a gallant soldier and a
statesman, enjoying the unique honor of having been the first
candidate of the Republican party for President.

I have taken an active part in every campaign since 1856, excepting
when poor health prevented a regular speaking campaign.

The animosities of the campaign of 1856 were carried into the
Legislature and kept alive in the House during the entire session.
Governor Bissell's inaugural address was a dignified State paper
in which he referred to the administration of his predecessor in
highly complimentary terms. He concurred in all his recommendations,
but suggested no measures of his own. Although he had commented
briefly upon the Kansas-Nebraska controversy, and in mild terms,
his remarks stirred the ire of the Democrats. Upon the motion to
print the address, a virulent attack was made upon him, led, strange
to say, by John A. Logan, afterwards the foremost volunteer general
of the Union, and a Republican of Republicans. The rancor of the
Democrats against Governor Bissell, who at that time was a physical
wreck from a stroke of paralysis, though mentally sound, was largely
due to their recollection of the fearless manner in which he had
responded, some years before, to a challenge given him by Jefferson
Davis to a duel. That episode has long since become historic, and
I need not enlarge upon it here.

As was the political temper in the State of Illinois, so was it,
to a greater or less degree, throughout the entire Nation.

Buchanan's first message repeated the assurance that the discussion
of slavery had come to an end. The clergy were criticised for
fomenting prevalent disturbances. The President declared in favor
of the admission of Kansas, with a Constitution agreeable to a
majority of the settlers. He also referred to an impending decision
of the Supreme Court, with which he had been made acquainted, and
asked acquiescence in it. This was Judge Taney's decision in the
Dred Scott case, rendered two days after Buchanan's inauguration.

An action had been begun in the Circuit Court in Missouri by Scott,
a negro, for the freedom of himself and children. He claimed that
he had been removed by his master in 1834 to Illinois, a Free State,
and afterwards taken into territory north of the compromise line.
Sanford, his master, replied that Scott was not a citizen of
Missouri, and could not bring an action, and that he and his children
were Sanford's slaves. The lower courts