| August 21 |  |
Editor says, what if Stephen A. Douglas had won the 1860 presidential race? Please note that the opinions expressed in this post do not necessarily reflect the views of the author(s).
| Share this Article on: |  Facebook |  Twitter |
In 1858, at the first Illinois Senatorial debate held on this day at Ottawa, Abraham Lincoln declared that his opponent Stephen A. Douglas "cares not whether slavery is voted down or voted up," and that, [in the words of Henry Clay], he would "blow out the moral lights around us" and eradicate the love of liberty.
A Slip, not a FallBy the time that the seventh debate had been held at Alton on October 15th, it was clear that Lincoln had lost the argument. Not only would Douglas cruise to victory in the Senate race, he would pursue the same logical argument in his successful bid for the Presidency two years later. Yet the voters of Illinois would experience some doubt during the secession crisis. By then Lincoln had occupied the vacant seat, a lonely voice in the Senate arguing against Douglas's "Richmond Compromise".
That compromise would leave unanswered the questioned posed to Douglas by Lincoln at Ottawa, namely ~ "[because all men were created equal], how can you deprive a negro of that equality which God and the Declaration of Independence awards to him?".The path was worn and slippery. My foot slipped from under me, knocking the other out of the way, but I recovered and said to myself, "It's a slip and not a fall".
For Lincoln, self-actualisation was a very personal matter. He had suffered from deep depression for many years. The nagging doubt that he had failed to make his mark would ultimately drive him to suicide in 1864.
Nevertheless his upbeat attitude to the future of the Union was deeply philosophical. Whilst considering the "Richmond Compromise" a setback (which he blamed upon a lack of national leadership), it was in his own remarkable words, "a slip, not a fall".
Entry posted by Todayinah Editor
© "Lincoln's Genius" by H.W. BrandsStory Tags
Permalinks: Post, Day. Browse Thread: Beasts Source: Wikipedia Labels: Stephen Douglas, Abraham Lincoln, 1860, Illinois, Civil War. Editor says, H.W. Brands explores Lincoln's development during and after losing the 1858 Senate Race, so we vary this by imagining that Douglas repeats his performance during the 1860 Presidential Race.
~ Given Dixie's suicidal politics in 1860 how does Douglas win? See
~ I think that the fallout from John Brown's raid would have spelled defeat for Douglas no matter what Lincoln had said years before. For a more interesting WI, how about one where the Democrats sink their differences and unite behind one candidate?
Comment from John Paul Canonigo on Facebook - more slave states means the Confederates can easily steamroll the Union into submission.
~ I have to agree with Scott Palter on this one...
~ Letting Dred Scott stand wouldn't have "forced slavery on the free states"--but it would have divided the states into two classes, one (the slaveholding states) whose laws must be enforced nationwide and one (the free states) whose laws need not be, at least on the question of slavery.
Douglas's election, therefore, might have postponed the Civil War but almost certainly would not have prevented it. And any postponement would have worked to the slave states' disadvantage, considering that they were lagging farther and farther behind in population and industrial development. I doubt, though, that the North would have seceded. More likely, Douglas would eventually have been fo,llowed by an anti-slavery president, causing the same reaction as did the election of Lincoln in our history.
© Today in Alternate History, 2013-. All characters appearing in this work are fictitious. Any resemblance to real persons, living or dead, is purely coincidental.
