Describe The Leadership Styel of Lawyer Abraham Lincoln (Essay Sample)

LEADERSHIP FOR LAWYER ABRAHAM LINCOLN
Student’s Name
Course
Professor’s Name
Date
President Lincoln’s astuteness was first witnessed just after his resounding victory in the 1860 election. As he awaited his inauguration, the president-elect faced a rising tide of calls for secession from southern states. Southern states opposed his position on the institution of slavery and they made good of their promise to begin the process of secession should Lincoln be elected. Lincoln’s position on the institution of slavery is well known, but his ability to balance between the political reality of the time and his inner feelings about the issue is a matter that reveals his astuteness. He took the position of not impairing slavery in states that already practiced slavery but ensuring that it did not spread in states that did not have an established institution of slavery.
The first step Lincoln took was to support a third amendment that sought to support slavery in states that already practiced it. The amendment was successfully approved by the Congress. As he weighed his support for the amendment through Republican Congressional leaders, a senator from Kentucky, John J. Crittenden came up with proposals that aimed to institute massive constitutional amendments that would have guaranteed slavery in states. The draft of proposals would be called the Crittenden Compromise. The compromise proposed that Congress shall not abolish slavery in the District of Columbia and it would not interfere with states trading slaves with each other. It also proposed that Congress would pass legislation that directed the compensation of slaveholders who lost runaway slaves. Lincoln understood the set of proposals in the Crittenden Compromise as set to undermine his campaign platform. He instructed Republican congressmen to reject any concessions on any clause of the compromise that sought to expand slavery. Lincoln used this tactic to prepare for any eventuality because he knew that the Civil War was somewhat an inevitable issue, especially after the extreme resolutions at the Montgomery Convention by southern states. He was able to foresee the ramifications of such a constitutional amendment on his long-term focus on abolishing slavery.[McPherson, J.M., 1995. Who Freed the Slaves?. Proceedings of the American Philosophical Society, 139(1), pp.1-10.]
Lincoln’s Decision on 300 Indians Accused for War Crimes during the Civil War
It was President Lincoln’s policy on Indians during the Civil War that demonstrated that his background as an attorney had a huge influence on his leadership style. In late November1862, when the war was its peak. The financial cost of war was at its all time high since the war began. Tension was brewing in Dakota due to rumors that the government could soon be no longer able to fund the war because there would be no annuity gold for The Dakota, the resident Indians in Minnesota. Traders slammed doors. The tension grew into actual war that was sparked by the decision by four men from Dakota led by an Indian called Killing Ghost attacked and killed five white settlers. It was an act to hit at the government for its failure deal with the economic problems of Indians during the war. During this time, many federal soldiers were engaged in a war offensive against the confederate soldiers. Dakota Indian leader saw this as an opportunity strike at white settlers who they loathed and their attack seemed more as an onslaught against the union. Many settlers in Dakota supported union troops and[Gallagher, Gary W., and Kathryn Shively Meier. "Coming to Terms with Civil War Military History." The Journal of the Civil War Era 4, no. 4 (2014): 487-508.] [Guelzo, Allen C. "Restoring the Proclamation: Abraham Lincoln, Confiscation, and Emancipation in the Civil War Era." Howard LJ 50 (2006): 397.]
President Lincoln’s Resolve to Defend the Constitution
The Dakota led by Chief Taoyateduta or Little Crow attacked white settlers in proper succession and within four days, some four to eight hundred white settlers were killed in cold blood. They burned farms and fields. They did not spare a detachment of federal soldiers that had been dispatched from Fort Ridgley. Panic and tension surged throughout Minnesota and tens of thousands of white settlers were internally displaced and fleeing the western regions. Commander Henry. H. Sibley captured about 1,200 of The Dakota and began the process of prosecuting them as war criminals. He constituted a commission of five military officers to carry out trials for the prisoners and convict those found guilty of war crimes. The penalty for war crimes was death. Executions could only be done upon the review and approval of the President. Most charges in the trials ranged from rape to murder to theft. The trials were largely unfair because they did not follow the due process. The commission used its own witnesses without giving the Dakotas an opportunity to have legal defense. It also relied on hearsay evidence with many witnesses testifying information they had heard from third parties rather than seen.
A list of the accused, many of whom had been sentenced to death, was dispatched to President Lincoln. As he began to deliberate and review the list, Lincoln received a bombardment of opinions and advises from generals, army officers, politicians, and the clergy. The Presidents’ decision, however, was largely influenced by his background as an attorney. Rather than follow the sentiments of surviving white settlers or yield to pressures of the Civil War, Lincoln employed his legal prowess in dealing with the executions. During his practice as a lawyer, he had built a reputation as a defense lawyer and a prosecutor. He was famous for carrying out lengthy cross-examinations in countrified style. He had made over two hundred appearances as one of the senior lawyers of the Illinois Central Railroad. Thus, Lincoln used this legal experience to review the cases before him by first reviewing transcripts and listened to pleads from visiting family members of the men convicted by the Sibley-appointed commission.
President Lincoln was able to identify the legal flaws of Dakota trials. The Lincoln used his legal skills to note that defendants did not have counsel representation where attorneys could have challenged the impartiality of the commission and its jurisdiction in the crimes where martial law was not ordered. Besides, Lincoln noted that the inconsistencies in witness submissions had been grossly ignored. Some witnesses such as one called “Godfrey” had lied to the commission in order to get its favor. Besides lacking legal representation, the Dakota also suffered from a language and cultural barriers that made the trials grossly biased because many did not even understand the proceedings. President also used a political perspective in addition to his legal perspective of the cases, which was also nuanced with his natural compassion. He therefore decided not to be very cruel in his judgment in a manner that disregarded material evidence submitted and also not to be too lenient to encourage another outbreak from the Indians. He only allowed 39 out of the 303 men to be executed. Were it not for Lincoln’s background as a legal expert and an attorney, he could possibly have made such a critical decision without due attention to material evidence submitted against the Dakotas. Besides, white Americans were crying for revenge but he did not yield to such an unjust way of dealing with the issue. The thirty prisoners sentenced to death had either been accused of murder, mutilation or mass massacres with compelling evidence against them. The decision was, indeed, astute and befitting of a president who...