Our Collection

At the Institute’s core is the Gilder Lehrman Collection, one of the great archives in American history. More than 85,000 items cover five hundred years of American history, from Columbus’s 1493 letter describing the New World through the end of the twentieth century.

Dana, Richard Henry (1815-1882) to John Dennison Baldwin

High-resolution images are available to schools and libraries via subscription to American History, 1493-1943. Check to see if your school or library already has a subscription. Or click here for more information. You may also order a pdf of the image from us here.

Gilder Lehrman Collection #: GLC00978 Author/Creator: Dana, Richard Henry (1815-1882) Place Written: Boston, Massachusetts Type: Autograph letter signed Date: 13 October 1862 Pagination: 4 p. ; 25 x 19.6 cm. Order a Copy

Discusses his recollection of an anti-slavery convention and his support for President Abraham Lincoln. Dana was currently U.S. district attorney for Massachusetts, appointed by Lincoln.

[Draft Created by Crowdsourcing]
Convention is to fail, let us hope that this success of a few men in carrying through our Convention an improper [strikeout] [struck: policy] thing, may be forgotten.
Yours truly,
R.H. Dana Jr. Boston Oct. 13. 1862
J.D. Baldwin, Esq.

Dear Sir,
I have the pleasure to acknowledge the receipt of your letter of the 30th ust., which did not reach me until a few hours ago.
It seems to me that there is no difference between us as to facts, but only as to opinions.
I introduced the resolve into the Convention, it was read & debated & referred, with other resolves, to the Committee. My resolve read "support &c" "the President of the United States &c". The committee struck out "President of the United States", & inserted "the Government", or some other general & abstract term. Where the Committee reported it, so amended, Mr. Child called the attention of the Convention to the change, deprecated it as an intentional disparagement of the President, & as conditional by duty. Yet, no member of the Committee attempted to deny or explain it.
Considering the state of things at that time, and the facts I have stated, I cannot agree with you that this change was not significant. To make such a change, at such a time, in a solemn resolve, introduced, discusseed & referred,-a change needless

[2]
& unaccountable for any other reason, and to insist on it after Mr. Child's speech.-Why, my dear Sir, it does not admit of a question. I know your candor well enough to receive, implicitly, your statement that you meant nothing by it, & your opinion that others on the Committee did not, & would have voted against it had it been made to appear in that light. But as to many men, indeed as to us all, we must not attach [inserted: too] much weight to our belief, after an event, [struck: as] of what we should have felt or done before it, had we considered it more fully.
As to the course in the Committee, on that resolve, I said nothing in my speech at Cambridge. I merely stated the results,-the act of the Committee, with my belief that it was intentional [struck: ,] & significant, of which I have no doubt.
I believe that is all there is between [inserted: us], which my speech at Cambridge calls for. I said nothing as to forced votes, in the Committee, or that [struck: point] [inserted: resolve], or reference of it to [insert: a] sub-committee, or otherwise. We agree that the Committee made the change. We disagree as to whether it was "intentional & in pursuance of their policy". I think a little reflection will lead you to fear that there was such an intent & policy on the part of those who shaped & controlled the business of the Convention,

[3]
& that you were unwittingly sustaining it.
As a matter between ourselves, on which my speech [inserted: does not touch] you say there was no vote in Committee to strike out "the President" &. My recollection is this. The change was made in the full committee before it went to the sub-committee. The subcommittee reported it back, with the other resolves, as it came to them. The full Committee adopted it, as amended, on a vote [struck: call] put by the Chair-that, Mr. Chandler & I voting against it, & every one else either voting for it or not voting. There was no count, as the majority was clear.
As to whether there was a vote taken in full Committee, when the change was introduced, I think there was not. I think there was no formal vote on anything until on the final adoption of the [strikeout] of resolves, one by one, from the subcommittee. That was not the course of things. Proposals were accepted or rejected by acquiescence, or evident majorities, indicated by the discussion, & those who were themselves over-ruled, submitted without requiring a division of the Committee, at each stage. As for myself, I felt that I was alone there, by virtue of a rule of Parliamentary courtesy,-except Mr. Chandler, whose [destress] prevented his taking an active part,-and that Committee was designated (as they always are) by the State Committee & those will when they [struck: act] consult, and I did not insist on the form of

[4]
a vote, on any proposition, where I [saw] that the majority was against me. Among so many things proposed, discussed, adopted or withdrawn, we may mistake as to the person who did each act. I have a pretty clear impression, but will name no one. When my resolve came up for consideration, the change was suggested. I objected & asked for reasons. No on in terms stated why the change should be made, but it received a general support in the Committee. I again objected & asked for some reason. None was given, but the general [inserted: voice] was-that is right,-that is what we wish to say,-that is better, & voices of like import. The change was insisted on & made, by erasing "President" & substituting other words, as the original will show, if you have it. In that form it went to the subcommittee, & was reported back-I think without discussion in subcommittee, though I was absent more less [inserted: half of] the session of the subcommittee.-taken up in full committee, with the other resolves voted on separately, as altered, & accepted with two negatives, as I have stated. This is the whole story. That those who suggested & carried through such a change did it intentionally & in pursuance of a policy, cannot count of a doubt. That none of the Committee may not have appreciated it, at the time, is quite possible. I think I said as much as to the Convention itself, in the speech to which you refer.
Now, my dear Sir, as the [People] in <continued on page 1>

Dana, Richard Henry, 1815-1882
Baldwin, John Dennison, 1809-1883

Citation Guidelines for Online Resources