Page images
PDF
EPUB

ments-it everywhere carefully excludes the idea that there is anything wrong in it. That is the real issue. That is the issue that will continue in this country when these poor tongues of Judge Douglas and myself shall be silent. It is the eternal struggle between these two principles-right and wrongthroughout the world. They are the two principles that have stood face to face from the beginning of time, and will ever continue to struggle. The one is the common right of humanity and the other the divine right of kings. It is the same principle in whatever shape it developes itself. It is the same spirit that says, 'You work and toil and earn bread, and I'll eat it.' No matter in what shape it comes, whether from the mouth of a king, who seeks to bestride the people of his own nation and live by the fruit of their labor, or from one race of men as an apology for enslaving another race, it is the same tyrannical principle."

To which Judge Douglas replied:-"He [Lincoln] says that he looks forward to a time when slavery shall be abolished everywhere. I look forward to a time when each state shall be allowed to do as it pleases. If it chooses to keep slavery forever, it is not my business, but its own; if it chooses to abolish slavery, it is its own business-not mine. I care more for the great principle of self-government, the right of the people to rule, than I do for all the negroes in Christendom. I would not endanger the perpetuity of this Union, I would not blot out the great inalienable rights of the white man for all the negroes that ever existed.”

The supreme court, in the celebrated Dred Scott case, had decided that slaves being property their owners had the right to take them to the territories the same as any other property and hold them as such; that congress transcended its power in the passage of the Missouri compromise, prohibiting slavery north of 36" 30', and that "if congress itself could not do this, if it is beyond the powers conferred by the federal government, it must be admitted that it could not authorize a territorial government to exercise them." Douglas had endorsed this decision-Lincoln opposed it.

Under this opinion slavery already existed in Kansas, notwithstanding the expressed will of the people, and when the

LINCOLN VERSUS DOUGLAS.

617

judge was asked to reconcile his doctrine of popular sovereignty in its practical workings with the decision, he was forced to take the position that slavery required protection by the adoption of police regulations, and that it could not exist if these were withheld by unfriendly legislation; thus practically conceding that it was in the power of territorial legislation to accomplish indirectly what the court had declared it had not the right to attempt directly. Of course the weak points on both sides were thoroughly exposed and ventilated.

As had been anticipated by Lincoln's friends, when they heard his speech on "the house divided against itself," it was boldly attacked and dissected by his watchful antagonist in his first speech at Chicago, and formed the objective point of his subsequent efforts. He charged that Lincoln had committed himself to the position that there must be a uniformity of institutions of the several states, which would lead to consolidation and despotism, and with great force and vehemence insisted that according to Lincoln, the formation by our fathers of the Union out of states that were partly free and partly slave was in violation of the law of God, and as they could not thus exist, the proposition committed his opponent to the duty of going into the slave states and making them free.

These objections were pointed out to Lincoln when the speech was delivered, and it was insisted by his friends that to utter such a sentiment was to commit a political blunder. But it must be remembered that Judge Douglas had been a prominent candidate for the presidency, and that if he could hold his party together, every indication pointed toward his nomination and elevation to the executive chair in 1860. Keeping this fact in view, Lincoln uniformly answered, "Well, perhaps it was a mistake so far as the present canvass is concerned, but in my opinion it will develop in the course of its discussion such statements and admissions on the part of Douglas as will widen the gap which already exists between him and the democrats of the southern states, and make his nomination and election as president impossible." What the ultimate result would be upon himself he refrained from stating, if, indeed, he had any opinion upon that point at that time. It was supposed by some, however, that a vivid conception of the

possibilities of his own future success was not excluded from the view.

Lincoln's defence of his "divided-house" proposition was that our fathers left the institution of slavery in the course of its ultimate extinction; that their policy was to prohibit its spread into territories where it had not before existed; that this policy was abandoned by the repeal of the Missouri compromise, thus placing it on the new basis not only of perpetuity but also of practically unlimited extension.

The first joint discussion was held at Ottawa, August 21. The crowd in attendance was estimated at 12,000; the speakers were met at the depot on their arrival by their friends, with large processions headed by brass bands, firing of cannon, and the fluttering of flags, banners, and emblematic devices from windows and house-tops on every street. Judge Douglas led off in a speech of one hour, Lincoln replying in an hour and a half, and the judge closing in thirty minutes. The admirers of each were enthusiastic in their demonstrations, Mr. Lincoln at the conclusion of the meeting, being seized by a party of friends and borne off through the crowd on their shoulders.

The side issues brought into the discussion attracted as much interest as did the main question. These were numerous and interesting, and owing to greater care and prudence were generally turned by Lincoln in his own favor. Douglas charged, for instance, that his opponent was present at the LovejoyCodding meeting at Springfield, in October, 1854, and read a set of resolutions which he alleged Lincoln helped to frame, when, in fact, the latter was not present at the meeting, and the resolutions alleged to have been passed by it were, in fact, adopted at a meeting held in Kane County. Of course no little capital was made out of these erroneous statements.

At Freeport, before an immense throng of listeners, Lincoln was the first speaker. He at once proceeded to answer seriatim the seven questions propounded to him by his opponent at Ottawa, relating to his position on the fugitive-slave law, the admission of new states into the Union, the abolition of slavery in the District of Columbia, the prohibition of the slave-trade between the different states, the prohibition of slavery in the territories, and the acquisition of new slave-territory. He then

LINCOLN VERSUS DOUGLAS.

619

in turn propounded four interrogatories to the judge. One of these was as follows: "Can the people of a United-States territory in any lawful way, against, the wish of any citizen of the United States, exclude slavery from its limits prior to the formation of a state constitution?" which brought out the fatal answer, that the local legislature by unfriendly legislation might effectually prevent the introduction of slavery into any territory. This position being in conflict with the Dred-Scott decision, which he had always upheld and defended, was heralded over the southern states as evidence that he had been two-faced on the subject, contending for the extension of slavery under the decision, and for its exclusion under his new doctrine.

The policy of propounding the question which had brought forth the answer had been submitted by Lincoln to some confidential friends, who advised against it. They even besieged his room the day before the discussion came off and insisted that the answer of his opponent would be such as to affect his fortunes in the State, without regard to the South, and urged him not to risk the interrogatory, saying in chorus, "if you do you can never be senator." But Lincoln, persisting in his determination to force an answer, replied, "Gentlemen, I am killing larger game; if Douglas answers, he can never be president, and the coming battle of 1860 is worth a hundred of this."*

At Jonesboro, Sept. 15, the audience was not so great, only about 2000 being present, but the meetings at Charleston, three days thereafter, and at Galesburg, Oct. 7, Quincy, Oct. 13, and at Alton, Oct. 15, were all attended by large and enthusiastic crowds.

In addition to the joint discussions, both candidates made speeches at mass meetings and barbecues, in nearly every county in the State, sometimes the appointments clashing, when nothing but the intervention of the two champions prevented a collision. It was a memorable campaign, abounding in debates, full of personalities, and in which individuals and newspapers were not over-nice in their choice of epithets. The arguments of the principals were taken up by their respective followers and repeated and threshed over and over again. Every town had its set of the Congressional Globe, and the number of constitu• "Abraham Lincoln: a History," The Century Magazine, XXXIV, 393.

tional lawyers was limited only by the number of the members of the bar.

The victory in the discussion was claimed by both sides; but the immediate result at the polls was, that while the republican state ticket was again elected, Douglas once more succeeded, under the existing apportionment in carrying the legislature— the senate standing fourteen to eleven and the house forty to thirty-five in his favor. But there was a more important and farreaching effect, and one which had been partially foreseen by the victorious contestant. His utterances during the canvass had cleft the democracy of the Nation in twain; thus not only rendering possible the nomination and election of his great antagonist in 1860, but effectually precluding the possibility of a united democracy in favor of armed secession.

James Miller, republican, for state treasurer received 125,430 votes, and Wm. B. Fondey, 121,609, Dougherty, the administration candidate, receiving 5071. Both the ex-governors, Reynolds and French, running for superintendent of public instruction, were defeated, the latter by only 2143 votes.

The twenty-first general assembly convened Jan. 3, 1859. The new senators were, Henry W. Blodgett, John P. Richmond, Samuel A. Buckmaster, Chauncey L. Higbee-these four having formerly served in the house-Richard F. Adams, Zenos Applington, George C. Bestor, Anthony L. Knapp, Thomas A. Marshall, and Austin Brooks. John H. Addams began his second, and Andrew J. Kuykendall his third, term.

The house was very largely composed of new members, only twelve of those who had served previously being returned. Among these were Wm. R. Morrison, Wm. B. Anderson, Vital Jarrot, Cyrus Epler, M. M. Bane, L. S. Church, and, after a long interval, Ebenezer Peck. Among those elected for the first time were, Leonard Swett, Alonzo W. Mack, Alex. Campbell, Stephen A. Hurlbut, VanH. Higgins, Wm. H. Green, Wm. A. Hacker, and Elijah M. Haines who then entered upon his long and eventful legislative career. John E. Detrich and Wm. B. Plato had been members of the eighteenth senate.

Wm. R. Morrison was elected speaker over Vital Jarrot, and James M. Blades, doorkeeper. Finney D. Preston was chosen secretary of the senate and David J. Waggoner for the second time, sergeant-at-arms.

« PreviousContinue »