only of the then five, now four whig papers, I do not remember having seen a single speech, or even an extract from one, in any single one of those papers. With equal and full means on both sides, I will venture that the State Register has thrown before it's readers more of Locofoco speeches in a month, than all the whig papers of the district, have done of whig speeches during the session.
If you wish a full understanding of the beginning of the war, I repeat what I believe I said to you in a letter once before, that the whole, or nearly so is to be found in the speech of Dixon of Connecticut. This I sent you in Pamphlet, as well as in the Globe. Examine and study every sentence of that speech thoroughly, and you will understand the whole subject.
You ask how Congress came to declare that war existed by the act of Mexico. Is it possible you dont understand that yet? You have at least twenty speeches in your possession that fully explain it. I will, however, try it once more. The news reached Washington of the commencement of hostilities on the Rio Grande, and of the great peril of Gen: Taylor's army. Every body, whig and democrat, was for sending them aid, in men and money. It was necessary to pass a bill for this. The Locos had a majority in both Houses, and they brought in a bill with a preamble, saying---Whereas war exists by the act of Mexico, therefore we send Gen: Taylor men and money. The whigs moved to strike out the preamble, so that they could vote to send the men and money, without saying any thing about how the war commenced; but, being in the minority they were voted down, and the preamble was retained. Then, on the passage of the bill, the question came upon them, ``shall we vote for preamble and bill both together, or against both together.'' They could not vote against sending help to Gen: Taylor, and therefore they voted for both together. Is there any difficulty in understanding this? Even my little speech, shows how this was; and if you will go to the Library you may get the Journals of 1845-6, in which you can find the whole for yourself.
We have nothing published yet with special reference to the Taylor race; but we soon will have, and then I will send them to every body. I made an Internal Improvement speech day-before-yesterday, which I shall send home as soon as I can get it written out and printed, and which I suppose nobody will read. Your friend as ever A LINCOLN
Annotation
[2] Arnold R. Robinson was a Whig attorney, prominent Mason and temperance man who turned Locofoco. Although Lincoln's punctuation seems to suggest that the name may be Turner Campbell, efforts have failed to identify such a person. Campbell was probably Antrim Campbell, prominent Whig attorney who had been defeated for Springfield city attorney in April. Herndon's claim that he also abandoned the Whig party has not been corroborated in contemporary sources. Turner was possibly Oaks Turner, Putnam County Whig.
[3] Probably short for Arnold Robinson.
[5] Harrison Grimsley, who married Mary Todd Lincoln's relative Elizabeth J. Todd, was a Springfield merchant. Zimri A. Enos was an attorney, partner of Edward D. Baker. Lee R. Kimball was an attorney, partner in the firm of N. W. Edwards & Company. Charles W. Matheny was the son of Lincoln's friend Charles R. Matheny.
[6] Christopher Logan, son of Stephen T. Logan; Reddick Ridgely, eighteen-year-old son of Nicholas H. Ridgely; Louis Zwisler, probably the son of James Zwisler, a Springfield merchant. A letter from Louis (DLC-RTL) of June 29, 1860, begins ``Dear Father I might say,'' and recalls early times in Springfield.
[7] Beardstown Gazette, Illinois Gazette (Lacon), Morgan Journal (Jackson-ville), Sangamo Journal (Springfield), and the Hennepin Herald which ceased publication in 1848.