TWO HERNDON LETTERS CONCERNING LINCOLN'S
RELIGION

BRIEF ANALYSIS OF LINCOLN'S CHARACTER

Springfield, Ill., Sept. 10, 1887.

J. E. Remsburg, Oak Mills, Kansas.

Friend Remsburg: Today I send you Speed's lecture on "Lincoln," which you can keep till I send for it—and this will probably be never. It is a very poor lecture if the lecture contains his knowledge of Lincoln, and, I guess it does. It shows no insight into Lincoln at all, though it is well enough written. It is said that Speed had a world of influence over Lincoln. This may be so, and yet I never saw it. It is said by Nicolay and Hay that Lincoln poured out his soul to Speed. Bah! Nonsense! Probably, except in his love scrapes, Lincoln never poured out his soul to any mortal creature at any time and on no subject. He was the most secretive, reticent, shut-mouthed man that ever existed.

You had to guess at the man after years of acquaintance and then you must look long and keenly before you guessed, or you would make an ass of yourself.

You had to take some leading—great leading and well-established—fact of Lincoln's nature and then follow it by accurate and close analysis wherever it went.

This process would lead you correctly if you knew human nature and its laws. Lincoln was a mystery to the world; he loved principle, but moved ever just to suit his own ends; he was a trimmer among men, though firm on laws and great principles; he did not care for men; they were his tools and instruments; he was a cool man—an unsocial one—an abstracted one, having the very quintessence of the profoundest policies. Lincoln's heart was tender, full of mercy, if in his presence some imaginative man presented the subject to him. "Out of sight, out of mind" may truthfully be said of Lincoln. If I am correct, what do you think of the stories afloat about what Lincoln said in relation to his religion, especially said to strangers? I send you two "Truth-Seekers" which you will please read where I speak of Lincoln in three letters, pages marked at the top. You will learn something of Lincoln's nature in those three letters of mine—two of them on Lincoln's religion, and one to a minister. Please read them. There are some quotations in these letters which I have never had time to send you as I recollect it. They are good things—one on Laws of Human Nature and one on the Pride-Haughtiness of Christians. Lincoln delivered a lecture in which these quotations are to be found. I heard him deliver it.

W. H. Herndon.

P. S.—Mr. Speed was my boss for three or four years and Lincoln, Speed, Hurst, and I slept in the same room for a year or so. I was clerk for Speed. Speed could make Lincoln do much about simple measures, policies, not involving any principle. Beyond this power Speed did not have much influence over Lincoln nor did anyone else.

A CARD AND A CORRECTION

I wish to say a few short words to the public and private ear. About the year 1870 I wrote a letter to F. E. Abbott, then of Ohio, touching Mr. Lincoln's religion. In that letter I stated that Mr. Lincoln was an infidel, sometimes bordering on atheism, and I now repeat the same. In the year 1873 the Right Rev. James A. Reed, pastor and liar of this city, gave a lecture on Mr. Lincoln's religion, in which he tried to answer some things which I never asserted, except as to Mr. Lincoln's infidelity, which I did assert and now and here affirm. Mr. Lincoln was an infidel of the radical type; he never mentioned the name of Jesus except to scorn and detest the idea of miraculous conception. This lecture of the withered minister will be found in Holland's Review [Scribner's Monthly]. I answered this lecture in 1874, I think, in this city to a large and intelligent audience—had it printed and sent a copy to Holland, requesting, in polite language, that he insert it in his Review as an answer to the Reed lecture. The request was denied me, as a matter of course. He could help to libel a man with Christian courage, and with Christian cowardice refuse to unlibel him.

Soon thereafter, say from 1874 to 1882, I saw floating around in the newspaper literature, such charges as "Herndon is in a lunatic asylum, well chained," "Herndon is a pauper," "Herndon is a drunkard," "Herndon is a vile infidel and a knave, a liar and a drunkard," and the like. I have contradicted all these things under my own hand, often, except as to my so-called infidelity, liberalism, free religious opinions, or what-not. In the month of October, 1882, I saw in and clipped out of the Cherryvale Globe-News of September, 1882, a paper published in the State of Kansas, the following rich and racy article; it is as follows:

"Lincoln's Old Law Partner a Pauper

"Bill Herndon is a pauper in Springfield, Ill. He was once worth considerable property. His mind was the most argumentative of any of the old lawyers in the State, and his memory was extraordinary. For several years before Lincoln was nominated for the Presidency, Herndon was in some respects the most active member of the firm, preparing the greatest number of cases for trial and making elaborate arguments in their behalf. It is said that he worked hard with Lincoln in preparing the memorable speeches by the man who afterward became President, during the debates between Lincoln and Douglas in 1858, and in constructing the Cooper Union address delivered by Lincoln a short time before the war. Herndon, with all his attainments, was a man who now and then went on a spree, and it was no uncommon thing for him to leave an important lawsuit and spend several days in drinking and carousing. This habit became worse after Lincoln's death, and like poor Dick Yates, Herndon went down step by step till his old friends and associates point to him as a common drunkard."

There are three distinct charges in the above article. First, that I am a pauper. Second, that I am a common drunkard, and third, that I was a traitor or false to my clients. Let me answer these charges in their order. First, I am not a pauper. Never have been and expect never to be. I am working on my farm, making my own living with my own muscle and brain, a place and a calling that even Christianity with its persecution and malignity can never reach me to do much harm. I had, it is true, once a considerable property, but lost much of it in the crash and consequent crisis of 1873, caused in part by the contraction of the currency, in part by the decline in the demand for the agricultural products which I raise for sale, in part by the inability by the people to buy, etc., etc., and for no other reasons.

Second, I never was a common drunkard, as I look at it, and am not now. I am and have been for years an ardent and enthusiastic temperance man, though opposed to prohibition by law, by any force or other choker. The time has not come for this. It is a fact that I once, years ago, went on a spree; and this I now deeply regret. It however is in the past, and let a good life in the future bury the past. I have not fallen, I have risen, and all good men and women will applaud the deed, always excepting a small, little, bitter Christian like the Right Rev. pastor and liar of this city, to whom I can trace some of the above charges. In my case this minister was an eager, itching libeler, and what he said of me is false—nay, a willful lie.

Third, I never was a traitor or untrue to my clients or their interests. I never left them during the progress of a trial or at other times for the cause alleged, drunkenness. I may have crept—slid—out of a case during the trial because I had no faith in it, leaving Mr. Lincoln, who had faith in it, to run it through. My want of faith in a case would have been discovered by the jury and that discovery would have damaged my client and to save my client I dodged. This is all there is on it, and let men make the most of it.

Now, let me ask a question. Why is all this libeling of me? I am a mere private citizen, hold no office, do not beg the people to give me one often. My religious ideas, views, and philosophy are today, here, unpopular. But wait, I will not deny my ideas, views, or philosophy for office or station or the applause of the unthinking multitude. I can, however, answer the above question. It, the libeling, is done because I did assert and affirm by oral language and by print that Mr. Lincoln was an infidel, sometimes bordering on atheism, and yet he was among the best, greatest, and noblest of mankind; he was a grand man. Why do not the Christians prove that Mr. Lincoln was an evangelical Christian and thus prove me a liar? One of my friends, for whom I have great respect, says, that "Mr. Lincoln was a rational Christian because he believed in morality." Why not say Lincoln was rational Buddhist, as Buddhism teaches morality? Why not say Lincoln was rational Mohammedan? By the way, let me say here, that I have a profound respect for an earnest, manly, and sincere Christian or an Atheist, a profound respect for an earnest, manly, and sincere Infidel or theist or any other religion, or the men who hold it, when that belief is woven into a great manly character to beautify and greaten the world.

These charges, and I do not know how many more, nor of what kind, have been scattered broadcast all over the land, and have gone into every house, have been read at every fireside till the good people believe them, believe that I am nearly as mean as a little Christian, and all because I told the truth and stand firm in my conviction. Respectfully,

W. H. Herndon.

November 9, 1882.

[Privately printed by H. E. Barker, Springfield, 1917, edition limited to 75 copies.]