because of the unfavorable military situation of the Union forces. He would prefer to wait for a Union victory, so that the public would be in a better frame of mind. But Union victories were scarce during that part of the war. Lincoln finally published it on September 22, after McClellan had succeeded in checking Lee's progress at Antietam. It was to go into effect January 1, 1863. The gist of the proclamation was contained in the following sentence:

"All persons held as slaves within any state or designated part of a state the people whereof shall be in rebellion against the United States shall be then, thenceforward, and forever free."

Even a casual reading of the document makes it plain that the Emancipation Proclamation did not emancipate a single slave. It applied neither to the border states nor to those portions of the Confederacy then held by Union forces, the only places where an executive order of that sort would have any validity. It could not be made effective in the Confederacy, because the power of the federal government did not extend that far. Lincoln's famous document therefore was designed, not to free the slaves, but to announce a policy for the future, and incidentally, to please politicians like Chase and Frémont and editors like Greeley.

No further attempt was made to promote the cause of emancipation until December 1863. Then a member of Congress introduced into the House a thirteenth amendment to the Constitution, providing for the final, complete, and absolute prohibition of slavery everywhere within the jurisdiction of the United States. But Congress was not sufficiently in favor of the project to adopt the amendment, so further consideration of it was put off until Congress should meet again the following year. In December, 1864, the amendment was brought up again. On the last day of January, 1865, it passed the House, by a vote of one hundred nineteen to fifty-six. By the following December it was ratified by the necessary three quarters of the state legislatures, and put into effect.

In 1862 the country was certainly not ready for emancipation. The Democrats seized upon it as an issue, and in the elections the Republicans lost New York, Pennsylvania, Ohio, Indiana, Illinois, and Wisconsin. New Jersey which had gone against the Republicans in 1860, did the same in 1862. The administration majority in Congress was cut down to the narrowest margin.

CAMPAIGN OF 1864

This outcome naturally made the administration somewhat nervous as the presidential campaign year of 1864 approached. The disappointment over Grant's failure to bring the war to a speedy close found expression among the Republicans in criticism of Lincoln, and in demands for a more vigorous Fosecution of the war. The radicals of the Chase-Frémont school were especially outspoken in their desire for a new executive. This grp attempted to carry the whole party with it by calling a convention' of its own. Meeting at Cleveland, they drew up a platform advocating, among other things, a constitutional amendment to prohibit slavery, Congressional rather than executive control of reconstruction, and the confiscation of Confederate property. For their candidate they picked their first standard bearer, John C. Frémont, a man who had an extraordinary facility in making a minimum of achievement produce a maximum of reputation.

When the report of these proceedings reached Lincoln, his comment was to open his Bible, and to read to his Cabinet one verse, I Samuel XXII: 2: "And every one that was in distress, and every one that was in debt, and every one that was discontented, gathered themselves unto him; and he became a captain over them; and there were with him about four hundred men." Lincoln's perception of Frémont's lack of strength was finally borne in upon the man himself, and on September 21, Frémont withdrew from the campaign.

The regular Republicans, laying emphasis upon their war-time title of "the Union Party" met at Baltimore in June. They agreed with the radicals in calling for the thirteenth amendment, but disagreed with them in upholding Lincoln. Lincoln got all the votes except those of Missouri on the very first ballot. For vice-president the convention selected one of the conspicuous pro-war Democrats, Andrew Johnson of Tennessee. At the time his choice seemed to be an excellent piece of political strategy because it made the ticket acceptable to other Democrats; in the end it proved to be a genuine calamity.

The Democrats delayed their convention until August 29, in order that they might draw as much profit from the war as possible. During the first half of 1864 the Union cause had suffered, and they were waiting for it to collapse. Horatio Seymour of New York, a "peace

Democrat," pr ed, while the notorious Vallandigham of Ohio wrote the platf It took the party twenty years to recover from the effects of th t of leadership. The platform called the war a failure, and der peace at once, regardless of the Union. Their nominee was G McClellan, who at least had the decency to repudiate the Val ham platform. On September 1, the convention adjourned, pr d to go before the country with their war-isa-failure platform, n though their candidate would not stand on it. On September 2 › first reports of Sherman's capture of Atlanta began to arrive. Before le end of the month Sheridan won his victories in the Shenandoah Valley, and Farragut had won another in Mobile Bay. The Republican newspapers ridiculed the Democratic platform, and Lincoln became more popular. In the election he carried all but three states: Kentucky, Delaware, and New Jersey, getting two hundred twelve electoral votes to twenty-one for McClellan. His popular plurality was nearly half a million. But his sucess was due largely, if not entirely, to the sudden change for the better in the field. Had Sherman been beaten before Atlanta, McClellan might perhaps have been elected, even though he had never exhibited any qualities which an executive position requires Voters in a democracy sometimes reveal weird vagaries in selecting their public officials.

CHAPTER XLVI

FOREIGN RELATIONS DURING THE WAR

From the outbreak of hostilities at Fort Sumter, President Lincoln held to the theory that the southern states had not left, and could not leave, the Union, that their attempt at secession had not made them into a different nation. They were still parts of the federal government, and instead of being at war they were merely in a state of rebellion. If this theory were sound, foreign governments would have no concern whatever with the contest. There were a number of difficulties with Lincoln's interpretation, not the least of which was the refusal of Europe to accept it. From their point of view the struggle was a war between two belligerants. Lincoln involved himself in inconsistencies by proclaiming a blockade, an act which virtually recognized Confederate belligerency. Even if he had not taken that step, it would have been impossible to make European nations look upon the struggle as a mere insurrection. Their own interests were affected, and they knew better.

SEWARD

In making Seward his Secretary of State Lincoln had been actuated and guided more by the necessities of Republican politics than by any deep regard for the foreign service as such. Seward was the most powerful leader in the party, and the administration had to recognize him by giving him the highest place in the Cabinet. Fortunately for the country, he proved to be an admirable man for the post. To be sure, it took him nearly two months to learn that he was not the President. Like many others, he had assumed that Lincoln was an untutored country lawyer, whose elevation to the presidency was due to the peculiar situation that had prevailed in 1860. As the recognized leader of the party, Seward took it for granted that he would continue to lead after March 4, 1861.

On April 1, 1861, without apparently appreciating the significance of the date, Seward submitted to his chief a remarkable document entitled "Thoughts for the President's consideration." In this he

told Lincoln that no policy had yet been adopted, that the country wanted one, so he had one all prepared. For a domestic policy he urged that the emphasis be shifted from slavery to union or disunion. With reference to foreign affairs, he suggested that England and Russia be called sharply to account, and that Spain and France be presented with an ultimatum and virtually threatened with a declaration of war. His idea was apparently to silence the contest at home by uniting the sections in a popular foreign war. In the war to be provoked, he assured the President, with becoming modesty, that he would not be unwilling to assume full charge. The belligerent secretary also sent communications to some of the American ministers in Europe which simply amazed men who knew anything about diplomacy. But Lincoln showed Seward his place so tactfully that he won his complete confidence and support, and once tamed he became one of the most valuable members of the administration. For minister to England the President selected, on Seward's advice, Charles Francis Adams, son of John Quincy Adams. He had all the ability of his celebrated father and grandfather, without their pugnacity and lack of tact. He was a clear-headed, even-tempered man, cool and distant as befitted a descendant of the New England Puritans, but able, in spite of these traits, to inspire confidence and to make friends. He arrived in London on May 13, 1861, nearly a month after hostilities had begun, and it fell to him to work against formal recognition of Confederate independence.

In the English Cabinet of the time Palmerston was Prime Minister, Earl Russell Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs, and Gladstone Chancellor of the Exchequer. Opinion in the country was divided from the beginning. The upper classes were strongly in sympathy with the South. The middle class element was opposed to slavery, but it found the Union policy so lacking in energy at the start that it hardly knew which side to take. English journalists in America were sending back reports of disunion and dissension, with little reference to anything else. The correspondent of the London Times wrote: "Practically, so far as I have gone, I have failed to meet many people who really exhibited any passionate attachment to the Union, or who pretended to be actuated by any strong feeling of regard or admiration for the government of the United States in itself." If this feeling of indifference and uncertainty prevailed in America, it is not surprising that English opinion should have been either puzzled, or