Lincoln and Van Buren in the Steps of the Fathers: Another Look at the Lyceum Address

LINCOLN AND VAN BUREN IN THE STEPS OF THE FATHERS: ANOTHER LOOK AT THE LYCEUM ADDRESS Major L. Wilson On January 27, 1838, Abraham Lincoln delivered an address to the Young Men's Lyceum at Springfield, IUinois, entitled "The Perpetuation of Our Political Institutions." Less than a year earlier, on March 4, 1837, President Martin Van Buren dealt with the same matter in his Inaugural Address. Both expressed concerns widely shared at the time and the ambiguous nature of these concerns: they proudly claimed success for the "repubUcan experiment" begun by the fathers, yet warned that it might fail if the present age proved false. "It impresses on my mind a firm beUef," the president observed, "that the perpetuation of our institutions depends upon ourselves."1 To the sons had faUen the solemn duty of preserving the work of the founding fathers. While both expressed a common concern for preserving the republic, Lincoln and Van Buren differed in their assessment of the specific dangers facing it. One was the widespread incidence of mob action. Deploring "the increasing disregard for law which pervades the country ," Lincoln feared thelong-run effectofthe "mobocratic spirit" would be to erode "the attachment of the People" and destroy the basis of self government. "Let reverence for the laws," he urged, "become the pohrical reUgion of the nation." Van Buren likewise saw how the "ardor of public sentiment" often outran "the regular progress ofthe judicial tribunals ." By wounding "the majesty of the law," moreover, mob action might eventually provide the occasion "for abridging the liberties of the people." On balance, however, Van Buren was far less concerned about mob violence than Lincoln. Reaffirmingat this point aJeffersonian trust in the "generous patriotism" and "sound common sense" of the people, he believed they would soon return to the "landmarks of social order."2 1 Roy P. Basler, ed., TheCollectedWorks ofAbraham Lincoln,9vols. (New Brunswick: Rutgers Univ. Press, 1953), 1:108-15; James D. Richardson, A Compilation of the Messages and Papers of the Presidents, 20 vols. (New York: Bureau of National Literature, 1897), 4:1530-37, 1532; Rush Welter, The Mind of America, 1820-1860 (New York: Columbia Univ. Press, 1975), pp. 276-93. 2 Basier, Works of Lincoln, 1:109, 111, 112; Richardson, Messages, 4:1533. 198CIVIL WAR HISTORY On two other dangers to the republic the differences were much clearer and sharper. Lincoln devoted only two sentences to the rising voice of abolitionist agitation and expressed no personal opinion on the matter. In a lengthy passage, by contrast, Van Buren condemned abolitionism as the greatest threat to the republic. Regarding the menace of Caesarism Van Buren made no explicit references at all, whereas Lincoln placed central emphasis on it in his address. The Lyceum Address has been the subject of a considerable number of studies. Done mainly from the perspective oflater events—mounting sectional controversy and the Civil War—these studies impute to the young Lincoln prophetic powers of one sort or another. Some argue that he was very ambitious and that he identified with the Caesarian figure he predicted would arise. Otherstudies see Lincoln as a prophet of"poUtical reUgion." During the controversy over the expansion of slavery in the 1850s he accordingly held up the principle of equaUty to judge and redeem a divided nation; after war began he invoked divine providence in behalf of a new birth of freedom. Relatively little attention, on the other hand, has been given to Van Buren's views and none to a comparison of them with the views of Lincoln . In taking up the matter this essay focuses particularly on the political context of the 1830s, at a time when the system oftwo-party competition was approaching maturity. If a prophet of some sort, the young Lincoln was also a Whig politician. As a Whig, moreover, his views on the perpetuation of republican institutions surely gained greater clarity and force in dialectical contrast with the party ideology of Democrats. And no other Democrat had contributed more to the organization of his party and its ideological identification than President Van Buren. A closer look at his views will throw further Ught on the Lyceum Address and, in reciprocal fashion...