On the heels of this refusal to concede to Chandler one of his cherished schemes, the second message was sent to Congress.  The watchful and exasperated Jacobins found abundant offense in its omissions.  On the whole great subject of possible emancipation it was blankly silent.  The nearest it came to this subject was one suggestion which applied only to those captured slaves who had been forfeited by the disloyal owners through being employed to assist the Confederate government Lincoln advised that after receiving their freedom they be sent out of the country and colonized “at some place, or places, in a climate congenial to them.”  Beyond this there was nothing bearing on the slavery question except the admonition—­so unsatisfactory to Chandler and all his sort—­that while “the Union must be preserved, and hence all indispensable means must be employed,” Congress should “not be in haste to determine that radical and extreme measures, which may reach the loyal as well as the disloyal, are indispensable.”

Lincoln was entirely clear in his own mind that there was but one way to head off the passion of destruction that was rioting in the Jacobin temper.  “In considering the policy to be adopted in suppressing the insurrection, I have been anxious and careful that the inevitable conflict for this purpose shall not degenerate into a violent and remorseless revolutionary struggle.  I have, therefore, in every case, thought it proper to keep the integrity of the Union prominent as the primary object of the contest on our part, leaving all questions which are not of vital military importance to the more deliberate action of the Legislature.”  He persisted in regarding the war as an insurrection of the “disloyal portion of the American people,” not as an external struggle between the North and the South.

Finally, the culmination of the message was a long elaborate argument upon the significance of the war to the working classes.  His aim was to show that the whole trend of the Confederate movement was toward a conclusion which would “place capital on an equal footing with, if not above, labor, in the structure of government.”  Thus, as so often before, he insisted on his own view of the significance in American politics of all issues involving slavery—­their bearing on the condition of the free laborer.  In a very striking passage, often overlooked, he ranked himself once more, as first of all, a statesman of “the people,” in the limited class sense of the term.  “Labor is prior to and independent of capital.  Capital is only the fruit of labor and could never have existed if labor had not first existed.  Labor is the superior of capital, and deserves much the higher consideration.”  But so far is he from any revolutionary purpose, that he adds immediately, “Capital has its rights which are as worthy of protection as any other rights.”  His crowning vision is not communism.  His ideal world is one of universal opportunity, with labor freed of every hindrance, with all its deserving members acquiring more and more of the benefits of property.