Reviewing Allen C. Guelzo, Our Ancient Faith – Lincoln, Democracy, and the American Experiment (Alfred A. Knopf, 2024) and Harold Holzer, Brought Forth On This Continent – Abraham Lincoln And American Immigration (Dutton, 2024)
The character, career and enduring legacy of our 16th President, Abraham Lincoln, continue to fascinate and inspire both scholars and the American public. Despite the publication of many thousands of books about Lincoln, one can ask if we ever will grasp his essence; he endured enormous challenges and turmoil throughout his personal life and his political and presidential careers. Perhaps the keynote point is that Lincoln articulated and applied original, novel principles in restoring the Union and in working to abolish slavery. Two well-renowned Lincoln scholars enlighten us on these issues.
In Our Ancient Faith – Lincoln, Democracy, and the American Experiment, Allen C. Guelzo, the author of 15 books on Lincoln, and the Thomas W. Smith Distinguished Research Scholar in the James Madison Program in American Ideals and Institutions at Princeton University, has provided a rich, accessible work on Lincoln’s views about our American Democracy. This is a collection of ten superbly written essays on how Lincoln steered our nation through the Civil War by applying his democratic principles and keen political judgment. Some of these essays had appeared in other formats, including magazines and lectures.1
Throughout this book, Guelzo’s emphasizes that the linchpin of Lincoln’s philosophy was the question of how to sustain American democracy. As Lincoln remarked, nothing could be “as clearly true as the truth of democracy.”2 Lincoln’s humble background and ability to advance in society provided him with this optimistic view of democracy. He remarked that “the principle of ‘Liberty to all’ was the principle that clears the path for all—gives hope to all—and, by consequence, enterprize, and industry to all.”3
Guelzo observes that Lincoln’s faith in democracy was rooted in natural law principles. Our modern jurisprudence, Guelzo writes, “has relegated much of natural law to the historical attic;” but it was very much alive during Lincoln’s time.4 In Guelzo’s eyes, natural law had been “fostered mutually by the Enlightenment, Christian scholasticism, and classical philosophy.” Insofar as our physical universe functions by natural physical laws, our moral world should also “reveal similar evidence of law-likeness.”5
Lincoln applied such natural law principles to the essential message of our founding document, the Declaration of Independence;6 it taught him that men are endowed with “Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness.”7 Lincoln proclaimed that the love of liberty was an instinct “which God has planted in our bosoms,” and was the “heritage of all men, in all lands, every where.”8 This heritage linked everyone, from the Founders to recent immigrants. Lincoln invoked this bond across the generations in his First Inaugural Address of March 4, 1861, when he appealed to the “mystic chords of memory” as a compelling reason to maintain the Union.9 As Guelzo elaborates, “a reasoned perception of natural law, and respect for the moral goods natural law identified, bound them to America as much as any descent of the Revolution.”10
Slavery, therefore, was morally wrong.11 In December 1861, Lincoln hoped that democracy would provide a “vast future” for the generations to come.12 Even earlier, in 1854, Lincoln observed that, according to “our ancient faith,” government derived its “just powers” from the consent of the governed, and that “no man is good enough to govern another man, without that other’s consent.”13 Slavery was inconsistent with that maxim.
Lincoln understood that democracy is characterized by sovereignty of the people; but he also recognized that governance depended on “reverence for the laws,” which restrained the government from becoming tyrannical, or the people from becoming a mob.14 Guelzo notes that this conclusion was consistent with the views of a contemporary philosopher, Francis Wayland, who warned that Americans should not surrender to “the dictates of passion and venality, rather than of reason and of right.”15
Lincoln urged that all Americans should swear not to violate the laws of the country, or tolerate violations of the law by others—that oath would serve as the “political religion of the nation.”16 He expounded that view to a newly-arrived European envoy in November 1861, stating that the United States “maintains, and means to maintain, the rights of human nature and the capacity of man for self-government.”17 But Lincoln tempered his support for democracy and majority rule by hearkening back to natural law principles, and rejected then-Senator Stephen Douglas’s invocation of “popular sovereignty” that would expand slavery to the western territories.18
Guelzo also describes Lincoln’s philosophy on economic issues, observing that Lincoln saw “economic self-transformation as the great gift of democracy.” 19 He was a proponent of what were then called “internal improvements,” ranging from the development of canals and railroads to the creation of state banking systems. Lincoln and his allies fought Southern agrarian interests, who opposed such projects— interests that became increasingly tied to, and dependent upon, a slave-based economy.20 Lincoln also grasped principles of economics (then termed “political economy”), and may have been influenced by John Stuart Mills’s 1848 edition of Principles of Political Economy.21 Lincoln believed in the advancement of labor: “Advancement-improvement in condition-is the order of things in a society of equals.”22 Guelzo acknowledges that Lincoln’s image of a free-labor economy became outdated after the post-Civil War surge of large-scale industrialization; but he also observes that our nation remains notable for its over 30 million small businesses.23
Guelzo also addresses Lincon’s complex views on race, and more specifically, the status and future prospects of Black Americans, many of whom had endured the cruelty of antebellum slavery in the South. Lincoln’s reputation faces contemporary attacks that belittle his accomplishments, while his admirers respond that the harsh criticism is “presentism–measuring people and situations from the past by the standards and sensibilities of the present.”24 Here, Guelzo seems to vacillate, calling Lincoln an “unhappy example of how opposition to slavery did not necessarily guarantee any sort of enlightenment on race,”25 and stating that Lincoln “zigzagged” on these issues and “confined his opposition to slavery to the most minimal grade of opposition.”26 Yet Guelzo remarks that Lincoln has been “unnecessarily” targeted for his “backwardness on race;” he adhered to a natural law theory of natural rights, and embarked on an explicit policy of emancipation, unlike any president before him.27
Harold Holzer, the Director of the Roosevelt House Public Policy Institute at Hunter University, and the author, coauthor, or editor of over fifty books, also has made a new contribution to Lincoln scholarship. Brought Forth On This Continent, a work of more than 340 pages, focuses on President Lincoln’s evolving views on the role of immigration in antebellum American society and during the Civil War. I surmise that Holzer wrote this work with our 21st-century controversy in mind; he explains that there are “striking parallels between the immigration debates of Lincoln and those of our own.”28 The introduction provocatively quotes President Lincoln’s December 1864 annual message to Congress which encouraged immigration into the United States.29 Holzer acknowledges that Lincoln’s statement was motivated by our nation’s evident deficiency in labor caused by the diversion of able-bodied men to the Union’s military forces.30
Before the Civil War, America experienced a new wave of immigration, predominantly Irish-Catholic, driven in part by a potato famine.31 By the 1850 census, natives of Ireland constituted 43% of all foreign-born American residents.32 The nation’s ethnic mix was increased by a similar migration of Germans.33 Regrettably, Irish immigration sometimes encountered violent resistance, such as the 1844 anti-Catholic riots in Philadelphia.34
How did Lincoln react to this surge in our population? Holzer notes that Lincoln acted cautiously. He expressed concerns about ballot integrity in Illinois, occasionally asserting that Irish Democrats might be voting illegally against his Whig party.35 Yet, Lincoln also indicated his support for an extension or enlargement of the right of suffrage.36
In a private letter to a close friend in 1855, Lincoln expressed his firm opposition to the nativist American Party (the so-called “Know Nothing” Party). The Declaration of Independence, he explained, simply stated that all men are created equal; it did not contemplate an exclusion of Negroes, or foreigners or Roman Catholics. As he remarked, “I should prefer emmigrating to some country where they make no pretence of loving liberty— to Russia, for instance, where despotism can be taken pure and without the base alloy” of hypocrisy.37
Holzer observes, however, that Lincoln’s private sentiments did not necessarily reflect the views that he was constrained to utter in the public arena.38 Lincoln had to strike a balance between his longer-term vision of a new political party united against the Democrats, and his recognition that a base of that support included a nativist faction.39 In a 1859 lecture, Lincoln excluded several groups from his vision of an ideal American future, i.e., Native Americans, Mexicans, and Asians, thus reflecting the prevailing Eurocentric view of our culture.40
Nevertheless, emphasizing that our country is “extensive and new” and that Europe’s countries were densely populated, Lincoln welcomed those abroad who wanted to make America “the land of their adoption.”41
In his early political career, Lincoln became friends with prominent German Americans; and the new Republican Party garnered substantial support from German immigrants, who had arrived in the United States in increasing numbers after the failure of the 1848 democratic revolutions in Europe.42 During the 1860 presidential campaign, political propaganda for Lincoln reached the German-American population.43 This was an influential voting bloc for Lincoln, but some of their leaders had definite political aspirations of their own.44 They expected to be rewarded in the new administration.45
The problem of rewarding German-American supporters became more acute when Lincoln needed to fill the officer ranks of the Union army. America did not, at the time, have a large regular army; each state provided volunteer regiments. The surge of 1861 Unionist patriotism– enthusiasm to put down the Confederate rebellion–resulted in a clamor of prominent German-Americans to lead troops.46 Holzer devotes much detail to the headaches this caused for Lincoln, notably the persistent lobbying of men like journalist Carl Schurz, to assume leadership positions.47 In fairness to Schurz, however, he had been a prominent figure in the failed 1848 uprising against the Prussian monarchy.48
The War generated commentary and ridicule, usually not justified, over the performance of some German military leaders and arguably some of their rank-and-file enlisted men too, including the song “I Fights Mit Sigel” – referring to Franz Sigel, a less-than-brilliant Union general.49 Further complicating the situation was what many saw as a poor, even cowardly, performance of German troops at the May 2, 1863 battle of Chancellorsville, Virginia.50
Holzer’s focus on military and political affairs also describes the emergence of Irish-Americans as zealous supporters of the Union cause. Although that group predominantly affiliated with the Democratic Party before the War, 160,000 enthusiastic Unionists swelled the ranks of the Army.51 In July of 1863, however, their reputation hit a low point when riots against a newly-imposed military draft broke out in New York City, and African-Americans were targeted in that violence.52
In his final chapter, Holzer returns to his introduction. In Lincoln’s December 8, 1863 annual message to Congress, the president asked for legislation to encourage foreign immigration, but with a codification of a requirement that foreign-born American residents serve in the military.53 Lincoln wanted to stimulate European immigration and augment our nation’s workforce, but also assure the native-born that the new immigrants “would be required to meet their obligations as Americans.”54 The immigration statute enacted in July 1864 created a U.S. Emigrant Office in New York City to help match foreign workers to jobs in America.55 Lincoln returned to the immigration issue one year later, when his next annual message to Congress urged an exemption from the military draft to new immigrants, given a pattern of fraud inflicted upon them at their arrival at our ports.56 The assassination of Lincoln in April 1865 pretermitted lawmaking on the issue during the War.57
Holzer emphasizes that during the course of his Presidency, Lincoln, in addition to destroying slavery, had denounced the Know Nothing movement, spurred immigration, and augmented the Union’s armed forces.58 That Presidency was transformative, for the Union not only was preserved, but the country also was set on a “path to an expanded citizenry with expanded rights.”59
These two authors, Holzer and Guelzo, illuminate important aspects of President Lincoln’s career and accomplishments. Each book is valuable in its own particular context, but also more broadly reminds us of Lincoln’s greatness. A pragmatic politician who had to accommodate his vision to often-conflicting constituent interests, Lincoln did not veer from the path of advancing the Declaration of Independence’s principles. That included new citizens and settled traditions alike, focusing on the preservation of the Founders’ vision of a republican democratic government.
1 Allen C. Guelzo. Our Ancient Faith – Lincoln, Democracy, and the American Experiment (Alfred A. Knopf, 2024) (hereafter “Guelzo”) at xiv.
2 Id. at 19.
3 Id.
4 Id. at 21.
5 Id.
6 For a deeper explication of this issue, the reader should consult Hadley Arkes, First Things, An Inquiry into the First Principles of Morals and Justice (Princeton University Press, 1986) (hereafter “Arkes”) at 37-39.
7 Guelzo at 22.
8 Id.
9 Abraham Lincoln, Speeches and Writings, 1859-1865 (The Library of America, 1989), at 224.
10 Guelzo at 88.
11 Id. at 22-23.
12 Id. at 23.
13 Id. at 26.
14 Id. at 31.
15 Id. at 35.
16 Id. at 42.
17 Id. at 46.
18 Id. at 145. See also Arkes at 36-42.
19 Id. at 50.
20 Id. at 55-63.
21 Id. at 68.
22 Id.
23 Id. at 76-78.
24 Id. at 113. See Tony Peterson, Gordon Wood versus the New Generation of Historians (Feb. 20, 2015), at https://tonypetersen.wordpress.com/2015/02/20/gordon-wood-vs-the-new-generation-of-historians/ (explaining Professor Gordon Wood’s critique of “presentism.”).
25 Guelzo at 116-19.
26 Id. at 118, 121, 132 (noting his support for colonization of African-Americans in 1862).
27 Id. at 123-25,130.
28 Harold Holzer, Brought Forth On This Continent – Abraham Lincoln and American Immigration (Dutton, 2024) (hereafter “Holzer”) at 11.
29 Holzer at 2.
30 Id. at 3-4.
31 Id. at 45.
32 Id. at 47.
33 Id. at 56.
34 Id. at 34-35.
35 Id. at 55.
36 Id.
37 Id. at 79.
38 Id. at 81.
39 Id. at 74.
40 Id. at 116.
41 Id. at 163.
42 Id at 56.
43 Id. at 146.
44 Id. at 146-53
45 Id. at 157-58.
46 Id. at 181, 186-93.
47 Id. at 181-84, 231-34.
48 Id. at 102. See, e.g., Andre M. Fleche, The Wars of Carl Schurz (June 12, 2012), at https://archive.nytimes.com/opinionator.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/06/02/the-wars-of-carl-schurz/.
49 Id. at 251-53, 261.
50 Id. at 263-66.
51 Id. at 213.
52 Id. at 272-81.
53 Id. at 288.
54 Id. at 291.
55 Id. at 296-98. See https://immigrationhistory.org/item/immigration-act-of-1864.
56 Id. at 320-21.
57 Id. at 322.
58 Id. at 333.
59 Id. That legacy, Holzer opines, can be seen in the remark of a direct descendant of an immigrant, i.e., then-candidate Barack Obama’s November 8, 2008 victory speech that declared that “We are not enemies, but friends.” Id. at 334 and n.129.
