233 cation to General Meade, and it is difficult to under- CHAP. IX. stand why General French was retained in command of his corps; it was a great error, and resulted in still more serious damage later in the campaign. The pursuit of the enemy was not continued further, and on the 29th of July the President wrote a letter to General Halleck stating that he had inferred from one of General Meade's dispatches that he thought the Government was pressing him to an engagement with Lee; that this impression was erroneous; that he was opposed to it unless such a course was in harmony with Halleck's and Meade's views; that if it were imprudent to attack at Williamsport it was certainly more so now that Meade had no more than two-thirds of the force he had then; that he was in favor at Williamsport of Meade's crossing and harassing the enemy; this had been done, and now he was rather in favor of delay than immediate attack, and he desired General Halleck to make this known to Meade, unless he saw good reasons to the contrary. The months of August and September were a period of repose for the Army of the Potomac. It was in fact in no condition to undertak operations; a considerable body of troops taken from Meade for service in South and a strong detachment had been sent to of New York for the purpose of enforcing th there. General Lee had retired behind the Rapid several weeks of rest; neither army was rea that time to attack the other. After his victor Chancellorsville and his damaging defeat at Getty burg General Lee, as well as his army, needed 1863. cation to General Meade, and it is difficult to under- CHAP. IX. stand why General French was retained in command of his corps; it was a great error, and resulted in still more serious damage later in the campaign. 1863. The pursuit of the enemy was not continued further, and on the 29th of July the President wrote a letter to General Halleck stating that he had inferred from one of General Meade's dispatches that he thought the Government was pressing him to an engagement with Lee; that this impression was erroneous; that he was opposed to it unless such a course was in harmony with Halleck's and Meade's views; that if it were imprudent to attack at Williamsport it was certainly more so now that Meade had no more than two-thirds of the force he had then; that he was in favor at Williamsport of Meade's crossing and harassing the enemy; this had been done, and now he was rather in favor of delay than immediate attack, and he desired General Halleck to make this known to Meade, unless he saw good reasons to the con- to Halleck, trary. The months of August and September were a period of repose for the Army of the Potomac. It was in fact in no condition to undertake active operations; a considerable body of troops had been taken from Meade for service in South Carolina, and a strong detachment had been sent to the city of New York for the purpose of enforcing the draft there. General Lee had retired behind the Rapidan for several weeks of rest; neither army was ready at that time to attack the other. After his victory at Chancellorsville and his damaging defeat at Gettysburg General Lee, as well as his army, needed a Lincoln July 29, 1863. MS. 1863. CHAP. VIII. tion against the provisional government because of its not having been chosen and inaugurated in the usual way. Nor have I seen any cause to suspect it of unfaithfulness to the Union. So far as I have yet considered, I am as ready, on a proper case made, to give the State the Constitutional protection against invasion and domestic violence, under the provisional government, as I would be if it were under a government installed in the ordinary manner. I have not thought of making a distinction. Oct., 1863. In your proclamation of the 12th instant you state the proposition substantially, that no objection can be made to any change in the State government, which the people may desire to make, so far as the end can be effected by means conforming to the Constitution and laws through the expression of the popular will; but that such change should not be effected by violence. I concur in this, and I may add that it makes precisely the distinction I wish to keep in view. In the absence of such violence, or imminent danger thereof, it is not proper for the National Executive to interfere; and I am unwilling, by any formal action, to show an appearance of belief that there is such imminent danger before I really believe there is. I might thereby, to some extent, bear false witness. You tell me "a party has sprung up in Missouri which openly and loudly proclaims the purpose to overturn the provisional government by violence." Does the party so proclaim, or is it only that some members of the party so proclaim? If I mistake not, the party alluded to recently held a State Convention, and adopted resolutions. Did they therein declare violence against the provisional State government? No party can be justly held responsible for what individual members of it may say or do. Nothing in this letter is written with reference to any State which may have maintained within to Gamble, it no State government professedly loyal to the United Ms. States. Lincoln Oct. 19, 1863. The serious lengths to which the Missouri controversy had run, Schofield's order against sedition, the Governor's proclamation against treason to the State, and President Lincoln's approval of both |