Down to the actual secession of 1860-61 the issue of issues—the issue
behind all issues—was the preservation of the Union. Between 1820 and
1850, by a series of compromises, largely the work of Mr. Clay, its
threatened disruption had been averted. The Kansas-Nebraska Bill put a
sore strain upon conservative elements North and South. The Whig Party
went to pieces. Mr. Clay passed from the scene. Had he lived until the
presidential election of 1852 he would have given his support to
Franklin Pierce, as Daniel Webster did. Mr. Buchanan was not a General
Jackson. Judge Douglas, who sought to play the rôle of Mr. Clay, was
too late. The secession leaders held the whip hand in the Gulf States.
South Carolina was to have her will at last. Crash came the shot in
Charleston Harbor and the fall of Sumter. Curiously enough two persons
of Kentucky birth—Abraham Lincoln and Jefferson Davis—led the rival
hosts of war into which an untenable and indefensible system of slave
labor, for which the two sections were equally responsible, had
precipitated an unwilling people.
Had Judge Douglas lived he would have been Mr. Lincoln’s main reliance
in Congress. As a debater his resources and prowess were rarely equaled
and never surpassed. His personality, whether in debate or private
conversation, was attractive in the highest degree. He possessed a
full, melodious voice, convincing fervor and ready wit.
He had married for his second wife the reigning belle of the National
Capital, a great-niece of Mrs. Madison, whose very natural ambitions
quickened and spurred his own.
It was fated otherwise. Like Clay, Webster, Calhoun and Blaine he was
to be denied the Presidency. The White House was barred to him. He was
not yet fifty when he died.
Tidings of his death took the country by surprise. But already the
sectional battle was on and it produced only a momentary impression, to
be soon forgotten amid the overwhelming tumult of events. He has lain
in his grave now nearly sixty years. Upon the legislation of his time
his name was writ first in water and then in blood. He received less
than his desert in life and the historic record has scarcely done
justice to his merit. He was as great a party leader as Clay. He could
hold his own in debate with Webster and Calhoun. He died a very poor
man, though his opportunity for enrichment by perfectly legitimate
means were many. It is enough to say that he lacked the business
instinct and set no value upon money; scrupulously upright in his
official dealing; holding his senatorial duties above all price and
beyond the suspicion of dirt.
Touching a matter which involved a certain outlay in the winter of
1861, he laughingly said to me: “I haven’t the wherewithal to pay for a
bottle of whisky and shall have to borrow of Arnold Harris the
wherewithal to take me home.”
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account