EIGHTEENTH GENERAL ASSEMBLY.

585

The general assembly met on January 3, and on the 5th, according to action taken on the 4th, met in joint session for the election of a United-States senator. Judge Douglas had been a strong candidate for the democratic nomination for president, and upon two ballots in the last national convention had received the highest number of votes for that position. So no time was to be lost, although there were a few grumbling objectors, in apprising Illinois' eminent senator of the people's continued confidence, by reëlecting him to his seat in the senate. The whigs cast their few votes for Joseph Gillespie.

Gov. French submitted his valedictory message on the 4th, and the inaugural of Gov. Matteson, read by the clerk of the house, was delivered on the 10th. It was devoted to the discussion of state questions. He recommended the adoption of a liberal policy in granting railroad charters, the adoption of the free-school system, and the erection of a penitentiary at Joliet. He also suggested the amendment of the State constitution in the particulars of extending the period of legislative sessions, and an increase of the compensation of public officers.

The principal questions which occupied the attention of the legislature related to the subject of temperance, the banking law, rival railroad routes, and conflicting claims of companies asking incorporation. Four hundred and sixty laws were enacted, the greater portion of which were classed as "private." Among the public acts were the following:

Prohibiting the issue or circulation of bank notes of a less denomination than five dollars; which, being against public opinion, was generally disregarded.

To prevent the immigration of free negroes into this Statethe last lash of the pro-slavery whip over the people of Illinois.

Repealing the prohibitory quart law of the last session, and reënacting all laws for the granting of license for the sale of liquors.

Providing for the purchase of a lot, and the erection thereon of the executive mansion, appropriating therefor $15,000, and $3000 for furniture.

To incorporate the state agricultural society.

To apply any surplus funds in the treasury to the purchase of evidences of State indebtedness.

Providing for the sale by the auditor of the remaining lands owned by the State, amounting to 128,954 acres.

The public debt reached its highest point January 1, 1853, from which time it began rapidly to diminish. The amount at that time according to the governor was as follows: principal debt and interest, $9,464,355; canal-debt and interest, $7,259,822, total $16,724,177.

The State had now entered upon the most prosperous period of its development and progress, material, social, and political, There was not a cloud to dim the sky of its onward career. Its canal was in successful operation, railroads were extending and opening up new fields of settlement and improvement in every direction. Its revenue was rapidly increasing and the new banks were affording a sufficient and satisfactory currency for the increased demands of business. Three State institutions—the asylums for the Deaf and Dumb, the Blind, and the Hospital for the Insane, all of them at Jacksonville, had been successfully established; education was receiving renewed attention from the people; a teeming immigration was pouring in the better classes of citizens from other states and lands, who brought with them not only large means, but improved methods in husbandry, mechanics, and manufactures. New farms were opened, and flourishing villages and cities, with unwonted industries, sprang up as if by magic, where a few short years before were seen only the wolf, the deer, and the tall prairie-grass.

Nor was there a cloud to disturb the peaceful serenity of the political sky. The compromise measures of 1850 had passed through the fiery ordeal of universal discussion, and had met with vindication through the endorsement of the two leading parties of the country; and the defeat of the whigs in the late presidential election had been so overwhelming as to leave no ground for the ambitious hopes of their leaders. Not that the popular vote had been so strongly against them, because that indicated the existence of a powerful minority opposed to the democrats, but the loss of power in twenty-seven states out of thirty-one was as discouraging, as its tendency was demoralizing to the organization.

As on previous occasions, it was found that the legislature,

REPEAL OF THE MISSOURI COMPROMISE.

587

restricted to a session of forty-two days, had adjourned without completing the business before it. The governor, therefore felt constrained to reconvene the general assembly on Feb. 9, 1854. Although laws sufficient to fill a volume of 259 pages were passed at the special session, they were mostly classed as "private" and related chiefly to incorporations. Only three acts of public interest were passed: the legislative apportionment law; providing for the election of a state superintendent of public instruction; and authorizing the construction of the "Mississippi and Atlantic Railroad."

The State steadily continued in its career of unprecedented material prosperity and general welfare; and by this time had approached the beginning of a new era in politics. The democratic party, which had been in the ascendancy for so many years, and had so lately secured its greatest victory, had received a sudden and violent check in the passage by congress of the Kansas-Nebraska bill in May, 1854. This bill declared the Missouri Compromise of 1850 by which slavery was restricted on the north to the line of 36′ 30′′, "inoperative and void," by reason of its alleged inconsistency with the Compromise measures of 1850, and established instead, the principle of popular sovereignty, that is, "that congress should not legislate slavery into any territory or state, or exclude it therefrom, but leave the people thereof perfectly free to form and regulate their domestic institutions in their own way, subject only to the Constitution of the United States."

This proposition, originally introduced in the committee on territories by Senator Dixon of Kentucky, and accepted by Judge Douglas, who as chairman of the committee reported it, came upon the country "like a clap of thunder in a clear sky."

The precipitation of this issue was immediately fatal to all party organizations as then formed—the old lines being effaced or changed beyond recognition. The whig party existed thereafter only in name, and the democratic party, with greater cohesive strength, while still able to maintain its esprit de corps, unexpectedly found enrolled within its ranks many old and leading whigs, while with equal surprise they found they had parted company with many of their honored and trusted lead

ers. The free soilers received recruits in large numbers from both the old parties. There were hurryings to and fro, yet some hesitated wondering where, as patriots, duty called, and others as partisans, where it was their interest to go. The agitation consequent upon the disturbance of the political equilibrium manifested itself in the elections of 1854, and nowhere more strikingly than in Illinois.

Judge Douglas was not unaware of the effect which such a measure might be expected to produce upon the country. He clearly foresaw, indeed, that it would shake the faith of his party in the north in his leadership, and imperil its prospects of His personal friends were divided in opinion in regard. to the best course to be pursued. President Pierce, however, backed by his cabinet, was strongly in favor of the proposed action, and it is stated that the celebrated amendment repealing the Missouri Compromise was drafted by himself.*

success.

The senator thus found himself placed in this dilemma: he must either champion a measure which his judgment did not wholly approve, or surrender the leadership of his party. It was only after long hesitation that he decided to take the leap at this turning point in his political career; but having finally reached a conclusion, he espoused the cause of repeal and non-intervention with his usual dash and persistency.†

On his return to his home in Chicago he sought to allay the

* Hon. John Wentworth is the authority for this statement.

+ The following letter to the author from Maj. George M. McConnel, formerly of Jacksonville, now residing in Chicago, gives an exceedingly interesting account of an interview between Judge Douglas and himself at this time. It even more than justifies the position taken in the text.

CHICAGO, Aug. 18, '89.

Hon. JOHN MOSES, Dear Sir:-On the evening of the day in January, 1854, when the famous protest by the Republican members of Congress against the “Kansas-Nebraska bill" appeared in the New York papers, Judge Douglas called to see Representative (afterward Senator) McDougall of California, and found only myself, then a youth acting as a sort of secretary for McDougall. Mr. Douglas had known me from my infancy, had been befriended by my father, and was quite on a familiar footing in our family for years; hence was under no restraint with me + * and talked of the Kansas matter freely and warmly. He said distinctly that he was not the author of the repeal of the Missouri Compromise, that he believed it to have come from a "higher source" but was interjected into the bill by Dixon of Kentucky, with the support of a majority of the committee, against his strenuous opposition. That he opposed it first because he was not willing to extend slavery, was