The Unity of the Republic, on the indestructible foundation of Liberty and Equality, was vindicated by the citizen of a community which had no existence when the Republic was formed.

From the slaves he saw on the banks he took a lesson of Liberty, which gained new charms by comparison with Slavery.

In the long history of worth depressed there is no instance of such contrast between the depression and the triumph,--unless, perhaps, his successor as President may share with him this distinction.

There was God above, who watches all, and does not desert the lowly.

His opinions on public questions were formed early, under the example and teaching of Henry Clay, and he never departed from them, though constantly tempted, or pressed by local majorities, in the name of a false democracy.

It is interesting to know that thus early he espoused those two ideas which entered so largely into the terrible responsibilities of his last years,--I mean the Unity of the Republic, and the supreme value of Liberty.

He did not believe that a State, in its own mad will, had a right to break up this Union.

Naturally, one of his earliest acts in the Legislature of Illinois was a protest in the name of Liberty.

For the Wilmot Proviso he voted, according to his own statement, “in one way and another, about forty times.” His vote is recorded against the pretence that slaves are property under the Constitution.

The champion of Liberty did not hesitate to denounce this most baleful measure in a series of popular addresses, where truth, sentiment, humor, and argument all blended.

The debate that ensued is one of the most memorable in our political history, whether we consider the principles involved or the way it was conducted.

It commenced with a close, well-woven speech from the Republican candidate, showing insight into the actual condition of things, in which were these memorable words: “‘A house divided against itself cannot stand.’ I believe this Government…

I do not expect the Union to be dissolved, I do not expect the house to fall, but I do expect it will cease to be divided.

The inevitable topic to which he returned with most frequency, and to which he clung with all the grasp of his soul, was the practical character of the Declaration of Independence in announcing the Liberty and Equality of all Men.

No idle words were there, but substantial truth, binding on the conscience of mankind.

The words he then uttered live after him, and nobody now hears how he then battled without feeling a new motive to fidelity in support of Human Rights.

If one man says it does not mean a negro, why not another say it does not mean some other man?

If that Declaration is not the truth, let us get the statute-book in which we find it and tear it out.

Remember that at the time the Declaration was put forth, every one of the Thirteen Colonies were slaveholding colonies,--every man who signed that Declaration represented slaveholding constituents.

Did those signers mean by that act to charge themselves and all their constituents with having violated the law of God in holding the negro in an inferior condition to the white man?

Let them make it read, that all men are created equal except negroes.

They make the Declaration, what the Fathers intended, no mean proclamation of oligarchic egotism, but a charter and freehold for all mankind.

I only have to remark upon this part of the Judge’s speech, that I believe the entire records of the world, from the date of the Declaration of Independence up to within three years ago, may be searched in vain for one single affirmation…

This was their lofty and wise and noble understanding of the justice of the Creator to His creatures,--yes, Gentlemen, to all His creatures, to the whole great family of man.

Take me and put me to death,” said he, “but do not destroy that immortal emblem of humanity, the Declaration of American Independence.” He has been put to death by the enemies of the Declaration; but, though dead, he will continue to guard…