Lincoln and Magnanimity

I enjoy reading, especially biographies¹⁾Though I do admit to having read the Harry Potter series, the Divergent series, the Hunger Games series, The Maze Runner, The Giver, and an occasional John Grisham [among other mindless literature]. Do not judge me.. I have thoroughly enjoyed biographies of George Washington, Benjamin Franklin, John Adams, Alexander Hamilton (you probably sense a pattern there), Harry Truman, Theodore Roosevelt, and leaders of my church, among others. I love seeing how these quite imperfect human beings overcame their many human flaws to become powerful and influential leaders. I see in these leaders characteristics that I would like to develop within myself because I see my own weaknesses in their strengths. Of all of these character traits, the one that struck me as personally important, particularly within the practice of law and as a business owner, is to be magnanimous: very generous or forgiving, especially toward a rival or someone less powerful than oneself.

With deference to my favored author David McCullough,²⁾If there is one person that I would love to buy lunch to steal an hour of his ear, it is author David McCullough, who wrote biographies of Adams, Truman, and Roosevelt. A free estate plan is offered to anyone that can make this happen for me. my single favorite biography is Team of Rivals: The Political Genius of Abraham Lincoln by Doris Kearns Goodwin. In Team of Rivals, Goodwin profoundly impresses on the reader the power of Lincoln’s magnanimous nature. At the outset of his presidency, Lincoln surrounded himself with cabinet members that exceeded his own political power in the day³⁾thus a “Team of Rivals”. In a surprising move, Lincoln appointed to his cabinet William H. Seward (Secretary of State), Salmon P. Chase (Treasury Secretary), and Edward Bates (Attorney General), all of whom had vied for the Republican nomination as President, but were defeated by Lincoln. Not fearing the political influence of such strong personalities, Lincoln knew that he would be a better President with their advice than he would be with them acting outside of the White House⁴⁾possibly against him...I am looking at you Mr. Chase. Also, including them in his cabinet had the effect of strengthening the whole party that was on the brink of fracturing.

How Mr. Lincoln dealt with General McClellan

A well-known example from Lincoln’s presidency highlights his magnanimity. George B. McClellan was Lincoln’s General of the Union army as the Civil War began. It was no secret in the day that McClellan viewed himself as superior to Lincoln in every way and in fact publicly referred to Lincoln as “nothing more than a well-meaning baboon” and “ever unworthy of his high position.” Nevertheless, McClellan enjoyed unparalleled popularity among the Union troops and in the public.

At one critical early juncture of the Civil War, Lincoln, Seward, and John Hay called on McClellan at McClellan’s residence. Finding him not at home at the time, Lincoln waited. After an hour of wait, McClellan arrived home and was informed that Lincoln was waiting on him. Rather than meeting with his Commander-in-Chief, McClellan retired to bed without so much as a hello to the President of the United States. Lincoln waited an additional thirty minutes before being informed that McClellan had retired to bed and would not see the President that night. Both Seward and Hay were outraged at the open disrespect of the President. However, Lincoln famously replied that is was “better at this time not to be making points of etiquette and personal dignity.”⁵⁾Read more here

Lincoln’s example teaches several important principles for practicing lawyers, myself principally among them. First, there is no need to fear opposing viewpoints. We too often default to degrading opposing counsel’s arguments with hyperbole, superlatives, and personal attacks⁶⁾veiled and not-so-veiled. Instead, we should recognize that opposing counsel has generally worked diligently at their arguments and that even if we do not agree with their arguments, we can respond appropriately and effectively without resorting to ineffective hyperbole and personal attacks. At the very least, we can do more to give the benefit of the doubt to opposing counsel even if counsel’s effort is less than lackluster.

Second, there is no need to take personal offense to perceived (or actual) slights from opposing counsel that does not follow the first point above. When our clients’ best interests should be at the forefront of every response, we need not be distracted⁷⁾and run up our clients’ bill by engaging opposing counsel in the gutter. Our “personal dignity,” as Lincoln noted, will be greatly increased by not making “points of etiquette” at the expense of our clients’ bill.

Though my darts rarely hit the bulls-eye of magnanimity, particularly on these two points, I hope to score a few points by at least hitting the dartboard once in a while. At worst, I hope to keep my aim and attempt to be a little more magnanimous today than in previous days. Although none of us can be as patient and understanding as Mr. Lincoln, conscious effort is the first step.