Our political problem now is, “Can we as a nation continue together permanently—­for ever—­half slave, and half free?” The problem is too mighty for me.  May God in his mercy superintend the solution.

     Your much obliged friend, and humble servant,
       A. LINCOLN.

Extracts from Letter to Joshua F. Speed.  August 24, 1855

You suggest that in political action now, you and I would differ.  I suppose we would; not quite so much, however, as you may think.  You know I dislike slavery, and you fully admit the abstract wrong of it.  So far there is no cause of difference.  But you say that sooner than yield your legal right to the slave, especially at the bidding of those who are not themselves interested, you would see the Union dissolved.  I am not aware that any one is bidding you yield that right; very certainly I am not.  I leave that matter entirely to yourself.  I also acknowledge your rights and my obligations under the Constitution in regard to your slaves.  I confess I hate to see the poor creatures hunted down and caught and carried back to their stripes and unrequited toil; but I bite my lips and keep quiet.  In 1841, you and I had together a tedious low-water trip on a steamboat, from Louisville to St. Louis.  You may remember, as I well do, that from Louisville to the mouth of the Ohio, there were on board ten or a dozen slaves shackled together with irons.  That sight was a continued torment to me, and I see something like it every time I touch the Ohio or any other slave border.  It is not fair for you to assume that I have no interest in a thing which has, and continually exercises, the power of making me miserable.  You ought rather to appreciate how much the great body of the Northern people do crucify their feelings in order to maintain their loyalty to the Constitution and the Union.  I do oppose the extension of slavery, because my judgment and feeling so prompt me, and I am under no obligations to the contrary.  If for this you and I must differ, differ we must.  You say if you were President, you would send an army and hang the leaders of the Missouri outrages upon the Kansas elections; still, if Kansas fairly votes herself a slave State she must be admitted, or the Union must be dissolved.  But how if she votes herself a slave State unfairly; that is, by the very means for which you say you would hang men?  Must she still be admitted, or the Union dissolved?  That will be the phase of the question when it first becomes a practical one.  In your assumption that there may be a fair decision of the slavery question in Kansas, I plainly see that you and I would differ about the Nebraska law.  I look upon that enactment, not as a law, but as a violence from the beginning.  It was conceived in violence, is maintained in violence, and is being executed in violence.  I say it was conceived in violence, because the destruction of the Missouri Compromise, under the circumstances, was nothing less than violence.  It was passed in violence, because it could not have passed at all but for the votes of many members in violence of the known will of their constituents.  It is maintained in violence, because the elections since clearly demand its repeal, and the demand is openly disregarded.