The Evening Post: A Century of JournalismNevins, Allan
History
The Evening Post: A Century of Journalism
Nevins, Allan
New York post
Meanwhile, a new figure had arisen in the West. Like most other
New York journals the _Evening Post_ had instantly perceived the
significance of the Lincoln-Douglas debates of 1858. When they began
it remarked that Illinois was the theater of the most momentous
contest, whether one considered the eminence of the contestants or the
consequences which might result from it, that had occurred in any State
canvass since Silas Wright’s defeat for Governor in 1846. When they
closed it remarked (Oct. 18): “No man of this generation has grown more
rapidly before the country than Mr. Lincoln in this canvass.”
At first the paper’s reports of the Lincoln-Douglas addresses were
taken from the Chicago press, but it soon had its own correspondent,
Chester P. Dewey, following the debaters. This writer knew Lincoln’s
capacity. “Poor, unfriended, uneducated, a day laborer, he has
distanced all these disadvantages, and in the profession of the law has
risen steadily to a competence, and to the position of an intelligent,
shrewd, and well-balanced man,” ran his characterization. “Familiarly
known as ‘Long Abe,’ he is a popular speaker, and a cautious,
thoughtful politician, capable of taking a high position as a statesman
and legislator.” He described the enthusiasm with which Lincoln’s
supporters at Ottawa carried him from the grounds on their shoulders.
He related how at Jonesboro, in the southern extremity of the State,
where the crowd was overwhelmingly Democratic, Douglas came to the
grounds escorted by a band and a cheering crowd, amid the discharges
of a brass cannon, while Lincoln arrived with only a few friends; how
when Lincoln arose “a faint cheer was elicited, followed by derisive
laughter from the Douglas men”; but how he quite won his audience.
It is interesting to note that this correspondent grasped the full
importance of the Freeport debate, where Lincoln asked Douglas whether
the people of a territory could themselves exclude slavery from it.
To answer “no” meant that Douglas repudiated his doctrine of squatter
sovereignty, and to answer “yes” meant that he alienated the South. On
Sept. 5 the _Evening Post_ had published a long editorial in which it
concluded that Douglas was likely to be the Southern candidate in 1860.
Just two days later its correspondent foretold the effect of Douglas’s
fatal “yes” at Freeport:
It was very evident that Mr. Douglas was cornered by the questions
put to him by Mr. Lincoln. He claimed to be the upholder of the
Dred Scott decision, and also of popular sovereignty. He was asked
to reconcile the two....
When the Freeport speech of Mr. Douglas shall go forth to all the
land, and be read by the men of Georgia and South Carolina, their
eyes will doubtless open. Can they ... abet a man who avows these
revolutionary sentiments and endorses the right to self-government
of the people of a territory?... How would he appear uttering this
treason of popular sovereignty at a South Carolina barbecue?
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.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account