206 of the Gospels: Matthew 12:25, Mark 3:25, and Luke 11:17.
207 or all free: Zarefsky, Lincoln, Douglas, and Slavery, p. 44.
207 “and half free?”: CW, 2:318.
207 “and part free”: T. Lyle Dickey to WHH, Dec. 8, 1866, HWC.
207 “issue before us”: CW, 2:453–454. For the dating of this fragment, see Robert W. Johannsen, Lincoln, the South and Slavery: The Political Dimension (Baton Rouge: Louisiana State University Press, 1991), p. 59n.
207 plan or blueprint: CW, 2:465–466.
208 “a slave State”: CW, 2:467.
208 “just like him”: AL to “Dear Sir,” incomplete draft of a letter, [early 1858], MS auctioned by Frank H. Boos Gallery, Detroit, 1994.
208 “of splendid success”: CW, 2:383.
208 “not do that”: Joseph Gillespie, statement, Apr. 22, 1880, John J. Hardin MSS, Chicago Historical Society.
208 as a “squabble”: CW, 2:463.
208 justices would rule: Fehrenbacher, The Dred Scott Case, pp. 444–447.
209 “shall not fail”: CW, 2:467–468.
209 “to say so?”: Herndon’s Lincoln, 2:398. Perhaps Herndon did say this, though very shortly afterward he was writing to Theodore Parker that Lincoln’s speech was a little too conservative. Herndon to Theodore Parker, July 8, 1858, Herndon-Parker MSS, University of Iowa Library.
209 “of the times”: WHH, interview with John Armstrong, undated, HWC. By this point Herndon had reconsidered his objections and was the only member of this little group to urge Lincoln to make the speech, predicting—if belated memories can be trusted—“Lincoln, deliver that speech as read and it will make you President.” Herndon’s Lincoln, 2:400. Cf. WHH to Jesse W. Weik, Oct. 29, 1885, HWC.
209 “it now exists”: John Locke Scripps to AL, June 22, 1858, Lincoln MSS, LC.
209 “so intended it”: CW, 2:471.
209 “foolish one perhaps”: CW, 2:491.
209 “be hardly won”: John W. Forney, Anecdotes of Public Men (New York: Harper & Brothers, 1873), 2:179.
210 “an unholy, unnatural alliance”: Johannsen, Lincoln-Douglas Debates, pp. 22–36.
210 “throughout the world”: CW, 2:500–501.
210 “in his wake”: Edwin Erie Sparks, ed., The Lincoln-Douglas Debates of 1858 (Springfield: Illinois State Historical Library, 1908), p. 46.
210 “the very thing”: CW, 3:84.
210 on the defensive: N. B. Judd to Lyman Trumbull, July 16, 1858, Trumbull MSS, LC.
210 “Lincoln the leavings”: W. J. Usrey to AL, July 19, 1858, Lincoln MSS, LC.
211 a considerable audience: Sparks, Lincoln-Douglas Debates, pp. 56–57.
211 “come from you”: CW, 2:529.
212 “his own success”: WHH to Lyman Trumbull, July 8, 1858, Trumbull MSS, LC.
212 counties was needed. Harry E. Pratt, The Great Debates of 1858 (Springfield: Illinois State Historical Library, 1956), pp. 8–9.
212 had been strongest: For these careful calculations, see CW, 2:476–481, 503.
212 “to the abolitionists”: Beveridge, 2:555.
212 “and public justice”: J.J. Crittenden to AL, July 29, 1858, Lincoln MSS, LC.
213 “to any extent”: CW, 2:471–472.
213 with the Danites: WHH to Lyman Trumbull, June 24, 1858, Trumbull MSS, LC.
213 “going to do”: WHH to Lyman Trumbull, July 8, 1858, Trumbull MSS, LC.
213 “he does not”: WHH to Lyman Trumbull, June 24, 1858, Trumbull MSS, LC.
213 Democrats’ campaign strategy: Jesse K. Dubois to AL, Sept. 7, 1858, Lincoln MSS, LC.
213 have been true: A. Sherman to O. M. Hatch, Sept. 27, 1858, Hatch MSS, ISHL.
214 3,400 by train: Pratt, The Great Debates, p. 5.
214 and in expression: For an excellent account of the reporting of the debates, which stresses the distortion caused by partisan reporting, see Harold Holzer’s introduction to The Lincoln-Douglas Debates: The First Complete, Unexpurgated Text (New York: HarperCollins Publishers, 1993). Also valuable are Tom Reilly, “Lincoln-Douglas Debates of 1858 Forced New Role on the Press,” Journalism Quarterly 56 (Winter 1979): 734–743, 752; Robert S. Harper, Lincoln and the Press (New York: McGraw-Hill Book Co., 1951), pp. 21–30; and Sparks, The Lincoln-Douglas Debates, pp. 75–84.
215 “his large feet”: Carl Schurz, “Reminiscences of a Long Life,” McClure’s Magazine 28 (Jan. 1907): 253.
215 “to be President”: CW, 2:506.
216 By one o’clock: For details on Ottawa and the arrangements for the debate, see the newspaper reports in Sparks, The Lincoln-Douglas Debates, pp. 124–145.
216 apparently startled Lincoln: In the following pages my account of the debates generally follows, and usually paraphrases, the texts as given in Johannsen, Lincoln-Douglas Debates. I have given specific citations only for quoted passages.
216 “a Republican party”: Johannsen, Lincoln-Douglas Debates, p. 39.
216 “of this Government”: Ibid., p. 48.
217 “a chestnut horse”: Ibid., p. 52.
217 “upon the merits”: Ibid., p. 58.
217 “it in kind”: Ibid., p. 52.
217 “to his knees”: Sparks, Lincoln-Douglas Debates, pp. 140–141; Henry Villard, Memoirs of Henry Villard, Journalist and Financier, 1835–1900 (Boston: Houghton, Mifflin & Co, 1904), 1:93. There was a good deal of chaffering about this episode in subsequent debates, Douglas claiming that Lincoln had been so demolished that his supporters actually had to carry him from the platform, Lincoln responding that Douglas must be “actually crazy” to tell such a story. Johannsen, Lincoln-Douglas Debates, p. 151.
217 “am yet alive”: Richard Yates to AL, Aug. 26, 1858, Lincoln MSS, LC; CW, 3:37.
217 “on the defensive”: Jay Monaghan, The Man Who Elected Lincoln (Indianapolis: Bobbs-Merrill Co., 1956), p. 115.
217 “proslavery bamboozelling demogogue”: Joseph Medill to AL, [Aug. 27, 1858], Lincoln MSS, LC.
218 day, at Freeport: Fehrenbacher, Prelude to Greatness, pp. 124–126.
218 “State of Illinois”: Johannsen, Lincoln-Douglas Debates, p. 79.
218 “question among ourselves”: Ibid., pp. 76–79.
218 “the slavery question?”: Ibid., p. 79.
218 Douglas would answer: CW, 2:530.
218 “a State Constitution”: Johannsen, Lincoln-Douglas Debates, p. 88.
219 “to the point”: CW, 2:530.
219 include the question: Explaining the true intent of the Freeport question, Fehrenbacher (Prelude to Greatness, pp. 122–128) demolishes the legend that Lincoln, against the warnings of his advisers, asked the question in order to deprive Douglas of Southern support in the 1860 presidential election. But the impact of the Freeport Doctrine on Douglas’s support in the South was heavy, for it appeared to rob Southerners of their victory in Dred Scott. For this reason in the next session of Congress the Democratic senatorial caucus, dominated by Southerners, virtually read Douglas out of the party and stripped him of his chairmanship of the Committee on Territories.
219 “be wholly false”: Johannsen, Lincoln-Douglas Debates, p. 81.
219 “defy your wrath”: Ibid., pp. 97, 100.
219 “the decided advantage”: WHH to Theodore Parker, Aug. 31, 1858, Herndon-Parker MSS, University of Iowa Library.
219 “more elevated position”: Lowell (Mass.) Journal and Courier, Aug. 30, 1858.
219 would be reelected: Zarefsky, Lincoln, Douglas, and Slavery, p. 58.
220 the Republican cause: On Trumbull’s role, see Mark M. Krug, “Lyman Trumbull and the Real Issues in the Lincoln-Douglas Debates,” JISHS 57 (Winter 1964): 380–396.
220 debate, at Jonesboro: For an excellent account of this debate, which gives much insight into the social, economic, and political life of “Egypt,” see John Y. Simon, “Union County in 1858 and the Lincoln-Douglas Debate,” JISHS 62 (Autumn 1969): 267–292.
220 Senate that year: Johannsen, Lincoln-Douglas Debates, pp. 122–123.
> 220 “be created equal”: Ibid., p. 128.
220 “my political friends”: Ibid., p. 136.
220 “against unfriendly legislation”: Ibid., pp. 146–147. The Chicago Times gave what is probably a better version: “vigor enough in the tendency to force slavery into a territory without positive police regulations.” Holzer, Lincoln-Douglas Debates, p. 170.
220 debate to begin: Sparks, Lincoln-Douglas Debates, pp. 314, 324. The best account is Charles H. Coleman, The Lincoln-Douglas Debate at Charleston, Illinois (Eastern Illinois University Bulletin, no. 220 [Oct. 1, 1957]).
221 “and political equality”: Johannsen, Lincoln-Douglas Debates, p. 162.
221 American race problem: Two excellent analyses of Lincoln’s racial views are George M. Fredrickson, “A Man but Not a Brother: Abraham Lincoln and Racial Equality,” Journal of Southern History 41 (Feb. 1975): 39–58, and Don E. Fehrenbacher, “Only His Stepchildren,” in Lincoln in Text and Context, pp. 95–112. The chapter on Lincoln in George Sinkler’s The Racial Attitudes of American Presidents: From Abraham Lincoln to Theodore Roosevelt (Garden City, N.Y.: Doubleday & Co., 1971) is also important. It would, I think, be a mistake to attempt to palliate Lincoln’s racial views by saying that he grew up in a racist society or that his ideas were shared by many of his contemporaries. After all, there were numerous Americans of his generation—notably, many of the abolitionists—who were committed to racial equality. At the same time, it ought to be noted that Lincoln fortunately escaped the more virulent strains of racism. Unlike many of his fellow Republicans, he never spoke of African-Americans as hideous or physically inferior; he never declared that they were innately inferior mentally or incapable of intellectual development; he never described them as indolent or incapable of sustained work; he never discussed their supposed licentious nature or immorality. For an extensive sampling of statements by Republicans who did crudely express these views, see James D. Bilotta, Race and the Rise of the Republican Party, 1848–1865 (New York: Peter Lang, 1992), esp. chap. 6. Lincoln’s own views on race, on the other hand, were nearly always expressed tentatively. As Fehrenbacher points out (p. 106), “He conceded that the Negro might not be his equal, or he said that the Negro was not his equal in certain respects.” Even when he agreed that blacks did not have the same civil rights as whites, he nearly always added in the next breath that they were the equal of whites in the enjoyment of the natural rights pledged in the Declaration of Independence.
221 “beginning to end”: Johannsen, Lincoln-Douglas Debates, p. 174.
221 “petty personal matters”: Ibid., pp. 177, 181, 184.
222 the Republican candidate: See the spirited account in Tufve Nilsson Hasselquist, “The Big Day: A Galesburg Swede Views the Lincoln-Douglas Debate,” ed. and trans, by John E. Norton, Knox Alumnus (Winter 1990), pp. 16–18. (Courtesy Prof. J. Harvey Young)
222 “their posterity forever”: Johannsen, Lincoln-Douglas Debates, pp. 210, 212, 216.
222 “Declaration of Independence”: Ibid., p. 219.
222 “‘set him again’”: Ibid., p. 228.
223 “the adjoining islands”: Ibid., pp. 233–234.
223 “a political wrong”: Ibid., p. 254.
223 “right or wrong”: Ibid., p. 256.
223 “the other counties”: Ibid, p. 264.
223 “side of Heaven”: Ibid., p. 267.
223 “to the law”: Ibid, p. 268.
223 “crime of slavery”: Ibid, p. 266.
223 “the whole earth”: Ibid, p. 276.
223 “shall last forever”: Ibid, p. 277.
223 course on Lecompton: Ibid, pp. 292–299.
224 “Go it bear!”: Ibid, p. 301. For the origins of this jest, see P. M. Zall, ed, Abe Lincoln Laughing: Humorous Anecdotes from Original Sources by and About Abraham Lincoln (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1982), p. 20.
224 “and so on”: Johannsen, Lincoln-Douglas Debates, p. 303.
224 “conditions in life”: Ibid, pp. 315–316.
224 “as a wrong”: Ibid, p. 316.
224 “right of kings”: Ibid, p. 319.
225 “the town together”: Ibid, p. 42.
225 “starved to death”: Ibid, p. 281.
225 “less of it”: Ibid., p. 57.
225 “and the same”: CW, 2:507.
225 on and on: Randall, Lincoln the President, 1:121–122.
225 the English bill: Potter, The Impending Crisis, p. 325.
226 “controversy with him”: Johannsen, Lincoln-Douglas Debates, p. 131.
226 “the most infamous treachery”: Ibid, p. 100.
226 “discussed before you?”: Ibid, p. 176.
226 “of ultimate extinction”: Ibid, p. 265.
226 “negroes in Christendom”: Ibid, p. 326. The Chicago Press and Tribune reported that Douglas said “niggers in Christendom.” Holzer, Lincoln-Douglas Debates, p. 367.
227 were closely divided: Bruce Collins, “The Lincoln-Douglas Contest of 1858 and Illinois’ Electorate,” Journal of American Studies 20 (Dec. 1986): 391–420, offers an informed analysis of the returns. The map in Arthur C. Cole, The Era of the Civil War, 1848–1870 (Springfield: Illinois Centennial Commission, 1919), facing p. 178, graphically shows the distribution of votes.
227 both men appeared: Forest L. Whan, “Stephen A. Douglas,” in William Norwood Brigance, ed, A History and Criticism of American Public Address (New York: McGraw-Hill Book Co., 1943), 2:823.
227 as a whole: Holzer, Lincoln-Douglas Debates, pp. 371–373.
228 United States Senate: Fehrenbacher, Prelude to Greatness, pp. 118–120, offers a clear explanation of this complicated subject.
228 “to their numbers”: Rockford Register, Nov. 13, 1858. Claiming that Republican districts had, on an average, 19,655 inhabitants and Democratic districts only 15,675, the Illinois State Journal argued that, under a fair apportionment, Republicans would have had a majority of seven in the House of Representatives and three in the Senate. Douglas, it concluded, “was elected for the reason that 750 voters in ‘Egypt’ are an offset to 1000 in Canaan [i.e., northern Illinois].” Journal, Nov. 10, 1858.
228 carry key counties: I. H. Waters to O. M. Hatch, Nov. 3, 1858, Hatch MSS, ISHL.
228 “and other cities”: WHH to Theodore Parker, Nov. 8, 1858, Herndon-Parker MSS, University of Iowa Library.
228 “than all others”: G. W. Rives to O. M. Hatch, Nov. 10, 1858, Hatch MSS, ISHL.
228 “me except Billy’: Henry C. Whitney to WHH, July 18, 1887, HWC.
229 “one hundred defeats”: CW, 3:339.
CHAPTER NINE: THE TASTE IS IN MY MOUTH
This chapter draws heavily on two excellent accounts of the 1860 campaign and election: William E. Baringer, Lincoln’s Rise to Power (Boston: Little, Brown & Co., 1937), and Reinhard H. Luthin, The First Lincoln Campaign (Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press, 1944).
For the general political background of that election, see David M. Potter, The Impending Crisis, 1848–1861, completed and edited by Don E. Fehrenbacher (New York: Harper & Row, 1976), and Allan Nevins, The Emergence of Lincoln, vol. 2, Prologue to Civil War, 1859–1861 (New York: Charles Scribner’s Sons, 1951).
For Lincoln’s activities during the year before his election, Harry V. Jaffa and Robert W. Johannsen, eds., In the Name of the People: Speeches and Writings of Lincoln and Douglas in the Ohio Campaign of 1859 (Columbus: Ohio State University Press, 1959), is indispensable.
There are several good studies of the Republican convention that nominated Lincoln: Kenneth M. Stampp, “The Republican National Convention of 1860,” in his The Imperiled Union: Essays on the Background of the Civil War (New York: Oxford University Press, 1980), pp. 136–162; Don E. Fehrenbacher, “The Republican Decision at Chicago,” in Norman A. Graebner, ed., Politics and the Crisis of 1860 (Urbana: University of Illinois Press, 1961), pp. 32–60; and Elting Morison, “The Election of 1860,” in Arthur M. Schlesinger, Jr., and Fred L. Israel, eds., History of American Presidential Elections,
1789–1968 (New York: Chelsea House Publishers, 1971), 2:1097–1122. Proceedings of the First Three Republican National Conventions of 1856, 1860 and 1864 (Minneapolis: Charles W. Johnson, 1893), is a rather dry record, but William B. Hesseltine, Three Against Lincoln: Murat Halstead Reports the Caucuses of 1860 (Baton Rouge: Louisiana State University Press, 1960), recaptures the color and excitement of that gathering.
Lincoln Page 101