”… That we here highly resolve that these dead shall not have died in vain – that this nation, under God, shall have a new birth of freedom – and that govemment of the people, by the people, for the peop e, shall not perish from the earth.” Possibly more than any other public utterance of Abraham Lincoln, the eloquent phrases of his Gettysburg address symbolize t e greatness of the 16th American president, whose birthday we commemorate today. When Lincoln delivered that speech Nov. 19, 1863, the- North and South were 2’/2 years into the Civil War, which was so devastating of human resources and spirit as well as from material standpoints. Fifteen to 30,000 people assembled at the Gettysburg, Pa. battlefield for multi-state ceremonies dedicating a 17-acre National Cemetery for Union and Confederate soldiers killed in the fierce encounter there July 1-3. Gettysburg, a victory for the North, was the turning point of the war. Gen. George C. Meade’s Union Army forced Gen. Robert E. Lee’s force to retreat across the Potomac. The battle was costly for both sides. About 44,000 men, one-third of those engaged in the conflict, were killed, wounded, or missing, recounted historian Allen C. Thomas. Some sources put the loss much higher. Most isteners on that November day probably wouldn’t have expected Lincoln’s words wou d take their place among celebrated presidential speeches. Indeed, many were openly disappointed, said Lord Longford in his volume, Abraham Lincoln. The main orator of the day, eminent statesmaneducator Edward Everett, had spoken for two hours. Later, Lincoln – scheduled for “a few remarks formally setting apart these grounds to their sacred use” – rose to speak. Holding in one hand his penned manuscript, at which he occasionally glanced, the President spoke “from the heart to the heart” in a firm, clear voice. Many in the tired, restless audience hardly had adjusted themselves when Lincoln sat down, his address finished. The President himself, according to .Longford’s account, felt the talk was “a flat failure.” Reaction of the press was mixed. Carl Sandburg, in his book, Abraham Lincoln, the War Years, assembled many newspaper comments. To quote a few: The Philadelphia Evening Bulletin said thousands would read Lincoln’s few words “and not many without a moistening of the eye and a swelling of the heart.” Providence Journal; “We know not where to look for a more admirable speech than the brief one which the President made …. ” Springfield Republican; “Surpassingly fine as Mr. Everett’s oration was rhetorical honors were won by President Lincoln. His little speech is a perfect gem; deep in feeling, compact in thought and expression; tasteful and elegant …” But the Chicago Times felt Lincoln had misstated “the cause for which the soldiers died,” and with “ignorant rudeness” insu ted the memory of the dead. A Richmond paper noted that Lincoln spoke of an idea, a concept worth dying for, and countered with: “For what are we fighting? An abstraction.” Everett’s opinion was written in a note to Lincoln next day: “I should be glad if I could flatter myself that I came as near to the central idea of the occasion in two hours as you did in two rninutes.” The President’s reply: “In our respective parts Esterday, you could not ve been excused to make a short address, nor I a long one. I am pleased to know that in your judgment, the little I did say was not entirely a failure.” Just as many undersold Lincoln’s address, numerous citizens were slow to appreciate his depth of character, patient and sympathetic understanding, and far-sighted dedication to the cause of preserving the Union.