FREDERICK DOUGLASS TO THEODORE TILTON

Rochester[, N.Y.] 15 Oct[ober] 1864[.]

My DEAR MR. TILTON:

I am obliged by your favor containing a copy of your recent Speech in Latimer hall.¹Theodore Tilton spoke in Latimer Hall in Brooklyn, New York, on 7 October 1864. He complained that too many of those campaigning for Lincoln’s reelection ignored the Republican party’s platform pledge to ensure slavery’s final abolition and instead stressed that the war was being fought principally to restore the Union. Latimer Hall, located at 210-12 Court Street, was a popular venue for political, religious, and reform meetings. The speech was reprinted in the New York , 12 October 1864; New York , 13 October 1864; Brooklyn , 29 December 1864. I had read that speech in the Tribune several days ago, and in my heart thanked you for daring thus to break the spell of enchantment which slavery, though wounded dying and despised, is still able to bind the tongues of our republican orators. It was a timely word wisely and well spoken, the best and most luminous Spark Struck from the flint and steel of this canvass. To all appearance we have been more ashamedof the negro during this canvass than those of 56 and 60. The President’s “To whom it may concern,”²Douglass refers to a public letter that President Lincoln wrote on 18 July 1864 and that was printed in Horace Greeley’s New York Tribune. Addressing “To Whom it may concern,” Lincoln declared, “Any proposition which embraces the restoration of peace, the integrity of the whole Union, and the abandonment of slavery, and which comes by and with an authority that can control the armies now at war against the United States will be received and considered by the Executive government of the United States, and will be met by liberal terms on other substantial and collateral points; and the bearer, or bearers thereof shall have safe-conduct both ways.” With the major Union armies seemingly stalled before their objectives in Virginia and Georgia, Northern antiwar sentiment seemed to be growing rapidly. Lincoln’s offer to negotiate with Confederates generated controversy because many, doubting its sincerity, saw it as a calculated effort to diffuse potential support for the Democratic candidate, George B. McClellan, among Northern and border state War Democrats. McPherson, , 760-62. frightened his party and his party in return frightened the President. I found him in this alarmed condition when I called upon him six weeks ago—and it is well to note the time. The country was was struck with one those bewilderments which dethrone reason for the moment. Every body was thinking and dreaming of peace—and the impression had gone abroad that the Presidents antiSlavery policy was about the only thing which prevented a peaceful settlement with the Rebels. McClellan³George B. McClellan. was nominated—and at that time his prospects were bright as Mr Lincolns were gloomy. You must therefore, judge the President’s words in the light of the circumstances in which he Spoke. Atlanta had not fallen; Sheridan had not swept the Shenandoah⁴The tide of the Civil War seemed to have turned in the Confederates’ favor in midsummer 1864. Confederate forces under General Joseph Johnston were successfully thwarting the Union army’s efforts, under General William T. Sherman, to capture the strategic transportation hub of Atlanta, Georgia. Johnston’s replacement, John Bell Hood, launched a series of unsuccessful counterattacks on Sherman in August and had to evacuate the city on 1 September 1864. In July, Confederate troops under Jubal Early marched the length of the Shenandoah Valley, invaded Maryland, and reached the outskirts of Washington, D.C., before being forced to retreat. A Union force led by Phillip Sheridan defeated Confederate forces early in September and laid waste to the valley’s harvests, which the Confederates needed esperately. McPherson, , 743-50, 756-58, 774-77; Long and Long, 495-574.—and men were ready for peace almost at any price. The President was pressed on every hand to modify his letter “To whom it may concern”—How to meet this pressure he did me the honor to ask my opinion. He Showed me a letter written with a view to meet the peace clamour raised against him. The first point made in it was the important fact that no man or set of men authorized to speak for the Confederate Government had ever submitted a proposition for peace to him. Hence the charge that he had in some way stood in the way of peace fell to the ground. He had always stoode ready to listen to any such propositions.

The next point referred to was the charge that he had in his Niagara letter committed himself and the country to an abolition war rather than a war for the union, so that even if the latter could be attained by negotiation, the war would go on for Abolition.⁵This issue must have been discussed when Douglass met privately with Lincoln at the White
House on 19 August 1864. s, ser. 2, 3:271-73.

The President did not propose to take back what he had said in his Niagara letter⁶An unauthorized group of Northerners and Southerners met at Niagara Falls, New York, in July 1864 to discuss ending the war. Organized by the New York Tribune editor, Horace Greeley, the so-called peace conference brought Peace Democrats into contact with Confederate agents in Canada, including Clement Claiborne Clay, a former U.S. senator from Alabama; James P. Holcombe of Virginia; and Jacob Thompson of Mississippi. Greeley claimed that the Confederates were anxious for peace and were willing to negotiate, but when Lincoln called their bluff by providing Greeley with a letter authorizing an end to the war if the Union was restored and slavery ended, the talks collapsed. Glyndon G. Van Deusen, (Philadelphia, 1953), 305-07; Frank H. Severance, “The Peace Conference at Niagara Falls in 1864: An Episode of the Civil War,” , 18:79-80 (1914); Ludwell H. Johnson, “Lincoln’s Solution to the Problem of Peace Terms, 1864-1865,” , 34:577-78 (November 1968). but wished to relieve the fears of his peace friends, by making it appear that the thing which they feared could not happen, and was wholly beyond his power. Even if I would, I could not carry on the war for the Abolition of Slavery—The country would not sustain such a war, and I could do nothing without the support of Congress. I could not make the abolition of Slavery an absolute, prior condition to the reestablishment of the Union. All that the President said on this point was to make manifest his want of power to do the thing which his enemies and pretended friends professed to be afraid he would do. Now the question he put to me was shall I send forth this letter? To which I answered certainly not—It ould be given a broader meaning than you intend to convey—it would be taken as a complete surrender of your antiSlavery policy—and do you serious damage. In answer to your copperhead⁷During the Civil War, Republican politicians frequently charged that Democratic opposition to many Union war policies was evidence of treasonous sympathy for the Confederate cause. Republicans called their political opponents “Copperheads” after a venomous snake that lies in ambush and strikes without warning. Recent scholarship generally dismisses the accusations of Northern Democratic disloyalty as a product of overheated wartime partisan spirit. Joel H. Silbey, (New York, 1977), 166-69, 243; Mitford M. Mathews, ed., , 2 vols. (Chicago, 1951), 1:392. accusers—your friends can make this argument of your want of power—but you Cannot wisely say a word on that point. I have looked and feared that mr Lincoln would say something of the sort, but he has been perfectly silent on that point—and I think will remain so. But the thing which alarmed me most—was this: The President said he wanted some plan devised by which we could get more of the Slaves within our lines. He thought that now was there time—and that such only of them as succeeded in getting within our lines would be free after the war is over. This shows that the President only has faith in his proclamations of freedom—during war—and that he believes their operation will Cease with the war. We were long to gether and there was much said—but this enough—

I gave my address—to the People of the U.S.⁸Douglass was the presiding officer at the National Convention of Colored Men held in Syracuse, New York, on 4-7 October 1864, and he addressed the gathering on several occasions. In this letter to Tilton, Douglass seems to allude to an address delivered on 4 October that was summarized in accounts of the convention. No text or notice of the speech subsequently appeared in the . , 13-14; , ser. 1, 4:xix; Foner, F, 3:408-22. to the Committee appointed to publish the minutes of the Convention. It is too lengthy for a news paper article—though of course I should be very glad to see it noticed in the Independent.⁹New York . You may not be aware that I do not see the Independent now a days—It was discontinued several months ago— If you were not like myself taxed on every hand—both by your own disposition to give, and the desposition of others to ask, I should ask you to send me the Independent for one year—on your own account. We had Anna Dickenson¹⁰Anna Dickenson. here on thursday night. Her speech made a profound impression. Nothing from Phillips,¹¹Born and raised in Boston and educated at Harvard, Wendell Phillips (1811-84) was one of the most prominent advocates of reform in the nineteenth century. In 1837, the young Phillips distinguished himself by denouncing the murder of the abolitionist editor Elijah Lovejoy. Active in the American Anti-Slavery Society, Phillips tended to support, but did not completely adhere to, William Lloyd Garrison’s brand of nonpolitical, disunionist abolitionism. For example, as a delegate to the World’s Anti-Slavery Convention of 1840, Phillips agreed with Garrison that female delegates should be seated, but disagreed with him on nonresistance to slavery. Following the Civil War, Phillips became devoted to a number of reforms, including prohibition, penal reform, concessions to Native Americans, woman suffrage, and the labor movement. Bartlett, ; Sherwin, ; Stewart, s; , 24:546-47. Beecher¹²Henry Ward Beecher. or yourself could have been more eloquent, and in her masterly handling of statistics she reminded one of Horace Mann in his palmiest¹³Prosperous or flourishing. days. I never listened to her with more wonder. One thing however, I think you can say to her, if you ever get the chance, for it ought to be said—and she will hear it and bear from you, as well or better than from most other persons—and that is: stop that walking. She walked incessantly—back and forth—from one side the broad platform to the other. It is a new trick and one which I neither think useful or ornamental—but really a defect and disfigurement. She would allow me to tell her so—I think—because she knows—how sincerely I appreciate both her wonderful talents and her equally wonderful devotion to the cause of my enslaved race.

I am not doing much in this Presidential Canvass for the reason—that Republican Committees do not wish to expose themselves to the charge of being the “Niggar” party. The negro is the deformed child, which is put out of the room when company comes. I hope to speak some after the Election—though not much before—and I am enclined to think I shall be able to speak all the more usefully because I have had so little to say during the present Canvass. I now look upon the Election of Mr Lincoln settled.

When there was any shadow of a hope that a man of more decided anti slavery convictions and policy could be elected—I was not for Mr Lincoln—but as soon as the Chicago convention—my mind was made up—and it is made up still. All dates changed with the nomination of McClellan.

I hope, that in listening to Mr Stanton’s¹⁴Edwin M. Stanton. version of my visit to the President you kept in mind something of Mr Stanton’s own state of mind concerning public affairs. I found him in a very gloomy state of mind—much less hopeful than myself—and yet more cheerful than I expected to find him. I judge from your note that he must have imparted somewhat of the hue of his own mind to my statements.¹⁵Stanton had become convinced of the need to recruit African Americans into the army as early as the spring of 1862, and had worked to persuade Lincoln to authorize it. Tilton apparently conversed with Stanton when the former lectured in the capital. In later years, Tilton praised Stanton for his stand against Andrew Johnson in the early phase of Reconstruction. Theodore Tilton, (New York, 1870), 213-18; Altina L. Waller, R(Amherst, Mass, 1982), 43; Thomas and Hyman, Stanton, 229-46, 262-65. He thinks far less of the President’s honesty than I do—and far less of his Anti Slavery than I do. I have not yet come to think that honesty and politics are incompatable. Well, here I am, my Dear Sir, writing you a long letter—needlessly taking up your precious time—and with no better expense for the impertenence than a brief note from you and a knowledge of your good temper and disposition toward me.

Make all the speeches of this Latimer Hall kind you can—They will look better after the election than now—though they bear with them the grace of fitness now. Please remember me kindly to Mrs Tilton¹⁶Theodore Tilton married Elizabeth Richards (1834-97), the daughter of a Brooklyn jeweler, in 1855. She had been a student at the Brooklyn Female Seminary, and one of her classmates was a daughter of the prominent Congregational minister Henry Ward Beecher. Elizabeth joined Beecher’s Plymouth Church in Brooklyn and was active in its programs to help the neighborhood’s poor. The Tiltons had five children, one of whom died in infancy. In 1870, Elizabeth confessed to Theodore that she had engaged in an eighteen-month affair with Beecher after the death of her child. Theodore
confronted Beecher privately, and the matter at first seemed resolved. But word leaked to the public, and a scandal quickly ensued. Tilton filed criminal charges against Beecher, which led to a highly publicized six-month trial. Elizabeth recanted her accusations against Beecher, and the trial ended in a hung jury. With his reputation and journalistic career ruined by the scandal, Theodore left his wife and fled to Paris. In 1878, Elizabeth reversed herself and publicly confessed to committing adultery with Beecher. The Plymouth Church excommunicated Elizabeth for her accusations against its pastor, and she died blind and socially ostracized in her daughter’s home. Shaplen, , 27, 34-35, 47-65, 245-47; Waller, , 8, 11, 14-15, 38-41, 54-63.—and all the Dear bright eyed little Tiltons—who sparkle like diamonds about your hearth—

Truly yours Always,

FREDERICK DOUGLASS.

P.S. I wish you would drop a line to John S. Rock¹⁷John Sweat Rock (1825-66) was born to free black parents in Salem, New Jersey. From 1844 to 1848, he taught public school while studying dentistry in his spare time. In 1850, Rock opened a dental practice in Philadelphia and enrolled in the American Medical College. Following his graduation in 1852, he moved to Boston, where he practiced both medicine and dentistry. When his health declined in 1858, Rock journeyed to France. Upon his return, he began studying for a less arduous career as a lawyer. He was admitted to practice before the Massachusetts bench in 1861 and before the U.S. Supreme Court in 1864. Rock was widely known as a lecturer on both scholarly and antislavery topics, and shared the platform with Douglass on several occasions. During the Civil War, he served as a recruiting agent for Massachusetts black regiments. NASS, 15 December 1866; William Wells
Brown, (Boston, 1863), 266-70; Eugene P. Link, “The Civil Rights Activities of Three Great Negro Physicians (1840-1940),”, 52:169-84 (July 1967); Wilhelmina M. Crosson, “Do You Know That?” , 5:3, 9 (October 1941); , 529-31. Esqr asking him to send you advanced sheets of my address to the people of the United states. He is at 6. Fremont Street—

Boston.

ALS: Gluck Collection of Manuscripts, NBu.