the farthest posterity. They erected a beacon to guide CHAP. VIII. their children, and their children's children, and the countless myriads who should inhabit the earth in other ages. Wise statesmen as they were, they knew the tendency of prosperity to breed tyrants, and so they established these great self-evident truths, that when in the distant future some man, some faction, some interest, should set up the doctrine that none but rich men, or none but white men, or none but Anglo-Saxon white men, were entitled to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness, their posterity might look up again to the Declaration of Independence and take courage to renew the battle which their fathers began, so that truth and justice and mercy and all the humane and Christian virtues might not be extinguished from the land; so that no man would hereafter dare to limit and circumscribe the great principles on which the temple of liberty was being built. Now, my countrymen, if you have been taught doctrines conflicting with the great landmarks of the Declaration of Independence; if you have listened to suggestions which would take away from its grandeur and mutilate the fair symmetry of its proportions; if you have been inclined to believe that all men are not created equal in those inalienable rights enumerated by our chart of liberty, let me entreat you to come back. Return to the fountain whose waters spring close by the blood of the revolution. Think nothing of me-take no thought for the political fate of any man whomsoever - but come back to the truths that are in the Declaration of IndependYou may do anything with me you choose, if you will but heed these sacred principles. You may not only defeat me for the Senate, but you may take me and put me to death. While pretending no indifference to earthly honors, I do claim to be actuated in this contest by something higher than an anxiety for office. I charge you to drop every paltry and insignificant thought for any man's success. It is nothing; I am nothing; Judge Douglas is nothing. But do not destroy that immortal emblem of Humanity - the Declaration of American Independence.1 ence. 1 Lincoln's Lewiston Speech, August 17, 1858. Chicago "Press and Tribune." CHAPTER IX CHAP. IX, LincolnDouglas Debates, p. 68. THE FREEPORT DOCTRINE HAT has thus far been quoted has been less to illustrate the leading lines of discussion, than to explain more fully the main historical incident of the debates. In the first joint discussion at Ottawa, in the northern or antislavery part of Illinois, Douglas read a series of strong antislavery resolutions which he erroneously alleged Lincoln had taken part in framing and passing. He said: แ "My object in reading these resolutions was to put the question to Abraham Lincoln this day whether he now stands and will stand by each article in that creed and carry it out. . . I ask Abraham Lincoln to answer these questions in order that when I trot him down to lower Egypt1 I may put the same questions to him." 2 1 A local nickname by which the southern or pro-slavery portion of Illinois was familiarly known. 2 DOUGLAS'S QUESTIONS AND "Question 1. 'I desire to know Answer. I do not now, nor ever did, stand in favor of the uncon ditional repeal of the fugitiveslave law. Q. 2. 'I desire him to answer whether he stands pledged today, as he did in 1854, against the admission of any more slave States into the Union even if the people want them?' A. I do not now, nor ever did, stand pledged against the admission of any more slave States into the Union. Q. 3. 'I want to know whether he stands pledged against the In preparing a powerful appeal to local prejudice, CHAP. IX. Douglas doubtless knew he was handling a twoedged sword; but we shall see that he little appreciated the skill with which his antagonist would wield the weapon he was placing in his hands. At their second joint meeting, at Freeport, also in northern Illinois, Lincoln, who now had the opening speech, said, referring to Douglas's speech at Ottawa: "I do him no injustice in saying that he occupied at least half of his reply in dealing with me as though I had refused to answer his interrogatories. I now propose that I will answer any of the interrogatories, upon condition that he will answer questions from me not exceeding the same number. I give him an opportunity to respond. The judge remains silent. I now say that I will answer his interrogatories, whether he answers admission of a new State into the Union with such a constitution as the people of that State may see fit to make?' A. I do not stand pledged against the admission of a new State into the Union with such a constitution as the people of that State may see fit to make. Q. 4. 'I want to know whether he stands to-day pledged to the abolition of slavery in the District of Columbia?' A. I do not stand to-day pledged to the abolition of slavery in the District of Columbia. Q. 5. 'I desire him to answer whether he stands pledged to the prohibition of the slave trade between the different States?' A. I do not stand pledged to the prohibition of the slave trade between the different States. Q. 6. 'I desire to know whether he stands pledged to prohibit A. I am impliedly if not ex- Q. 7. 'I desire him to answer A. I am not generally opposed CHAP. IX. mine or not; and that after I have done so, I shall Lincoln- propound mine to him." Douglas Debates, p. 87. Lincoln then read his answers to the seven questions which had been asked him, and proposed four in return, the second one of which ran 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?”1 To comprehend the full force of this interrogatory, the reader must recall the fact that the "popular sovereignty" of the Nebraska bill was couched in vague language, and qualified with the proviso that it was "subject to the Constitution." The caucus which framed this phraseology agreed, as a compromise between Northern and Southern Democrats, that the courts should interpret and define the constitutional limitations, by which all should abide. The Dred Scott decision declared in terms that Congress could not prohibit slavery in Territories nor authorize a Territorial Legislature to do so. The Dred Scott decision had thus annihilated "popular sovereignty." Would Doug las admit his blunder in law, and his error in CHAP. IX. statesmanship? He had already faced and partly evaded this dilemma in his Springfield speech of 1857, but that was a local declaration and occurred before his Lecompton revolt, and the ingenious sophism then put forth had attracted little notice. Since that time things had materially changed. He had opposed Lecompton, become a party recusant, and been declared a party apostate. His Senatorial term was closing, and he had to look to an evenly balanced if not a hostile constituency for reëlection. The Buchanan Administration was putting forth what feeble strength it had in Illinois to insure his defeat. His Democratic rivals were scrutinizing every word he uttered. He stood before the people to whom he had pledged his word that the voters of Kansas might regulate their own domestic concerns. They would tolerate no juggling nor evasion. There remained no resource but to answer Yes, and he could conjure up no justification of such an answer except the hollow subterfuge he had invented the year before. Lincoln clearly enough comprehended the dilemma and predicted the expedient of his antagonist. He had framed his questions and submitted them to a consultation of shrewd party friends. This one especially was the subject of anxious deliberation and serious disagreement. Nearly a month before, Lincoln in a private letter accurately foreshadowed Douglas's course on this question. "You shall have hard work to get him directly to the point whether a Territorial Legislature has or has not the power to exclude slavery. But if you |