all.  It obliges nobody to follow me, and I trust it obliges me to follow nobody.  The radicals and conservatives each agree with me in some things and disagree in others.  I could wish both to agree with me in all things; for then they would agree with each other, and would be too strong for any foe from any quarter.  They, however, choose to do otherwise, and I do not question their right.  I, too, shall do what seems to be my duty.  I hold whoever commands in Missouri, or elsewhere, responsible to me, and not to either radicals or conservatives.  It is my duty to hear all; but at last I must, within my sphere, judge what to do and what to forbear.”

It is some consolation to history, that out of this blood and travail grew the political regeneration of the State.  Slavery and emancipation never gave each other a moment’s truce.  The issue was raised to an acute stage by Fremont’s proclamation in August, 1861.  Though that ill-advised measure was revoked by President Lincoln, the friction and irritation of war kept it alive, and in the following year a member of the Missouri State convention offered a bill to accept and apply President Lincoln’s plan of compensated abolishment.  Further effort was made in this direction in Congress, where in January, 1863, the House passed a bill appropriating ten million dollars, and in February, the Senate another bill appropriating fifteen million dollars to aid compensated abolishment in Missouri.  But the stubborn opposition of three pro-slavery Missouri members of the House prevented action on the latter bill or any compromise.

The question, however, continually grew among the people of Missouri, and made such advance that parties, accepting the main point as already practically decided at length only divided upon the mode of procedure The conservatives wanted the work to be done by the old State convention, the radicals desired to submit it to a new convention fresh from the people.  Legislative agreement having failed, the provisional governor called the old State convention together.  The convention leaders who controlled that body inquired of the President whether he would sustain their action.  To this he made answer in a letter to Schofield dated June 22, 1863: 

“Your despatch, asking in substance whether, in case Missouri shall adopt gradual emancipation, the general government will protect slave-owners in that species of property during the short time it shall be permitted by the State to exist within it, has been received.  Desirous as I am that emancipation shall be adopted by Missouri, and believing as I do that gradual can be made better than immediate for both black and white, except when military necessity changes the case, my impulse is to say that such protection would be given.  I cannot know exactly what shape an act of emancipation may take.  If the period from the initiation to the final end should be comparatively short, and the act should prevent persons being sold