of Stephen A., Douglas." Lincoln opened up his address with the famous paragraph in which he declared: "A house divided against itself cannot stand. I believe this government cannot endure permanently, half slave and half free. . . . . . Either the opponents of slavery will arrest the further spread of it, and place it where the public mind shall rest in the belief that it is in course of ultimate extinction, or its advocates will push it forward till it shall become alike lawful in all the states, old as well as new, North as well as South."1 Lincoln had pondered this general proposition for three years. He had at last linked it up with a "universally known figure expressed in simple language as universally well known," that would "strike home to the minds of men," and "raise them up to the peril of the times." This paragraph was done in excellent prose. It reduced into single perspective the past and the future of the slavery question in America. Politically, too, it was strategic, even though Lincoln's intimate friends considered it hazardous to his prospects in the campaign. As they predicted, I Pages 223-233, Appendix.

2

2 Herndon and Weik, II:398.

3 Ibid., 399, 400. Herndon calls attention to the "similarity in figure and thought in the opening lines" of Lincoln's Springfield speech and Webster's reply to Hayne. Lincoln wrote to O. P. Hall to interpret the "house-divided-against-itself" paragraph.

Douglas seized upon it as his opponent's attempt to inspire sectional hatred in the country. As Lincoln foresaw, it centered the people's attention upon the ultimate meaning of the issue between him and Douglas, and definitely aligned party opinion for the supreme decision of America upon the "ultimate extinction" of a system dishonorable to her civilization. Lincoln amplified this fundamental thesis by maintaining that events indicated a "preconcert" of Douglas and other Democratic leaders to nationalize slavery. These events were "compounded of the Nebraska doctrine and the Dred Scott decision." Only another Supreme Court decision was needed to restrain a State from forbidding slavery, and Douglas's indifference to whether slavery were voted up or voted down was tending to prepare the public mind to support such a possible decision.

The effect was crucial. The Springfield speech threw upon Douglas the necessity of defending his Kansas-Nebraska policy in the face of its negation by the Supreme Court. The climax was reached at Freeport, August 27. At this debate Lincoln propounded to Douglas four critical questions. The second of these was decisive: "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?" To this question, framed with "malice aforethought," Douglas replied: “I answer emphatically, as Lincoln has heard me answer a hundred times from every stump in Illinois, that in my opinion the people of a Territory can, by lawful means, exclude slavery from their limits prior to the formation of a State constitution." Naturally, the effect was disastrous to Douglas's logic. He had unwittingly permitted himself to be lured into the awkward position of trying to ride two horses going in opposite directions. He had maintained that Lincoln, by arguing against the Dred Scott decision, was disloyal to the Supreme Court. His answer to Lincoln's interrogatory disclosed to his Southern supporters that he likewise was an impossible exponent of the judicial doctrine which had given the hope of fresh vitality to their "peculiar institution." Lincoln had eclipsed his opponent's ambitions for the Presidency. That star was moving in the direction of his own fortune.

The debate was a well-staged and ably conducted battle in political dialectics. In the effort to disclose the proper policy of government toward the paramount question, each of the two men sought to mould public opinion to his side of the controversy.