The University of Michigan Library provides access to these materials for educational and research purposes, with permission from their copyright holder. If you decide to use any of these materials, you are responsible for making your own legal assessment and securing any necessary permission.
My dear Sir: Your note of this morning is just received. I forebore to answer yours of the 22d because of my aversion (which I thought you understood,) to getting on paper, and furnishing new grounds for misunderstanding.
I do say the sole purpose of bringing troops here is to defend this capital.
I do say I have no purpose to invade Virginia, with them or any other troops, as I understand the word invasion. But suppose Virginia sends her troops, or admits others through her borders, to assail this capital, am I not to repel them, even to the crossing of the Potomac if I can?
Suppose Virginia erects, or permits to be erected, batteries on the opposite shore, to bombard the city, are we to stand still and see it done? In a word, if Virginia strikes us, are we not to strike back, and as effectively as we can?
Again, are we not to hold Fort Monroe (for instance) if we can? I have no objection to declare a thousand times that I have no purpose to invade Virginia or any other State, but I do not mean to let them invade us without striking back. Yours truly
A. LINCOLN
[1] Copy, DLC-RTL. Maryland's ex-senator (1845-1849) and recent delegate to the Peace Conference wrote on April 24 that he desired an answer to his letter of April 22 before he left Washington. A contemporary copy of the earlier letter made by Joseph Holt, in the Lincoln Papers, reads in part as follows: ``. . . . The existing excitement and alarm . . . of my own State and of Virginia are owing . . . to an apprehension that it is your purpose to use the military force you are assembling in this District for the invasion of . . . these States . . . '' (DLC-RTL).