From Out of the Top Hat: A Blog from the Abraham Lincoln Presidential Library & Museum

To only a handful of individuals interested in the Lincoln assassination, the name of Nathan Simms evokes quizzical looks.  Simms is one of several individuals who claimed to have held the reins of John Wilkes Booth’s horse on the night of April 14, 1865.  Dr. Edward Steers ably demonstrates the problems with Simms’s claims and credits John “Peanut” Burroughs as the rightful holder of Booth’s horse on that fateful night.  But if Simms was mistaken about his role on April 14, 1865, it might be premature to dismiss his connection to the assassination.

A letter by architect Walter F. Price to President Herbert Hoover suggests that Simms — misspelled as “Sims” throughout the letter — worked for Mary Surratt.  Beyond the new information on Simms, Mr. Price also enclosed three photographs to provide additional visual reference of this obscure individual.  The text of the February 3, 1931, letter follows:

“Some weeks ago I went to Marshalton, Chester County, Pa., to visit an old Meeting House; the aged care-taker as I was leaving pointed to a frame House in the edge of the village.  He said ‘in that house lived a colored man named Nathan Sims; when he was about seventeen he held a horse for J. Wilkes Booth while he went into the theatre to assassinate President Lincoln.’

Nathan Simms, in Pennsylvania, 1931 – Mary Surratt’s former slave?

“On the 9^th of January last I went again to Marshalton about four miles west of West Chester and called at his house.  A mulatto woman came to the door and said she was Mrs. Nathan Sims, then added that her husband was in the village getting slop.  On my inquiry as to how I should know him, she said he will be carrying two buckets.  Within five minutes I met him with his buckets; he admitted he was the Nathan Sims who held the horse for Booth.  I turned to walk back with him to his house.  He seemed shy and taciturn.  To my question as to whether he was the slave of Mrs. Surratt, he said he had been, but later in our short talk, he referred as to having been her bond servant.  Of Mrs. Surratt he said only, the soldiers came and bundled her up and took her away.  I don’t know what became of her.  Near his house I had him stand for his picture by his pump.  I took a second picture, trying to secure a little better light on his face.

“I went again on the 25^th of January and took a promised picture.  In the town I asked for an old and reliable citizen, and was referred to a Mr. Peterson, who said relative to N. Sims’ veracity, that from his knowledge of the man, he felt sure we could depend on anything he might say.  Just as I reached the house he came around the corner and I gave him the picture and asked more questions.  For example; who are his parents?  He replied they were slaves of Dr. Gunton of Maryland.  There were several boys in the family and as he was not needed, he was bound over by his master to Mrs. Surratt, and that he worked for her on her ‘big’ farm at Surrattville, where she had much property.  He finished by saying that he had lived in Marshalton thirty-six years.”

Nathan Simms may not have held Booth’s horse but he clearly seems to be connected to Mary Surratt.  To this extent, he is worth knowing more about as an historical actor.

Episode 12, “Killing Lincoln” Book Discussion: On a special podcast, a panel of historians including: James Cornelius (Lincoln Curator, ALPLM), Daniel Stowell (Director and Editor, Papers of Abraham Lincoln), Ron Keller (Assistant Professor of History and Political Science, Lincoln College, and Director, Lincoln Heritage Museum), and Matthew Holden (Wepner Distinguished Professor in Political Science, University of Illinois Springfield) discuss the Bill O’Reilly/Martin Dugard book, “Killing Lincoln”. The panel is moderated by former Chicago Tribune reporter Patrick Reardon.

Podcast: Play in new window | Download

Among the oldest liberties assigned to themselves by government officials is the franking privilege.  In Europe it applied to the monarch and highest courtiers.  In the U.S. in Lincoln’s day, it allowed a President, his private secretary, a Cabinet member, First Lady, Member of Congress, and a few others to send mail for free.  The ‘frank’ is simply their signature written on the envelope where a stamp or seal would normally go.

Lincoln used this privilege often enough, for official business of course. ‘A. Lincoln / M.C.’ (for Member of Congress) appears on a few surviving envelopes from the years 1847-1849.  While president, he and his office sent out scores of franked missives each week, and some of these survive, too, though most recipients (then as now) tossed out envelopes.  Among the rarest of this type are envelopes with black mourning borders, used for a few weeks after Willie Lincoln died in 1862.

A new type came to the attention of the ALPLM this year.  In 2010 we acquired two empty envelopes, both addressed in a fine hand to Hon. John T. Stuart /Springfield/Illinois and sent by free frank “From the President of the United States/ Priv. Sec.” and the signature of John G. Nicolay.  As private secretary to the president, Nicolay signed many hundreds of these.  The postmarks confirm the privilege: ‘Washington, D.C., FREE’ and the respective dates, March 22 and May 8, 1861.

Who was sending these?  The address line is not the hand of Nicolay, nor his assistant John Hay, nor those of Abraham, Mary, Robert, nor even the precocious Willie Lincoln. (Mr. Nicolay did frank Willie’s outgoing letters.)  Should one suspect Nicolay of abusing the franking privilege for some friend?  Nothing we know of this scrupulous and tireless Bavarian-born public servant, orphaned at 14, suggests that he did anything but work hard his whole life.

Furthermore, no letter by Abraham or Mary to her cousin John was known to date from those weeks.  So, who else had this access?

The answer: Mary’s cousin, and Stuart’s cousin also, Elizabeth Todd Grimsley.  Married to a man who died young, who never quite provided for her in the manner a Todd might expect, she did need a hand.  She traveled with and moved into the Executive Mansion alongside the Lincolns on March 4, 1861.  In addition to helping the family get settled, and using her schoolgirl French — as did Mary Lincoln, one night in dinner conversation with the Danish minister to the U.S. — ‘Lizzie’ Grimsley was trying to get appointed as a postmistress.  President Lincoln alone had the power to appoint her.

Figuring out who made use of mailing privileges can tell us a little something extra about life with the Lincolns.

It was not her sex or her inside track that gave him pause; he named more than 400 women to such an office.  As Lincoln wrote to Stuart on March 30, “The question of giving her the Springfield Post-office troubles me,” because he had just given out jobs to two relatives of Illinois’s junior senator, Lyman Trumbull, and people already criticized Lincoln’s penchant for appointing his old friends as well as Mary’s relations to federal positions.  Stuart advised that Lincoln ought not “let the case of Cousin Lizzie trouble …  you.”  Mainly, cousin Lizzie was too slow: one Beecher Todd had just been named postmaster of Lexington, Ky., and one Washington newspaper jested that 100 Todds were in the city looking for jobs.

Postmasterships were by far the largest category of federal jobs before the war broke out.  Applicants and recommenders barraged Lincoln with mail (postage paid) in pursuit of these positions, and ‘Cousin Lizzie’ was after all a loyal Kentuckian, the type of person Lincoln wanted to see in office, anywhere, as war neared.  A Buchanan-era Democrat who held the Springfield job, however, kept it till mid-August, when Lincoln appointed someone else.  Cousin Lizzie had felt since May that she overstayed her welcome, but confided to cousin John that her own brother as well as Mary Lincoln “insisted” or “urged and urged” her to stay.

Yet once the Springfield job was filled, cousin Lizzie left the White House, after a six-month stay.  One of the franked letters to cousin John had indeed discussed the post-office matter, and thus vaguely counted as ‘government business.’ Whether she was qualified to be a postmistress, we will never know.  But she did demonstrate that she knew how to use the mails, and presumably did pay for many stamps — after she had left Washington.

A side note to this story for collectors: her two letters to cousin John were donated to what is now the ALPLM in 1937.  How many hands did the envelopes pass through before being now reunited with the letters?

Part two of a two-part essay.  Part one appeared on November 10th.

Herndon’s 1866 lecture on Ann Rutledge drew the scorn of many who read the newspaper excerpts.  Critics ripped him for going public with Lincoln’s alleged buried-heart comment, a statement certain to anguish the widowed Mary Lincoln.

After watching Ann’s coffin descend into the grave in 1835, Abraham supposedly declared that his “heart, sad and broken, was buried there.”  To Herndon, this meant that Lincoln had lived out the rest of his life without truly loving another woman.

In 1866, no one disputed the reliability of the buried-heart remark, supplied to Herndon, he said, by an unnamed “friend.”  They just blasted Herndon for disclosing it, and claiming that it set the future course of Lincoln’s love life.  As it turns out, they could have challenged the comment’s legitimacy too.

In their edition of Herndon’s Lincoln, his 1889 biography of his partner, Douglas Wilson and Rodney Davis assert (p. 429, n. 6) that Herndon’s lecture silently reveals William Greene, a Lincoln acquaintance since 1831, as his unnamed source.  But the quotation is nowhere to be found, they say, in Greene’s communications with Herndon.  Nor did any other person pass along the buried-heart comment to Herndon.

So where did Herndon get those words?  I suspect that he composed them himself after reading an 1862 newspaper article in the Menard County Axis, a Democratic weekly published in nearby Petersburg.  Sent to him by one of his informants, this piece gushed over the president’s phenomenal rise from New Salem dry goods clerk to Commander-in-Chief.  “What a model of ambition … for the youths of the land,” the story exclaimed.

The Democratic newspaper in which the Lincoln-Rutledge folklore began, 27 years later.

The Axis had picked up the oral tradition of Lincoln’s romance with a beautiful young New Salem woman — “the youth had wrapped his heart with hers” — and cited his desolation over her death as one of the many obstacles he’d overcome on his arduous road to national renown.

The article described him standing by her grave, so distraught “as the cold clods fell upon the coffin, he sincerely wished that he too had been enclosed within it.”  By this account, the stricken Abraham wished he could leave his entire body with Ann, not just his “heart.”  He was saying he wanted to die.  He was not saying he couldn’t love another woman.  Burying his heart was apparently Herndon’s idea, not Lincoln’s.

As if to admit that he had no informant’s testimony to back up his public withering of Mary Lincoln — a woman who, according to him, had never received her husband’s deepest affection in 23 years of marriage — Herndon made a surprising claim in the 1889 biography.

In Herndon’s Lincoln, he wrote: “speaking of [Ann’s] death and her grave Lincoln once said to me, ‘My heart lies buried there.’”  Of course, in the 1866 lecture, Herndon said the remark had come to him from a “friend.”  In 1866, he made no claim that Lincoln had ever mentioned Ann to him at all.

In his lecture, Herndon made one final statement about Ann Rutledge, and this time the New York Times decided not to publish it — the only Herndon comment on Ann that the paper didn’t quote.  This unused observation may have come from the 1862 Axis story too.

After Ann’s death, the Axis article said, Lincoln recovered from his misery by finding “active exercise” for “both mind and body” in his political career.  Herndon attributed that notion to the same “friend” who’d come up with the buried-heart remark.  Lincoln had “leaped wildly into the political arena,” according to the alleged friend, “as a refuge from his despair.”

If fate had instead allowed Abraham to settle down with “Ann Rutledge, the sweet, tender and loving girl, he would have gravitated insensibly into a purely domestic man.”  Though already a state legislator, Lincoln would supposedly have forsaken electoral ambition for the pleasures of the hearth.

Herndon suspected that, for Lincoln, embracing the storm and stress of politics had depended on Ann’s dying.  It took the jolt of her removal to launch Lincoln on his weary pilgrimage toward the supreme sacrifice: surrendering his life for the people.

In this tragic scenario, Ann’s death, like Abraham’s, could be taken as an indirect act of devotion to the Republic.  Never publicly joined in love, they could be bound together in public service.  The loss of her life in 1835 could be tethered to the loss of his life in 1865.  Lincoln’s entire three-decade public career could be seen as framed by two calamitous events, his fiancée’s death and his own martyrdom.

Looking back from the 21st century, we can only wonder what kind of love Ann and Abraham shared.  “Love” covers a spectrum of emotions, desires, and promises.  There’s no way to be sure how far their bond had progressed along the path from intimate friendship to informal betrothal.

Perhaps they themselves didn’t know.  Anyone who has ever been young and in love can imagine that the devastation Abraham felt at her death may have come, in part, from knowing that they hadn’t been given the time to figure out just where they stood.

We do know that Abraham fell in love again.  Seven years after Ann’s death, Lincoln married the mercurial and passionate Mary Todd.  He let himself feel the promise of a lasting tie with a quick-witted, attentive woman whose extensive education, loyalty to the Whig Party, and endorsement of his ambition would help him rise to whatever heights life had in store for him.

With Mary, Abraham could bring love and politics together in a life of companionship, parenting, service, and, for all their domestic discord, moments of tenderness shielded from public view — maybe a reminder to him of moments he’d shared in his youth with Ann Rutledge.

Episode 11, The Law Office Clock: This month, Dr. James Cornelius discusses our Featured Artifact of the Month: The Law Office Clock. Plus, he answers questions regarding Mr. Lincoln’s voice and the soldiers who carried Mr. Lincoln to the Petersen house after he was shot.

Podcast: Play in new window | Download

Springfield eagerly anticipated the presidential visit by Herbert Hoover to rededicate the remodeled Lincoln Tomb on June 17, 1931.  In advance of the visit, Hoover received an unusual request from famed Lincoln collector Oliver R. Barrett proposing an offer that he hoped the president could not refuse.  Writing on June 2, 1931, Barrett declared:

“I have the door plate which, during Mr. Lincoln’s residence in Springfield, was on the front door of his home.  Enclosed you will find a photostat of the contemporaneous description of the door plate with the print of the Lincoln Home.  A similar description has appeared in one of the Bulletins of The Lincoln Centennial Association.

“I have been requested to permit a reproduction to be made and replaced upon the door.  I think, however, it would be more fitting to have the original plate restored to its old place upon the door of the Lincoln home by you on the occasion of your visit to Springfield.

In the 1930s, gentlemen traded around the door plate of this self-made gentleman.

“I have always made it a rule that nothing should go out of my Lincoln collection unless in exchange for some other desirable item which might be added to it.  If you would be willing to write your answer to this letter in longhand and send also an appreciation of Lincoln written and signed in longhand, I would be glad to give you the door plate in exchange and when restored by you, it would be unnecessary to make any reference to its former ownership.

“If you have a short appreciation of Lincoln already written, it will serve.  If not, I would prefer to have you write on one of the enclosed sheets (the other you may retain if you wish).  You will note the former ownership of these sheets by holding to the light to observe the water-mark.

“If you choose to write some thought or excerpt from your address which is to be delivered at the Lincoln Monument, it will not be necessary for you to send the appreciation to me until after the address has been delivered.

“I am sure that Mr. Logan Hay of The Lincoln Centennial Association, Springfield, Illinois, will be very glad to have the door prepared to receive the plate before your arrival.

“In the event of your answer to my letter, I would like to have you address it to my son, Roger Watson Barrett, who, although only fifteen years of age, is, in reality, the owner of the plate which I have brought together.”

Although Barrett’s offer was “very much appreciated,” Hoover, through his secretary Lawrence Richey, respectfully declined the offer.  What happened next to the door plate is murky.  The Illinois State Historical Library (now called the Abraham Lincoln Presidential Library and Museum) received it from Jesse Jay Ricks, another Chicago collector, in 1938 but without fanfare.  Paul Angle, director of the Library, placed a note on the box indicating that the Library was not to admit owning the original unless the copy on the door of the Lincoln Home was stolen.  Ricks was a prominent collector in his own right and perhaps made a swap with Barrett that placed the door plate into his possession.

Barrett’s son, Roger, later went on to a prominent legal career of his own, first as one of the legal team at the Nuremberg Trials and later with the prominent Chicago law firm of Mayer Brown & Platt.

Part One of a two-part essay

If you’re interested in Lincoln’s young adulthood, get your hands on Douglas Wilson’s and Rodney Davis’s book Herndon’s Informants.  It brings together more than 600 interviews and statements amassed by Lincoln’s law partner after the assassination in 1865.

Many of his sources had known Lincoln before he moved to Springfield in 1837 at the age of 28.  (He arrived for good in the state capital on April 15, exactly 28 years before his death.)

Herndon’s great virtue was his zeal for collecting all the facts of Lincoln’s personal life, no matter how delicate the subject.  He thought the apotheosis of the martyr in 1865 was making northerners forget his flesh-and-blood friend, whom he’d known for a quarter-century.  But Herndon’s great vice was his mixing of pet theories and pat psychologizing into his fact gathering.

On November 16, 1866, he gave a rambling lecture on the subject of New Salem, where Lincoln had lived before Springfield.  The explosive segment of the talk concerned Ann Rutledge, the “beautiful, amiable, and lovely girl” who became Abraham’s intimate friend in the mid-1830s.

Herndon printed his shocking public lecture of 1866 as this broadside, and the story was also covered by many newspapers.

The lecturer faced a huge problem: neither Abraham nor Ann had left any direct evidence of their bond.  They wrote nothing about it, and said nothing to anyone who recorded their words at the time.

Herndon was forthright about relying on fragmentary memories of people looking back 30 years.  For some reason, he didn’t specify that one of his sources — Isaac Cogdal, an old Lincoln acquaintance from New Salem — told him that he’d spoken to the president-elect about Ann Rutledge just five or six years earlier.

At the end of a long day’s work in late 1860 or early 1861, Lincoln had invited Cogdal to his office, hoping to pump him for news about families he’d known in New Salem, including the Rutledges.  Cogdal gladly obliged, and took advantage of the nostalgic occasion to “dare to ask” Lincoln about his early love life.

“Abe is it true that you fell in love with & courted Ann Rutledge?” Cogdal remembered saying. Lincoln supposedly welcomed this query about a touchy, personal topic he’d never discussed even with his closest friends.  It was a subject sure to cause him grief if he talked about it now and word of the conversation somehow got spread around Springfield.

The president-elect’s words, reconstructed orally by Cogdal and written down by Herndon, were, “I loved the woman dearly & sacredly: she was a handsome girl — would have made a good loving wife — was natural & quite intellectual, though not highly Educated — I did honestly — & truly love the girl & think often — often of her now.”

Cogdal’s reliability has been dismissed by many historians, and affirmed by others.  But even if his memory for Lincoln’s sentiments was perfectly accurate, they touch only on Abraham’s retrospective feelings about Ann.  They say nothing about her feelings for him.

Did Ann love him “sacredly” too (and does “sacredly” suggest “eternally,” or just “purely,” “reverentially”)?  How far did she advance toward becoming his “good loving wife,” rather than someone else’s?

In fact, when Lincoln embarked on his love for her, she was already engaged to someone else.  This man, the merchant John McNamar, had left New Salem and was presumed to have given up on Ann, despite his promise eventually to return to her.  For the moment, Abraham’s “sacred” love meant unrealizable love.

In 1865 and 1866, a number of informants told Herndon that Ann and Abraham had sealed some kind of pact, and were planning to marry after she cleared up her murky status with McNamar.  Naturally, they tried to keep their pact secret, making it all the harder for Herndon’s informants, decades later, to agree about their exact relationship.

But in August 1835, Ann fell ill.  She lingered only long enough for Lincoln to make one last visit to her bedside.  No informant claimed any knowledge of what he and Ann said to each other that day.  Many of them did claim that two weeks later, when Ann expired, Abraham fell completely apart.

Lincoln’s collapse convinced some who’d known nothing about his closeness to Ann that he must have been deeply in love with her, and she with him.  Nothing short of professed and reciprocated love, perhaps with a promise to marry, could account for his wretched state.

Herndon seems to have concurred with this speculation.  Lincoln’s emotional prostration after her death pointed to one conclusion: that Abraham “loved Ann Rutledge with all his soul, mind and strength.  She loved him as dearly, tenderly and affectionately.”

Within weeks, the New York Times and other papers in the U.S. and abroad reprinted almost everything Herndon said about Ann Rutledge.  Many readers regretted his public probing of Lincoln’s private life.  But what infuriated so many readers was not the news of Lincoln’s love for Ann as such.

They were incensed by an additional Herndon revelation.  He said a friend had told him that after Ann was lowered into her grave, Abraham declared (in the friend’s words): “his heart, sad and broken, was buried there.”

That alleged statement by a distraught 26-year-old established to Herndon’s satisfaction that Lincoln had never loved another woman as fully as he had loved Ann Rutledge.  She had been Abraham’s first and final love.

[In Part Two: where Herndon got Lincoln’s alleged words that his heart lay buried in Ann Rutledge’s grave, and how the nation benefited, in Herndon’s estimation, from Ann’s death.]

Although Abraham Lincoln predates Sigmund Freud, the Illinois lawyer did write to famed Cincinnati physician Dr. Daniel Drake for help during his emotional crisis of  “the hypo” in 1841.  If Drake replied to Lincoln’s letter, it has never surfaced.  Since then, both professionals and amateurs have tried to explain Lincoln’s personality.  One particular incident led a number of individuals to lobby President Herbert Hoover to intervene.  The incident is instructive because of both the prominent persons involved and Hoover’s response.

In life, Lincoln was deemed 'crazy' mainly by secessionists; in death, mainly by psychiatrists. This now-reupholstered couch was on his funeral train.

Dr. Abraham Arden Brill (1874-1948) announced that he planned to deliver a paper at the American Psychiatric Association meeting in Toronto, Canada, on June 5, 1931, in which he would characterize Abraham Lincoln as a “schizoid-manic personality.”  Brill was hardly a quack.  Rather, he provided the first English translations of Sigmund Freud’s work, introducing into the American lexicon such Freudian concepts as transference, repression, displacement, and unconscious.  Brill founded the New York Psychoanalytic Society and served for a time as head of the psychiatry clinic at Columbia University before going into private practice.  He is widely known for advising famous public relations guru Edward L. Bernays (1891-1995) on how to overcome the stigma that surrounded women smoking cigarettes.  Brill suggested that cigarettes be viewed as “torches of freedom.”  Bernays hired a number of young models to march in the 1929 New York City Easter Parade, and on his cue they each lit a Lucky Strike in front of a group of photographers he had assembled.  The women’s “torches of freedom” were lit as a protest against male domination, but also to help Bernays’s sponsor, the American Tobacco Company, promote its most popular cigarette brand to a new audience — women.

Brill’s characterization of Lincoln as a “schizoid-manic personality” immediately drew the ire of fellow psychiatrist Dr. Edward Everett Hicks, senior physician of the psychopathic department of Kings County (i.e., Brooklyn) Hospital, New York.  Hicks was an avid history buff and a member of both the Sons of the American Revolution and the Society of Mayflower Descendants.  He made a formal protest to the American Psychiatric Association regarding Brill’s intended paper and received the assistance of F. Walter Mueller, Eastern Division Sales Manager for the Continental Lithograph Corporation.  It was Mueller who took it upon himself to write to Lawrence Richey, Secretary to President Hoover, seeking to obtain a Presidential request to suppress Brill’s paper from being delivered in Canada.

The media enjoyed the brief controversy because it provided entertaining copy.  An unidentified instructor of psychology declared: “Some of our psychiatrists and psychologists seem to get so saturated with abnormal in their practice that they lost the normal point of view.  They then get a compulsion to pigeonhole all persons, and especially eminent men in the routine psychiatric categories.”  One less-kind reaction goaded Hicks: “I hope you hit the illustrious gentleman [Brill] in the solar plexus, and once for me too.”  Hicks offered the following assessment of Brill to the press:  “I understand Dr. Brill is an alien.  If he was not born here and was permitted to become a citizen, it seems very bad taste for him to criticize a man of the caliber of Lincoln.  If psychiatrists would modify some of their fantastic theories and apply more common sense, the American public would have greater respect for them.  Psychiatrists and psychoanalysts ought to be analyzed themselves and classified as to the types they belong to.”  Hicks was reminded by the reporter that “you’re a psychiatrist too.”  Hicks replied with a laconic “yes” — and smiled.

President Hoover idolized Abraham Lincoln but wanted no part in the controversy.  Lawrence Richey replied to F. Walter Mueller’s letter, indicating that “The matter of an address before a scientific association in another country is not, it seems to me, within the purview of the President’s duties.”  Brill delivered his paper on Lincoln, one which people have since little noted nor long remembered.

Episode 10, The Presidential China: We are joined, once again, by our curator Dr. James Cornelius to discuss our Featured Artifact of the Month: The Presidential China. In addition, we answer a question courtesy of Facebook regarding Mr. Lincoln’s Portfolio.

Podcast: Play in new window | Download

Today we may hastily ponder what is in some ways still treated as a national holiday: the anniversary of Christopher Columbus’s landing, as leader of three ships, on a Caribbean island on October 12, 1492.  In Lincoln’s day this was not a holiday.  Only New Year’s Day and the Fourth of July (not even Christmas or Easter) were ongoing ‘official’ holidays.

But in Lincoln’s mind, the occasion of that landing and all that followed it were of the greatest moment.  Having jettisoned further publication of his poems after 1846, he turned to less-personal matters.  In September 1848 he saw Niagara Falls, and tried to grasp its historical context:

“When Columbus first sought this continent — when Christ suffered on the cross — when Moses led Israel through the Red-Sea … Niagara was roaring here.”

Then, in giving his lectures ‘Discoveries and Inventions’ in 1858 and 1859, he explicitly cited the 1492 voyage of discovery.  Revising this talk, he prepared what came to be two distinct lectures, because, it is thought today, he was giving up hope of higher elective office and wanted to be a travelling lecturer.  Or, perhaps his mind flagged from the tedium of the law, and he sought a fresh outlet for his intellect.

In any case, Christopher Columbus (he took the Spanish cognate Cristóbal Colón after 1485) was much on Lincoln’s mind as he wrestled with what the Kansas-Nebraska Act of 1854 and the Dred Scott decision of 1857 meant for the future of his nation.  He gave his lectures a half-dozen times around central Illinois, to audiences not large; then dropped the matter and returned to politics and law.

Lincoln admired Columbus; the World's Columbian Exposition, in Chicago in 1893, remembered Lincoln on this ticket.

Here he lays it out as plainly as we could wish.  He probably believed the following as early as April 1858, and certainly by February 1859.  By Lincoln’s compass,

“in the world’s history, certain inventions and discoveries occurred, of peculiar value, on account of their great efficiency in facilitating all other inventions and discoveries.  Of these were the arts of writing and of printing — the discovery of America, and the introduction of Patent-laws.  The date of the first … is unknown; but it certainly was as much as fifteen hundred years before the Christian era; the second — printing — came in 1436, or nearly three thousand years after the first.  The others followed more rapidly — the discovery of America in 1492, and the first patent laws in 1624.”

Can it be any clearer how a man, who missed the American Revolution yet often urged his contemporaries to uphold its principles, viewed the “discovery” of America?   It was of an importance to progress — to invention, to further discovery, to efficiency — behind only the invention of writing and printing.

If Lincoln’s view does not comport with polite received opinion today, he did not predict our future, but instead carried on in like vein.  “Though not apposite to my present purpose, it is but justice to the fruitfulness of that period, to mention two other important events — the Lutheran Reformation in 1517, and, still earlier, the invention of negroes, or, of the present mode of using them, in 1434. But, to return to the consideration of printing …”

The image of Columbus stuck in his mind; he used it twice in his campaign against Douglas in September 1858.  First at Paris, Illinois, in the eastern part of the state: “The idea of Popular Sovereignty was floating about the world several ages before the author of the Nebraska bill saw daylight — indeed, before Columbus set foot on the American continent.” Lincoln repeated this sarcastic gibe word for word for the benefit of those in the western part of the state, at Edwardsville, on September 11th.

Thereafter we have no evidence that he wrote or spoke about the Genoese-born sailor.  His reasons to write the word ‘Columbus’ in 1860 through 1865 all concern the capital city of Ohio, or the small town in western Kentucky much fought over by warring Federals and Confederates.  Yet today we may imagine that in Lincoln’s own voyage of discovery — to the heart of the American experiment, in his war against the ‘popular sovereignty’ fiction that Douglas tried to impose upon the construction of the Constitution, for a new way to “invent” a role for negroes outside of Africa — he continued to ponder the fearlessness and hope that those sailors possessed.