CHAPTER XI

AN EMANCIPATED POLITICIAN

The indignation that rushed through Illinois when the first news from

the Capitol forecast the repeal of the Missouri Compromise had not yet

abated, when Douglas dauntlessly sought to explain his course of conduct

in Chicago. He was howled down and denied liberty of speech. This

naturally brought on a reaction. The contention that the distinguished

senator had been struck before being heard, added martyrdom to his bold

conduct.

As he wandered down the State closer to the home of ardent democracy, he

was met with growing enthusiasm. His ingenious sophistry turned popular

sovereignty into a seeming contest for a principle and Illinois was

being carried away by his triumphant oratory and logic. There is little

wonder that the man who breasted the storm of debate in the Senate

should make headway in the land of his friends where office holders and

supporters gloried in his fame and were elated when he chanted forth his

alluring doctrine as a solution to political conditions.

His main effort was made at the State Fair in October, 1854, an occasion

that called together the intelligence of Illinois in days when few

occasions permitted the satisfaction of social life. Enhancing its

importance, this political gathering was to mark the opening of the

campaign to determine the selection of a Senator. The speech of Douglas

was to be almost a national event. Upon him the hopes of the State

democracy centered in the conditions following the late political

tempest. Douglas was equal to the occasion and his friends rejoiced.

Lincoln had made such a profound impression at the time among the Whig

orators, that he was chosen to bear the brunt of the reply to the "State

Fair Speech" of the wily leader of the Democratic party. Lincoln

surpassed every expectation. Neither side was prepared for the terrible

onslaught. A new and dauntless advocate appeared giving power to the

gathering protesting elements against the aggressive championship of

Douglas. Herndon, himself, was thoroughly amazed, and tells us that the

speaker quivered with emotion, that he felt upon his soul the truths

burn which he uttered, that crushing with his logic the Nebraska bill he

rent it into shreds and held it up to the scorn and the mockery of the

crowds, that he took the heart captive and broke like a sun over the

understanding.[279] In his reply Douglas was excited, and his voice loud

and shrill. Lamon relates that shaking his forefinger at the democratic

malcontents, and declaiming rather than debating, he occupied to little

purpose the brief interval remaining until the adjournment for supper;

that then, promising to resume his address in the evening, he went his

way, and evening came but not the orator.[280]

[279] Herndon, 2, 37-8.

[280] Lamon, 349-350.

While Lincoln was moving in the moral realm, still, at this very time,

note must be taken of the politician in the valley. The enthusiasm that

followed his baptismal oration had not calmed when Lovejoy announced a

gathering that evening of the friends of freedom. The Nebraska movement

fed the Abolitionists with abounding faith in a speedy triumph. With a

rising sense of their strength, fairly "snuffing" the coming victory

they looked for, Lovejoy and his associates hastened to command

Lincoln's attendance at their meeting. Herndon vividly describes the

occasion, saying that their plan was to induce Lincoln to speak for

them, yet he doubted the propriety of Lincoln's taking any stand yet.

Lincoln was ambitious to climb to the United States Senate, and on

grounds of policy it would not do for him to occupy at that time such

advance ground as they were taking. On the other hand, it was equally

dangerous to refuse a speech for the Abolitionists. Herndon then hunted

up Lincoln and urged him to avoid meeting the enthusiastic champion of

Abolitionism. "Go home at once," he said. "Take Bob with you and drive

somewhere into the country and stay till this thing is over." Lincoln

under the pretense of having business in Tazewell County drove out of

town in his buggy, and did not return until the apostles of Abolitionism

had gone to their homes. Herndon believes that this arrangement saved

Lincoln, for if he had endorsed the resolutions passed at the meeting,

or spoken simply in favor of freedom that night, he would have been

identified with all the rancor and extremes of Abolitionism, and if, on

the contrary, he refused to take a position as advanced as theirs, he

would have lost their support.[281]

[281] Herndon, 2, 40-41.

Another incident told by the same writer makes it necessary ever to keep

track of Lincoln, the wary politician: "One day I read in the _Richmond

Enquirer_ an article endorsing slavery, and arguing that from principle

the enslavement of either whites or blacks was justifiable and right. I

showed it to Lincoln, who remarked that it was 'rather rank doctrine for

northern Democrats to endorse. I should like to see,' he said, with

emphasis 'some of these Illinois newspapers champion that.' I told him

if he would only wait and keep his own counsel I would have a

pro-slavery organ in Springfield publish that very article. He doubted

it, but when I told him how it was to be done, he laughed and said, 'Go

in.' I cut the slip out and succeeded in getting it in the paper named.

Of course it was a trick but it acted admirably. Its appearance in the

new organ, although without comment, almost ruined that valuable

journal, and my good natured friend the editor was nearly overcome by

the denunciation of those who were responsible for the organ's

existence. My connection and Lincoln's too,--for he endorsed the

trick,--with the publication of the condemned article was eventually

discovered, and we were thereafter effectually prevented from getting

another line in the paper. The anti-slavery people quoted the article as

having been endorsed by a democratic newspaper in Springfield and

Lincoln himself used it with telling effect. He joined in the popular

denunciation, expressing great astonishment that such a sentiment could

find lodgment in any paper in Illinois, although he knew full well how

the whole thing had been carried through."[282]

[282] Herndon, 2, 39-40.

Lincoln was alive to the best methods of persuasion. He knew that men

were the children of emotion and that while many would be calloused to

the slavery of the black man, nothing would arouse the North quicker

than this doctrine of the bondage of the white man. While slavery was

making every effort to fasten its fangs on the nation, Lincoln was not

averse to take advantage of a shrewd move to strike heavy blows at the

potent institution.

He entered deeply into the contest. Lincoln knew that it involved the

painful rending of party allegiance. His letter to Palmer sheds light on

the intensity of the struggle, the heroism of the democratic minority

whose loyalty to country and righteousness surpassed a deep-seated

partisanship: "You are," he said, "and always have been, honestly and

sincerely a Democrat; and I know how painful it must be to an honest

sincere man to be urged by his party to the support of a measure, which

in his conscience he believes to be wrong. You have had a severe

struggle with yourself, and you have determined not to swallow the

wrong. Is it just to yourself that you should, in a few public speeches,

state your reasons, and thus justify yourself? I wish you could; and yet

I say, 'Don't do it if you think it will injure you.'"[283]

[283] Tarbell, 1, 275.

Lincoln recognized that political progress is not alone the result of

intellectual supremacy; that it is a painful struggle; that policy must

be mingled with principle; that the world does not welcome the

unadulterated gospel; that through the centuries, humanity has groped

its way to the far light with eyes blinded by the superstition of ages

and selfishness.

The moral prophet is seldom the political leader of his time. He stands

above his age. The politician is part of it. One sees things as they

should be, the other as they are. One is splendidly indifferent to

results, the other keenly appreciative of them. Lincoln made no false

step. Had he walked too fast for his day he might have been the Garrison

of the West, but not the party guide. With sure instinct he felt that

the time was not ripe for companionship with the Abolitionists. Illinois

was not ready. If he was to continue his hold on public sentiment, to

guide it, he could not flash the truth before the gaze of humanity.

Despite the suffering of martyrs, the heroism of statesmen, the

sacrifices of seekers of the truth, wrong was still "upon the throne,"

and "truth upon the scaffold," the world was not slow in crucifying its

heroes of speech and deed. Lincoln recognized the weaknesses of men, the

shortcomings of human nature, the superstition of centuries. He was

content with slow progress, uncowed by disappointment, and realized

that the grumbling world emancipated its heart and mind slowly.

Under the spell of the State Fair speech, Whig leaders earnestly

besought Lincoln to follow Douglas up until election.[284] So again at

Peoria, Lincoln broke forth in impassioned utterances that took captive

the judgment. His logic throbbed with passion for freedom, for liberty

and emancipation. He lifted his hearers above the jangling of everyday

life, above the mists of hate, of jealousy, of selfishness, into a

region of the brotherhood of man. Unlike his speech at Springfield, this

was written out. It demonstrates that his supremacy among the eminent

leaders of Illinois was not a matter of the choice of the hour.

[284] Lamon, 354.

With marvelous power of directness, he plotted out the line of

discussion. He made much of the fact that the Fathers of the Republic

regarded slavery as an evil worthy of restriction and looked forward to

the day of its ultimate abolition, saying that as the subject was no

other than part of the larger question of domestic slavery, he wished to

make the distinction between the existing institution and the extension

of it so clear that no honest man could misunderstand him, and no

dishonest man could successfully misrepresent him.[285]

[285] Lincoln's Speeches, 1, 181.

With telling effect he quoted the words of Douglas himself as to the

sincere observance of the Missouri Compromise that put a barrier in the

way of the progress of slavery: "It had its origin," said Douglas, "in

the hearts of all patriotic men, who desired to preserve and perpetuate

the blessings of our glorious Union--an origin akin to that of the

Constitution of the United States, conceived in the same spirit of

fraternal affection, and calculated to remove forever the only danger

which seemed to threaten, at some distant day, to sever the social bond

of Union. All the evidences of public opinion of that day seemed to

indicate that this Compromise had been canonized in the hearts of the

American people, as a sacred thing which no ruthless hand would ever be

reckless enough to disturb."[286] His comment on this unanswerable

statement of Douglas is significant of the nature of Lincoln's peculiar

fairness and consequent strength. Lincoln said that he did not read the

extract to involve Judge Douglas in an inconsistency, for if he

afterward thought he was wrong, it was right for him to change, but he

brought it forward merely to show the high estimate placed on the

Missouri Compromise by all parties up to so late as the year 1849.[287]

[286] Lincoln's Speeches, 1, 184.

[287] _Ibid._

In the North and South passion had unloosed its tongue and crimination

and recrimination were daily becoming steady servants in debate and

discussion on the slavery question. With it all, Lincoln calmly sat in

judgment.

"Before proceeding let me say that I think I have no prejudices against

the Southern people. They are just what we would be in their situation.

If slavery did not now exist between them, they would not introduce it.

If it did now exist among us, we should not instantly give it up. This I

believe of the masses North and South.... When Southern people tell us

they are no more responsible for the origin of slavery than we are, I

acknowledge the fact. When it is said that the institution exists, and

that it is very difficult to get rid of it in any satisfactory way, I

can understand and appreciate the same. I surely will not blame them for

not doing what I should not know how to do myself. If all earthly power

were given me, I should not know what to do as to the existing

institution. My first impulse would be to free all the slaves, and send

them to Liberia, to their own native land. But a moment's reflection

would convince me that whatever of high hope (as I think there is) there

may be in this in the long run, its sudden execution is impossible--what

then? Free them all, and keep them among us as underlings? Is it quite

certain that this betters their condition? I think I would not hold one

in slavery at any rate, yet the point is not clear enough for me to

denounce people upon. What next? Free them and make them politically and

socially our equals? My own feelings will not admit of this, and if mine

would, we well know that those of the great mass of whites will not.

Whether this feeling accords with justice and sound judgment is not the

sole question, if indeed it is any part of it. A universal feeling,

whether well or ill founded, cannot be safely disregarded. We cannot

make them equals. It does seem to me that systems of gradual

emancipation might be adopted, but for their tardiness in this I will

not undertake to judge our brethren of the South.

"When they remind us of their constitutional rights, I acknowledge

them--not grudgingly, but fully and fairly; and I would give them any

legislation for the reclaiming of their fugitives which should not in

its stringency be more likely to carry a free man into slavery than our

ordinary criminal laws are to hang an innocent one.

"But all this, to my judgment, furnishes no more excuse for permitting

slavery to go into our free territory than it would for reviving the

African slave-trade by law. The law which forbids the bringing of slaves

from Africa, and that which has so long forbidden the taking of them

into Nebraska, can hardly be distinguished on any moral principle, and

the repeal of the former could find quite as plausible excuses as that

of the latter."[288]

[288] Lincoln's Speeches, 1, 186-187.

In the domain of literature on the slavery question there is no

statement that surpasses this in charity, sanity and wisdom. With his

overflowing hatred to slavery, he still kept justice as his guide and

was slow to blame the South for the long standing sin. In this he towers

above the Abolitionists who put upon the slave holders the burdens of a

past as well as a present wrong. Yet unlike the politician he did not

lose his ideal and become palsied and apologetic. He saw the need of

keeping alive the principles of the Republic. Hastening the coming of

the better humanity, with patience for human shortcoming, with zeal for

the triumph of emancipation, he continued in his peculiar, lonely and

potent way the advocacy of justice to God's dusky children.

In the Senate Douglas with triumphant eloquence charged Seward and

Sumner and the North with having repudiated the Missouri Compromise

through the Wilmot Proviso and the measures of 1850. Anti-slavery

leaders in the Senate were confounded by this sudden charge and

grandiloquent accusation. Lincoln took up the challenge and met the

arrogant claim of Douglas without flinching. His analysis exposed the

glittering sophistry of the man who enraptured the Northern statesmen in

the solemn Senate. He not only held his ground in the face of the

brilliant strategy of his opponent, but even carried the war into the

camp of the foe.

He argued that the contention of Douglas that the North repudiated the

Missouri Compromise was no less absurd than it would be to argue that

because they had so far forborne to acquire Cuba, they would have

thereby, in principle, repudiated former acquisitions and determined to

throw them out of the Union; that it was no less absurd than it would be

to say that because he may have refused to build an addition to his

house, he thereby decided to destroy the existing house.

This speech abounds in plain, hard English, travelling direct to the

intellect on a straight line. No labored argument could be half as sure

of a welcome to the human mind as his graphic exposal of the injustice

of the repeal of the Missouri Compromise: "After an angry and dangerous

controversy, the parties made friends by dividing the bone of

contention. The one party first appropriates its own share, beyond all

power to be disturbed in the possession of it, and then seizes the share

of the other party. It is as if two starving men had divided their own

loaf; the one had hastily swallowed his half, and then grabbed the

other's half just as he was putting it to his mouth."[289]

[289] Lincoln's Speeches, 1, 192.

In nothing did Douglas show greater genius than in hallowing his

doctrine of popular sovereignty. The leaders in Congress feared openly

to fight his vaunted "sacred right of self government," they were not

sure of their ground. Lincoln with confidence, born of lonely struggle,

rushed on the angry battlefield to run the gantlet of debate on the

conquering doctrine of popular sovereignty: "When the white man," he

said, "governs himself, that is self-government, but when he governs

himself and also governs another man, that is more than self

government--that is despotism. If the negro is a man, why then my

ancient faith teaches me that 'all men are created equal,' and that

there can be no moral right in connection with one man's making a slave

of another.

"Judge Douglas frequently, with bitter irony and sarcasm, paraphrases

our argument by saying: 'The white people of Nebraska are good enough to

govern themselves, but they are not good enough to govern a few

miserable negroes!' Well! I doubt not that the people of Nebraska are

and will continue to be as good as the average of people elsewhere. I

do not say the contrary. What I do say is that no man is good enough to

govern another man without that other's consent."[290] In a single

weighty phrase he crushed the elaborate argument of the Senator of

Illinois and left its fair form so that only a shattered frame remains.

[290] Lincoln's Speeches, 1, 195.

At times he spoke like a seer lifted above the petty prejudices of the

time. He declared that the spirit of mutual concession--that first

wrought the Constitution, and thrice saved the Union--and that trust in

a national compromise, would thus be strangled; that the South flushed

with triumph would provoke and aggress, and the North, brooding on

wrong, would resent and retaliate. He alleged that already a few in the

North defied all constitutional restraint, and even menaced the

institution of slavery in the southern States; that already a few in the

South claimed the constitutional right to hold slaves in the free States

and demanded the revival of the slave trade. That it was a grave

question for lovers of the Union whether the final destruction of the

Missouri Compromise, and with it the spirit of all compromise, would not

fatally increase the number of both.[291]

[291] _Ibid._, 201.

His sanity enabled him to guide the erring and confounded in the days of

doubt. "Some men," he said, "mostly Whigs, who condemn the repeal of the

Missouri Compromise, nevertheless hesitate to go for its restoration,

lest they be thrown in company with the Abolitionists. Will they allow

me, as an old Whig, to tell them, good humoredly, that I think this is

very silly? Stand with anybody that stands right. Stand with him while

he is right, and part with him when he goes wrong. Stand with the

Abolitionists in restoring the Missouri Compromise, and stand against

him when he attempts to repeal the fugitive slave law. In the latter

case you stand with the Southern disunionist. What of that? You are

still right. In both cases you are right. In both cases you expose the

dangerous extremes. In both you stand on middle ground, and hold the

ship level and steady."[292]

[292] Lincoln's Speeches, 1, 202.

Above all, this speech will live for its moral intensity, hatred of

injustice and hunger for righteousness. Throughout this long appeal and

uniting its links of logic is an overpowering and pervasive sentiment of

the highest humanity. Now and then an outburst against oppression comes

forth resistlessly, yet in the company of a sober expression, logical

intensity and a broad outlook peculiar to him. These rival the most

impassioned utterances of Phillips and Garrison. Like O'Connell, he sent

his voice "careering like the thunderstorm against the breeze, to tell

the slaveholders of the Carolinas that God's thunderbolts are hot, and

to remind the bondman that the dawn of his redemption is already

breaking."[293]

[293] Martyn's Wendell Phillips, 136.

With elation he passed from the sordidness and the turmoil of the

courtroom and daily pettiness of common political controversy to the

championship of an all-mastering principle. He fed the "parched souls of

men with celestial anodyne," with visions of a new and nobler era of

humanity. He made the humblest voter a public participant in the high

service of ridding the nation of the shame of slavery. He was educating

American democracy to practice the principles of the Declaration of

Independence, restoring to life seemingly dead doctrines of the fathers.

Better than a course in ethics was the uplift of his utterances, the

call to higher attitudes.

He declared his hate in ringing words, of the indifference to, if not

covert zeal for, the spread of slavery, of depriving the Republic of its

just influence in the world, of enabling the enemies of Democracy to

engage in the taunt of hypocrisy, of forcing so many men into open war

with the fundamental principles of civil liberty, criticising the

Declaration of Independence and insisting that there was no right

principle but self interest.[294]

[294] Lincoln's Speeches, 1, 186.

In measured language befitting his solemn theme, Lincoln continued his

prophetic condemnation of slavery, charging that, steadily as man's

march to the grave, the people were giving up the old for the new faith;

that they had run down from the declaration that all men were created

equal to the declaration that the enslavement of some was a sacred right

of self government. He dwelt upon the statement of Pettit that the

Declaration of Independence was a "self evident lie" and said that

Pettit did what candor required, and that of forty-odd Nebraska senators

who listened, no one rebuked him; and asked if that had been said among

Marion's men, Southerners though they were, what would have become of

the man that said it? He added that if it had been said in old

Independence Hall seventy-eight years before, the very doorkeeper would

have throttled the man and thrust him into the street.[295]

[295] _Ibid._, 203.

The day after the Peoria speech, Douglas told Lincoln that he understood

the Territorial question better than all the opposition in the Senate,

and declared that Lincoln had given him more trouble than his combined

antagonists in Congress. Then Douglas proposed that he would speak no

more during the campaign if Lincoln would do the same, and to that

proposition Lincoln acceded.[296] So though a speech by Douglas and

Lincoln had been advertised for the following day, Mr. Douglas said that

he was too hoarse to speak, and Lincoln declared that he would not take

advantage of the judge's indisposition, by addressing the people. His

friends could not see the affair in the same light, and they "pressed

him for a speech," but Lincoln mysteriously and unaccountably

refused.[297]

[296] Lamon, 358.

[297] Lamon, 359.

Wisely did shrewd Douglas, the imperial leader in debate, appeal to the

generosity of his opponent to conclude further controversy. Douglas was

an over-match for all of the radical Abolitionists, the men who spoke of

the higher law, who made war on the charter of American liberties. His

better nature rejoiced in such conflicts. But his genius was rebuked in

the presence of the plain product of the West, the man who neither

relinquished his confidence in the Constitution nor yet in the ultimate

triumph of the freedom that first gave it its being. Douglas could wage

triumphant war on a Lovejoy and Chase, but the common logic and simple

honesty of Lincoln disconcerted him. The elaborate oratory of the Senate

never confused the Senator of Illinois. For the first time in his career

the national leader was worried and perplexed. He was neither used to

nor prepared for the combination of talent that could not be diverted

from its way, that met every movement with a baffling complacency. There

was something unanswerable in Lincoln's manner and mode of discussion.

Douglas could fight other men at a distance, but this opponent made it a

hand-to-hand grapple. At length a man had arisen in the American arena

as skillful in defense of freedom as other men were in that of slavery.

An orator had come who combined the solidity of Webster, the moral

fervor of Phillips, and the logic of Calhoun; who mingled justice,

patriotism and argument so as to astonish the foremost figure in

Washington. It was no idle sentiment that brought Douglas to tender his

rival the high tribute of a truce.

The Peoria and State Fair speeches created a supreme place for Lincoln

in the anti-slavery movement. He was looked to as likely to gather great

strength in the transitional period of party dissolution. A dominating

passion for place again took hold of him. He declared he prized a full

term in the Senate more than the Presidency. To advance local political

conditions Lincoln was unwisely made a candidate, in his absence, for

the State Legislature that would soon elect a Senator. Mrs. Lincoln,

however, had Lincoln's name taken off the list of candidates. When Mr.

Lincoln returned, "I went to see him," says Jayne, "in order to get his

consent to run. That was at his house. He was then the saddest man I

ever saw,--the gloomiest. He walked up and down the floor, almost

crying; and to all my persuasions to let his name stand in the paper, he

said, 'No, I can't. You don't know all. I say you don't begin to know

one-half, and that's enough!' I did, however, go and have his name

reinstated." After election Lincoln resigned and by a "still hunt" a

Democrat was elected in his stead. The interference of Mrs. Lincoln, the

loss of a vote in the approaching close contest, according to Jayne,

angered the people of Sangamon County so that for the time being they

hated him.[H]

[H] Lamon, 359-360.

Lincoln managed his senatorial campaign with adroitness. Herndon shows

that Lincoln did not calmly sit down and gather his robes around him,

waiting for the people to call him. The vicissitudes of a political

campaign brought into play his management, and developed to its fullest

extent his latent industry. Like other politicians he never overlooked a

newspaper man who had it in his power to say a good or bad thing of him.

Writing to the editor of an obscure little country newspaper that he had

been reading his paper for three or four years and had paid him nothing

for it, he enclosed $10.00 and admonished the editor with complacency

to put it into his pocket and say nothing further about it. Very soon

thereafter Lincoln prepared a political article and sent it to the rural

journalist, requesting its publication in the editorial columns of his

valued paper. The latter, having followed Lincoln's directions, declined

saying that he long ago made it a rule to publish nothing as editorial

matter not written by himself. Lincoln read the editor's answer to

Herndon, who remarks that although the laugh was on Lincoln the latter

enjoyed the joke heartily, and said that that editor had a lofty but

proper conception of true journalism.[298]

[298] Herndon, 2, 44-45.

His correspondence shows that he was in constant contact with the ever

shifting events of the campaign; that he was on the lookout for

dangerous symptoms; that he was careful to nicety to measure his

strength soberly, and displayed the same splendid generalship that

distinguished him in his Congressional canvass. The history of his

effort to gain a seat in the Senate may be well trailed in his own

letters. A curt and crisp note advised his friends of his intention. The

following is a sample of many: "You used to express a good deal of

partiality for me, and if you are still so, now is the time. Some

friends here are really for me, for the U. S. Senate, and I should be

very grateful if you could make a mark for me among your members. Please

write to me at all events giving me the name, postoffices and 'political

position' of members around about you."[299]

[299] Tarbell, 2, 305.

Lovejoy had only some twenty-five adherents at the convention following

the "State Fair speech" of Lincoln. Nothing daunted by the paltry

attendance, they adopted a bold platform. "Ichabod raved," said the

Democratic organ in derision, "and Lovejoy swelled, and all endorsed the

sentiments of that speech." Not content with this, without consent or

consultation, they placed Lincoln's name on the list of their State

Central Committee.[300] Lincoln's reply shows that he was not unwilling

to confer with the abolition leaders and that he deemed it well to keep

the way open to an understanding. "I suppose my opposition to the

principle of slavery is as strong as that of any member of the

Republican party; but I have also supposed that the extent to which I

feel authorized to carry that opposition, practically, was not at all

satisfactory to that party. The leading men who organized that party

were present on the fourth of October at the discussion between Douglas

and myself at Springfield, and had full opportunity to not misunderstand

my position. Do I misunderstand them? Please write and inform me."[301]

[300] Nicolay & Hay, 1, 386.

[301] Lincoln's Speeches, 1, 210.

Like other candidates for public office he was subjected to all manner

of hostility and opposition. He was not spared the humility of defending

his most cherished integrity. Lincoln was not a common egoist and he

sparingly bared his view. He was little trained in the easy language of

self-praise. Yet once across the bar he displayed rare skill in the

presentation of his position.

"For a senator to be the impartial representative of his whole State is

so plain a duty that I pledge myself to the observance of it without

hesitation, but not without some mortification that any one should

suspect me of an inclination to the contrary. I was eight years a

representative of Sangamon County in the legislature; and although in a

conflict of interest between that and other counties it perhaps would

have been my duty to stick to old Sangamon, yet it is not within my

recollection that the northern members ever wanted my vote for any

interests of theirs without getting it."[302]

[302] Lincoln's Speeches, 1, 212.

Self interest in the campaign did not once lead him astray in partial

judgment of the course of events. Early in January he informed Washburne

that he did not know that it was of much advantage to have the largest

number of votes at the start; that if he did know it to be an advantage,

he should feel better, for he had more committals than any other

man.[303] He remained a master in the study of the attitude of the

individual voter and delegate. He not only had the enthusiasm of the

orator, but also the keen, calm sense of the politician, knowing that

battles are largely won by strategy and plan. He did not leave the

decision to chance. He studied the way to reach men, the method of

attaching and calling friends. He was methodical rather than brilliant.

[303] _Ibid._, 213.

His last letter dealing with the event opens with the statement that the

agony was over at last. He then unfolded the story of his defeat, how

his forty-seven adherents yielded to the five of Trumbull, how Governor

Matteson by a secret candidacy gathered some anti-Nebraska men to his

support; how five of the latter declared they would never vote for a

Whig and twenty Whigs resentfully contended that they would not vote for

the man of the five. He then stated that the signal was given to the

Nebraska men to turn to Matteson on the seventh ballot; that soon he

only wanted three of an election; that to detain the bolters Lincoln's

friends turned to Trumbull until he had risen to thirty-five and he,

Lincoln, had been reduced to fifteen; that they would never desert him

except by direction; that he then determined to strike at once and

accordingly advised the fifteen to go for Trumbull and thus elected him

on the tenth ballot.

"Such is the way," said Lincoln, "the thing was done. I think you would

have done the same under the circumstances; though Judge Davis, who

came down this morning, declares he never would have consented to the

forty-seven being controlled by the five. I regret my defeat moderately,

but I am not nervous about it. I could have headed off every combination

and been elected, had it not been for Matteson's double game--and his

defeat now gives me more pleasure than my own gives me pain. On the

whole, it is perhaps as well for our general cause that Trumbull is

elected. The Nebraska men confess that they hate it worse than anything

that could have happened. It is a great consolation to see them worse

whipped than I am."[304]

[304] Lincoln's Speeches, 1, 213-215.

Here a composite Lincoln confronts the student--a politician much

concerned over defeat and getting pleasure out of the failure of an

unfair opponent. Yet at the same time another Lincoln reveals himself.

Determined to run no risk in the cause of freedom he yielded cherished

hopes and gave way to an obstinate minority. He would not allow his own

fortune to stand in the way of striking a blow at the slave power.

Lincoln emancipated himself from selfish egoism, rising in the hour of

disappointment to the calmness of duty.

Lincoln, the Politician · 第 11 / 16 章