it. Lincoln at once arose and left the court-room. The judge told the parties to proceed with the case; and Lincoln not appearing, he directed a bailiff to go to the hotel and call him. The bailiff ran across the street to the hotel, and found Lincoln sitting in the office with his feet on the stove, apparently in a deep study, when he interrupted him with: Mr. Lincoln, the Judge wants you.' 'Oh, does he?' replied Mr. Lincoln. 'Well, you go back and tell the Judge I cannot come. Tell him I have to wash my hands.' The bailiff returned with the message, and Lincoln's client suffered a non-suit. It was Lincoln's way of saying that he wanted nothing more to do with such a case."

He was entirely innocent of all the tricks, which so many lawyers use to influence judge or jury. In his conduct of a case he was always straightforward and honest, often conceding points which the opposition had difficulty in establishing, apparently against his own interest, but the vital points he always grasped with unerring precision and presented them so clearly and pointedly that he seldom failed to win his case.

There were many of his associates who excelled him in knowledge of the details of the law, but few who could seize and apply a general principle so forcibly and appropriately.

He practiced not only in the common courts, but also in the Supreme, District and Circuit courts, and had equal success in them all. When he had an important case, or one in which some great principle was involved, he was absolutely invincible, asking comparatively few questions but such as would elicit facts directly bearing upon the case in hand. When he

addressed the jury, his view of the testimony was so pointed and straightforward as to carry conviction.

He sometimes became so eloquent in his address to the jury that he moved the whole audience, judge, jury and spectators, to tears. At such times he was exceedingly impressive. His tall figure, now drawn up to its full height, and then bent over until his hands nearly touched the floor, acquired an unusual dignity. His gestures were simple, but exceedingly striking, while he would give utterance to vivid descriptions, or paint the sufferings and adversities of his client in living colors.

Though holding himself from active participation in political affairs, he never faltered in his interest, and ardently longed to reënter the arena, yet he patiently bided his time, and when the supreme opportunity came, he was ready and fitted to the uttermost to take advantage of it.

During the campaign of 1852, he made a few speeches for General Scott, the Whig candidate, but they were not marked by much display of ability. Douglas, in opening the campaign for the Democrats, at Baltimore, had made an exceedingly partisan speech, and one which contained many utterances upon slavery which were obnoxious to the people of Illinois. Lincoln was asked to reply to the statements and arguments of Douglas, but for some reason made one of the poorest and least effective speeches of his life, failing to make an impression upon his audience.

Slavery had always been the great disturbing element in American politics. More than any other issue, it had tended to divide the people on sectional

lines, and was always developing and fomenting hostility between them.

In colonial times it had secured a foothold, not because the colonists specially desired or needed it, but because it suited the interests of European slavetraders to encourage its growth in the New World. It was the survival of an Old World custom, which, in former times, had obtained in every civilized country. It was like a serpent charming its conscious victim only to destroy him. In every country property declined in exact ratio to the advance of slavery. The more extensively the system was developed, the weaker the country became, and more than one great power fell in utter ruin because the slave-power became predominant.

As civilization advanced in Europe, slavery became more and more distasteful to the people, until the nefarious trade, which had been a mine of wealth, almost ceased. In order that a better market might be opened up, the institution was forced upon the American colonies and, England, who could not tolerate the blight on her own fair soil, even abetted its introduction into her colonies. For a time it languished and several petitions were handed into the Crown looking towards a prohibition of the traffic, but George III. received them in contemptuous silence, and did nothing to prevent or even to check it in any way.

The peculiar conditions of climate and soil in the Southern States rendered slave labor both agreeable to the people and profitable. The climate was so hot as to discourage active effort on the part of the white man, but was adapted to call out the best energies of

the warm-blooded African. The products, too, could be raised to advantage in large plantations, which would require the labor of hundreds of men to cultivate. As land was plenty, the population sparse, and the products in good demand, especially after the invention of the cotton-gin, made that material available for the manufacture of a cheap fabric, the landed proprietors gradually acquired great estates, requiring hundreds of laborers to till them.

Thus the system became firmly rooted, and seemed to be an absolute necessity to the indolent and aristocratic Southerners. They had no difficulty in persuading themselves that slavery was morally and legally right, and were ready to defend it with their best efforts, and even with their lives, if necessary. What the fathers looked askance upon, the sons came to regard as a right, and succeeding generations as a fixed institution which it was treason to attack. It was but natural that each assault upon it should intrench them more firmly in their position, and widen the breach between them and their Northern neighbors.

They early learned that, when they were compelled to assume the defensive, they were at a disadvantage, hence they became aggressive and combative, in society as well as in the State and national councils, making their pet institution the dominant question, and were ready to do battle for it even when no one attacked.

The political situation, at the time of the adoption of the Constitution, had been so confused, and the grounds for dissension so numerous, that the insertion of a clause forbidding slavery would have

insured its rejection. Yet the majority of its framers were undoubtedly opposed to the institution and believed that the best welfare of the nation would be subserved by its abolition, to such an extent that they made it possible for the Government to prevent the importation of slaves, after twenty years had elapsed, by a special provision.

Through the efforts of Henry Clay, during the administration of Monroe, Missouri was admitted to the Union as a slave State in 1821, but the extension of slavery in all territory west of the Mississippi river and north of the southern boundary of Missouri, latitude 36°, 30', was forever forbidden. This seemed to assure the development into free States of the vast territory of the North-west, and to seal the final doom of slavery. For, as the North-west should gradually be populated and organized into free States, the balance of power would pass from the slave to the free States, and the latter would have it in their power to crush the institution out of existence.

But the South would not give up without a struggle. A vast territory was acquired from Mexico, and the question of its organization came up in Congress in 1850 for settlement. The "irrepressible conflict" broke out afresh, and again the representatives of freedom and slavery were pitted against each other. The conflict resulted in a compromise, again established through the efforts of Clay. California was to be admitted as a free State. Territorial governments were to be organized in New Mexico and Utah, and slavery was to be tacitly admitted. Texas' claim to nearly ninety square miles, north of the parallel of 36°, 30' was to be recognized, and slavery was to be