along with those grim men of strength

who dominated the Committee. In January, a formidable addition appeared

in the ranks of Lincoln's opponents. Thaddeus Stevens made a speech in

the House that marks a chapter. It brought to a head a cloud of floating

opposition and dearly defined an issue involving the central proposition

in Lincoln's theory of the government. The Constitution of the United

States, in its detailed provisions, is designed chiefly to meet the

exigencies of peace. With regard to the abnormal conditions of war,

it is relatively silent. Certain "war powers" are recognized but not

clearly defined; nor is it made perfectly plain what branch of the

government possesses them. The machinery for their execution is assumed

but not described--as when the Constitution provides that the privileges

of the writ of habeas corpus are to be suspended only in time of war,

but does not specify by whom, or in what way, the suspension is to be

effected. Are those undefined "war powers," which are the most sovereign

functions of our government, vested in Congress or in the President?

Lincoln, from the moment he defined his policy, held tenaciously to the

theory that all these extraordinary powers are vested in the President.

By implication, at least, this idea is in the first message. Throughout

the latter part of 1861, he put the theory into practice. Whatever

seemed to him necessary in a state of war, he did, even to the arresting

of suspected persons, refusing them the privilege-of the habeas corpus,

and retaining them in prison without trial. During 1861, he left the

exercise of this sovereign authority to the discretion of the two

Secretaries of War and of State.

Naturally, the Abolitionists, the Jacobins, the Democratic machine,

conscientious believers in the congressional theory of the government,

every one who for any reason, wanted to hit the Administration, united

in a chorus of wrath over arbitrary arrests. The greatest orator of

the time, Wendell Phillips, the final voice of Abolition, flayed the

government in public speeches for reducing America to an absolute

despotism. Trumbull introduced into the Senate a resolution calling upon

the President for a statement of the facts as to what he had actually

done.(1)

But the subject of arrests was but the prelude to the play. The real

issue was the theory of the government. Where in last analysis does the

Constitution place the ultimate powers of sovereignty, the war powers?

In Congress or in the President? Therefore, in concrete terms, is

Congress the President's master, or is it only one branch of the

government with a definite but united activity of its own, without that

sweeping sovereign authority which in course of time has been acquired

by its parent body, the Parliament of Great Britain?

On this point Lincoln never wavered. From first to last, he was

determined not to admit that Congress had the powers of Parliament. No

sooner had the politicians made out this attitude than their attack

on it began. It did not cease until Lincoln's death. It added a second

constitutional question to the issues of the war. Not only the issue

whether a State had a right to secede, but also the issue of the

President's possession of the war powers of the Constitution. Time and

again the leaders of disaffection in his own party, to say nothing of

the violent Democrats, exhausted their rhetoric denouncing Lincoln's

position. They did not deny themselves the delights of the sneer.

Senator Grimes spoke of a call on the President as an attempt "to

approach the footstool of power enthroned at the other end of the

Avenue."(2) Wade expanded the idea: "We ought to have a committee to

wait on him whenever we send him a bill, to know what his royal pleasure

is with regard to it. . . . We are told that some gentlemen . . . have

been to see the President. Some gentlemen are very fortunate in that

respect. Nobody can see him, it seems, except some privileged gentlemen

who are charged with his constitutional conscience."(3) As Lincoln kept

his doors open to all the world, as no one came and went with greater

freedom than the Chairman of the Committee, the sneer was-what one might

expect of the Committee. Sumner said: "I claim for Congress all that

belongs to any government in the exercise of the rights of war."

Disagreement with him, he treated with unspeakable disdain: "Born in

ignorance and pernicious in consequence, it ought to be received with

hissings of contempt, and just in proportion as it obtains acceptance,

with execration."(4) Henry Wilson declared that, come what might, the

policy of the Administration would be shaped by the two Houses. "I had

rather give a policy to the President of the United States than take a

policy from the President of the United States."(5) Trumbull thundered

against the President's theory as the last word in despotism.(6)

Such is the mental perspective in which to regard the speech of Stevens

of January 22, 1862. With masterly clearness, he put his finger on the

heart of the matter: the exceptional problems of a time of war, problems

that can not be foreseen and prepared for by anticipatory legislation,

may be solved in but one way, by the temporary creation of the dictator;

this is as true of modern America as of ancient Rome; so far, most

people are agreed; but this extraordinary function must not be vested

in the Executive; on the contrary, it must be, it is, vested in the

Legislature. Stevens did not hesitate to push his theory to its

limit. He was not afraid of making the Legislature in time of war the

irresponsible judge of its own acts. Congress, said he, has all possible

powers of government, even the dictator's power; it could declare itself

a dictator; under certain circumstances he was willing that it should do

so.(7)

The intellectual boldness of Lincoln was matched by an equal boldness.

Between them, he and Stevens had perfectly defined their issue. Granted

that a dictator was needed, which should it be--the President or

Congress?

In the hesitancy at the White House during the last eclipse, in the

public distress and the personal grief, Lincoln withheld himself

from this debate. No great utterances break the gloom of this period.

Nevertheless, what may be considered his reply to Stevens is to be

found. Buried in the forgotten portions of the Congressional Globe is a

speech that surely was inspired-or, if not directly inspired, so close

a reflection of the President's thinking that it comes to the same thing

at the end.

Its author, or apparent author, was one of the few serene figures in

that Thirty-Seventh Congress which was swept so pitilessly by epidemics

of passion. When Douglas, after coming out valiantly for the Union and

holding up Lincoln's hands at the hour of crisis, suddenly died, the

Illinois Legislature named as his successor in the Senate, Orville Henry

Browning. The new Senator was Lincoln's intimate friend. Their points

of view, their temperaments were similar. Browning shared Lincoln's

magnanimity, his hatred of extremes, his eagerness not to allow the

war to degenerate into revolution. In the early part of 1862 he was

Lincoln's spokesman in the Senate. Now that the temper of Wade and

Chandler, the ruthlessness that dominated the Committee, had drawn unto

itself such a cohort of allies; now that all their thinking had been

organized by a fearless mind; there was urgent need for a masterly

reply. Did Lincoln feel unequal, at the moment, to this great task? Very

probably he did. Anyhow, it was Browning who made the reply,(8) a reply

so exactly in his friend's vein, that--there you are!

His aim was to explain the nature of those war powers of the government

"which lie dormant during time of peace," and therefore he frankly put

the question, "Is Congress the government?" Senator Fessenden, echoing

Stevens had said, "There is no limit on the powers of Congress;

everything must yield to the force of martial law as resolved by

Congress." "There, sir," said Browning, "is as broad and deep a

foundation for absolute despotism as was ever laid." He rang the changes

on the need to "protect minorities from the oppression and tyranny of

excited majorities."

He went on to lay the basis of all Lincoln's subsequent defense of

the presidential theory as opposed to the congressional theory, by

formulating two propositions which reappear in some of Lincoln's most

famous papers. Congress is not a safe vessel for extraordinary powers,

because in our system we have difficulty in bringing it definitely to an

account under any sort of plebiscite. On the other hand the President,

if he abuses the war powers "when peace returns, is answerable to the

civil power for that abuse."

But Browning was not content to reason on generalities. Asserting that

Congress could no more command the army than it could adjudicate a case,

he further asserted that the Supreme Court had settled the matter and

had lodged the war powers in the President. He cited a decision called

forth by the legal question, "Can a Circuit Court of the United States

inquire whether a President had acted rightly in calling out the militia

of a State to suppress an insurrection?" "The elevated office of the

President," said the Court, "chosen as he is by the People of the United

States, and the high responsibility he could not fail to feel when

acting in a case of such moment, appear to furnish as strong safeguards

against the wilful abuse of power as human prudence and foresight could

well devise. At all events, it is conferred upon him by the Constitution

and the laws of the United States, and therefore, must be respected and

enforced in its judicial tribunals."(9)

Whether or not constitutional lawyers would agree with Browning in the

conclusion he drew from this decision, it was plainly the bed rock

of his thought. He believed that the President--whatever your mere

historian might have to say--was in point of fact the exponent of the

people as a whole, and therefore the proper vessel for the ultimate

rights of a sovereign, rights that only the people possess, that

only the people can delegate. And this was Lincoln's theory. Roughly

speaking, he-conceived of the presidential office about as if it were

the office of Tribune of the People.

There was still another reason why both Lincoln and Browning feared

to yield anything to the theory of congressional supremacy. It was,

in their minds, not only the general question of all Congresses but

immediately of this particular Congress. An assembly in which the temper

of Wade and Chandler, of Stevens and Sumner, was entering the ascendent,

was an assembly to be feared; its supremacy was to be denied, its power

was to be fought.

Browning did not close without a startling passage flung square in

the teeth of the apostles of fury. He summed up the opposite temper,

Lincoln's temper, in his description of "Our brethren of the South--for

I am willing to call them brethren; my heart yet yearns toward them with

a fervency of love which even their treason has not all extinguished,

which tempts me constantly to say in their behalf, 'Father, forgive

them, for they know not what they do.'" He pleaded with the Senate not

to consider them "as public enemies but as insurgent citizens only," and

advocated an Act of Amnesty restoring all political and property

rights "instantly upon their return to allegiance and submission to the

authority of the government."

Had this narrowly constitutional issue arisen in quiet times, who can

say how slight might have been its significance? But Fate had decreed

that it should arise in the stormiest moment of our history. Millions

of men and women who cared nothing for constitutional theories, who were

governed by that passion to see immediate results which the thoughtless

ever confuse with achievement, these were becoming hysterical over

delay. Why did not the government do something? Everywhere voices were

raised accusing the President of cowardice. The mania of suspicion

was not confined to the Committee. The thoughts of a multitude were

expressed by Congressman Hickman in his foolish words, "These are days

of irresponsibility and imbecility, and we are required to perform two

offices--the office of legislator and the office of President." The

better part of a year had passed since the day of Sumter, and still the

government had no military success to its credit. An impetuous people

that lacked experience of war, that had been accustomed in unusual

measure to have its wishes speedily gratified, must somehow be

marshalled behind the government, unless the alternative was the

capture of power by the Congressional Cabal that was forming against the

President.

Entering upon the dark days of the first half of 1862, Lincoln had no

delusions about the task immediately before him. He must win battles;

otherwise, he saw no way of building up that popular support which alone

would enable him to keep the direction of policy in the hands of the

Executive, to keep it out of the hands of Congress. In a word, the

standing or falling of his power appeared to have been committed to the

keeping of the army. What the army would do with it, save his policy or

wreck his policy, was to no small degree a question of the character and

the abilities of the Commanding General.

XXI. THE STRUGGLE TO CONTROL THE ARMY

George Brinton McClellan, when at the age of thirty-four he was raised

suddenly to a dizzying height of fame and power, was generally looked

upon as a prodigy. Though he was not that, he had a real claim to

distinction. Had destiny been considerate, permitting him to rise

gradually and to mature as he rose, he might have earned a stable

reputation high among those who are not quite great. He had done well

at West Point, and as a very young officer in the Mexican War; he had

represented his country as a military observer with the allies in the

Crimea; he was a good engineer, and a capable man of business. His

winning personality, until he went wrong in the terrible days of 1862,

inspired "a remarkable affection and regard in every one from the

President to the humblest orderly that waited at his door."(1) He was

at home among books; he could write to his wife that Prince Napoleon

"speaks English very much as the Frenchmen do in the old English

comedies";(2) he was able to converse in "French, Spanish, Italian,

German, in two Indian dialects and he knew a little Russian and

Turkish." Men like Wade and Chandler probably thought of him as a

"highbrow," and doubtless he irritated them by invariably addressing

the President as "Your Excellency." He had the impulses as well as the

traditions of an elder day. But he had three insidious defects. At the

back of his mind there was a vein of theatricality, hitherto unrevealed,

that might, under sufficient stimulus, transform him into a poseur.

Though physically brave, he had in his heart, unsuspected by himself

or others, the dread of responsibility. He was void of humor. These

damaging qualities, brought out and exaggerated by too swift a rise to

apparent greatness, eventually worked his ruin. As an organizer he was

unquestionably efficient. His great achievement which secures him a

creditable place in American history was the conversion in the autumn of

1861 of a defeated rabble and a multitude of raw militia into a splendid

fighting machine. The very excellence of this achievement was part of

his undoing. It was so near to magical that it imposed on himself, gave

him a false estimate of himself, hid from him his own limitation. It

imposed also on his enemies. Crude, fierce men like the Vindictive

leaders of Congress, seeing this miracle take place so astoundingly

soon, leaped at once to the conclusion that he could, if he would,

follow it by another miracle. Having forged the thunderbolt, why could

he not, if he chose, instantly smite and destroy? All these hasty

inexperienced zealots labored that winter under the delusion that one

great battle might end the war. When McClellan, instead of rushing to

the front, entered his second phase--the one which he did not understand

himself, which his enemies never understood--when he entered upon his

long course of procrastination, the Jacobins, startled, dumfounded,

casting about for reasons, could find in their unanalytical vision, but

one. When Jove did not strike, it must be because Jove did not wish to

strike. McClellan was delaying for a purpose. Almost instantaneous

was the whisper, followed quickly by the outcry among the Jacobins,

"Treachery! We are betrayed. He is in league with the enemy."

Their distrust was not allayed by the manner in which he conducted

himself. His views of life and of the office of commanding general were

not those of frontier America. He believed in pomp, in display, in an

ordered routine. The fine weather of the autumn of 1861 was utilized

at Washington for frequent reviews. The flutter of flags, the glint of

marching bayonets, the perfectly ordered rhythm of marching feet, the

blare of trumpets, the silvery notes of the bugles, the stormily rolling

drums, all these filled with martial splendor the golden autumn air when

the woods were falling brown. And everywhere, it seemed, look where one

might, a sumptuously uniformed Commanding General, and a numerous and

sumptuous staff, were galloping past, mounted on beautiful horses.

Plain, blunt men like the Jacobins, caring nothing for this ritual of

command, sneered. They exchanged stories of the elaborate dinners he

was said to give daily, the several courses, the abundance of wine, the

numerous guests; and after these dinners, he and his gorgeous staff,

"clattering up and down the public streets" merely to show themselves

off. All this sneering was wildly exaggerated. The mania of

exaggeration, the mania of suspicion, saturated the mental air breathed

by every politician at Washington, that desperate winter, except the

great and lonely President and the cynical Secretary of State.

Lincoln; An Account of his Personal Life, Especially of its Springs of Action as Revealed and Deepened by the Ordeal of War · 第 14 / 30 段