Mistakes Of Lincoln Administration Essay

It is an accepted fact, for most, that Abraham Lincoln was one of the best leaders the United States has had. Before becoming president, Lincoln had been a lawyer, then politician. In the 1860 election, Lincoln was ran against and beat three other candidates. He was elected entirely by Northern states. This lack of representation for the South was the impetus for the secession of several states (South Carolina, Mississippi, Florida, Alabama, Georgia, Louisiana, and Texas), who believed he would attempt to end slavery. It is important to note that this secession was completely legal within the Constitution and that Lincoln was neither inclined to, nor had the power to end slavery (as he himself said in his first Inaugural Address). When these

things are considered and only Lincoln’s merit is analyzed- his push for political and economic centralization, his disregard of the constitution, his disrespect towards the rights of citizens, the bills he passed, as well as the overall impact of his presidency- it becomes clear that he was simply a below average president.
Examination of Lincoln’s leadership makes it clear that he supported a strong central government, as he expanded the powers of the federal government both politically and economically. Throughout his career, Lincoln passionately endorsed the American System, an economic system comprised of a national bank, federal subsidies and protective tariffs. Giving the government the authority to distribute subsidies, as well as control of a national bank, expanded its power considerably. This unchecked power over the economy would undoubtedly lead to corruption as well as other consequence (the lack of competition leading to constant, high prices and the lack of consumer choice). Lincoln also suggested an economic plan in which he would be in complete control over imports, saying, “I… would continue [trade] where it is necessary, and discontinue it where it is not.” (DiLorenzo, 72) Politically, Lincoln’s push for more powers included the suspension of the writ of Habeas Corpus (which allowed him to imprison dissenters without trial), blocking southern ports, and assembling troops, all without any word from Congress. This ambition for a heavily centralized federal government might have been the reason for him pushing to “save the union,” leading a war not for social justice (which he made clear) but for more power over a bigger nation. These sorts of governments are known to be oppressive. Also, as the United States is a large nation, it is more easily run when split into independent states- state decision making allows for issues to be resolved efficiently, and to the specific needs of the state.
One of the most notable mistakes in the Lincoln administration was the blatant disregard of the Constitution.

He assembled an army, blockaded Confederate ports, suspended Habeas Corpus and undermined the First and Second Amendments completely. While Lincoln did call in Congress later, on July 4, for approval of the army, his lax treatment of the separation of powers set a dangerous precedent regardless. Furthermore, the blocking of Southern ports remained unconstitutional, as “the Constitution permits such blockades only in time of war with a foreign power,” (DiLorenzo, 152) which the Confederate was not. In fact, Lincoln was adamant in the fact that the war was not a war, but rather the government putting down a “rebellion,” (“I shall not hesitate to use all the means at my control to secure the termination of this rebellion.”) His order for the confiscation of weapons (through the Confiscation Act) was against the Second Amendment, and he disrupted the right to free speech and press when he ordered for any newspaper critical of him or the war to be shut down. The publishers of such newspapers were imprisoned, and all telegraph communication was censored. Lincoln even went as far as exiling a Senator who spoke out about him (Clement Vallandigham.) Citizens were arrested and imprisoned without trial, due to the suspension of the writ of Habeas Corpus. In 1863, the Habeas Corpus Suspension Act was passed to release the Lincoln administration from being held accountable for

the suspension, as well as approving its continuance. Habeas Corpus was suspended for all of Lincoln’s presidency.
Abraham Lincoln was very unpopular during his governance.

Most citizens, even those from the North, disagreed with Lincolns policies. In fact, “internal improvements” funded by state subsidies- a part of the American System which Lincoln was very passionate about- were forbidden by constitutional amendment in several states (New York, Pennsylvania, Maryland, etc.) The Civil War itself was also rightfully unpopular in both the North and the South. On November 7, 1861, Maryland’s House Committee on Federal Relations released a declaration asking for the cease of war, which was definitively ignored. Newspapers, politicians and regular citizens called for peace but most were simply arrested and imprisoned. Thousands were imprisoned without trial, on the basis of rumors alone. They were kept in horrible conditions in prisons like Fort Lafayette, which was nicknamed the “American Bastille” due to the amount of inmates it contained. There, they were fed “a piece of fat pork, sometimes raw and sometimes half cooked, and coarse bread cut in large thick slices.”(DiLorenzo, 141) and were given water which sometimes “would contain a dozen tadpoles, from one-quarter to one-half inch long” (DiLorenzo, 141). It was clear that the officers had no concern for their comfort. The Peace Movement in the North was just about destroyed through physical intimidation. Even so, the South was hit even harder. The blockades strangled the economy and stopped medicine from reaching the sick. The army

marching through the South, led by Lincoln’s generals (Sherman, Grant, and Sheridan) had no limits in cruelty. Citizens were taken hostage, private properties and churches burned down, houses pillaged and vandalized. Entire towns were burned to the ground, one of the most notable being Atlanta, Georgia. After the attack was over, “90% of the city was demolished”- the city went from around 4,000 private estates to only 400 (DiLorenzo, 186). Lincoln is clearly not innocent in these acts, he was known for being extremely involved with the war effort. The cost of this bloody, destructive and unnecessary war was also paid in lives; it is estimated that around 620,000 died during the Civil War.
One of the most important responsibilities of the President is to veto and pass bills. Lincoln passed three, very influential bills during his leadership: the Homestead Act, the Pacific Railway Act and the Morrill Act. The first of the three gave Americans almost free land in exchange for their continuous residence of it for five years. This act also encouraged settlement of the West. In theory, it was a clever and giving idea; however, in practice, it was useless to most poor farmers who could not afford the materials necessary to build up a farm. Another problem was the way the act was worded, which allowed easy fraud. The Pacific Railway Act (passed in 1862) was similar- it was a clever way to expand to the West, however, it was doomed to fail from the beginning. Before the Act was passed, a transcontinental railroad was out of the question economically; it didn’t make sense to build an expensive railroad through such tough terrain for such a sparse population. However, with government funding convincing the companies (Union Pacific and Central Pacific), the railroad was built anyway. Predictably, the companies involved went bankrupt almost immediately after it was built. There wasn’t enough profit to offset the cost of running the railways, due to the small population in the West. The railroad also impacted Western farmers- as the lack of profit became clear, high rates were charged, devastating Western farmers who had no other ways to get their crops to the eastern market. Lastly, the Morrill Act, which gave land to allow the establishment of colleges, was passed on July 2. While this was a true accomplishment, bringing higher education within the grasps of thousands of people, it still had its faults. The land was commonly used fraudulently and “substantial portions of the educational land-grants never benefited education” (“Morrill Act (1862)”). This Act was also not beneficial for African Americans, who were not allowed to attend state colleges. In conclusion, Lincoln did sign bills but none were free of consequences. DONE
Lincoln’s presidency had irreversible impacts on the United States, both short and long term. His governance laid the groundwork for a disastrous ‘Reconstruction.’ For 12 years (1865-1877) after the Civil War, there was turmoil in the South. For them, Reconstruction meant heavy taxing with no representation, which didn’t help the bitter attitude. Also, the government could not truly protect the rights of the freed slaves, as the Southern states passed voter qualifications and black codes to stunt and reverse progression. The sharecropping system became widespread, tying African Americans who had little economic power to land. In the long term, Lincoln redefined the powers of the president. His choice to break several laws of the Constitution, and the glorification of it is highly dangerous. The laws of the Constitution are meant to be protected by the government, and the powers of the president are supposed to be checked. For a President many believe to be the best to completely ignore these things makes it seem acceptable to do so- and in the wrong hands this can be very damaging. His actions also tipped the balance of power, taking power from the states in order to strengthen the federal government.
In conclusion, Lincoln’s impactful leadership had a less than positive effect. His treatment of the people and of the Constitution is not excusable. The bills he passed had great consequences, until they were revised, and his centralization damaged the original vision of America. Also, the unnecessary, self-satisfying war which cost 2% of the nation’s population and “40% of the nation’s economy” (DiLorenzo, 4) was completely avoidable, if that had been in the interest of the President. In fact, it might have been far more beneficial for the Union to allow a peaceful split, economically and for the general good of the population. The larger a country is, the less likely it is to represent smaller groups of people, as proved by the secession. Also, if the goal of the war had really been to end slavery (which it was not), then it truly was unnecessary; slavery would have ended eventually, with far less bloodshed if the secession was accepted. Slaves could pour north, to a Union that was no longer obligated to return the runaways as it had been under the Fugitive Slave Act. If not that, then capitalism would have brought slavery to an end. Lincoln kept the south (a south which seceded in a totally legal way for better representation of the common man- representation he, himself had challenged) in the Union by force. Yes, geographically, he kept the Union together but there was no unity. Keeping the South in the Union by force might have been more damaging for America than letting it secede.