Something of Men I Have Known | Page 5

upon the boards. They
have one face for the public, rife with the saws and learned gravity of
the profession, and another for themselves, replete with broad mirth,
sprightly wit, and gay thoughtlessness. The intense mental toil and
fatigue of business give them a peculiar relish for the enjoyment of
their hours of relaxation, and, in the same degree, incapacitate them for
that frugal attention to their private concerns which their limited means
usually require. They have, in consequence, a prevailing air of

unthriftiness in personal matters, which, however it may operate to the
prejudice of the pocket of the individual, has a mellow and kindly
effect upon his disposition. In an old member of the profession, one
who has grown gray in the service, there is a rich unction of originality
that brings him out from the ranks of his fellowmen in strong relief. His
habitual conversancy with the world in its strangest varieties and with
the secret history of character, gives him a shrewd estimate of the
human heart. He is quiet, and unapt to be struck with wonder at any of
the actions of men. There is a deep current of observation running
calmly through his thoughts, and seldom gushing out in words; the
confidence which has been placed in him, in the thousand relations of
his profession, renders him constitutionally cautious. His acquaintance
with the vicissitudes of fortune, as they have been exemplified in the
lives of individuals, and with the severe afflictions that have 'tried the
reins' of many, known only to himself, makes him an indulgent and
charitable apologist of the aberrations of others. He has an impregnable
good humor that never falls below the level of thoughtfulness into
melancholy."
A distinguished writer, two generations ago, said of the early Western
bar:
"Not only was it a body distinguished for dignity and tolerance, but
chivalrous courage was a marked characteristic. Personal cowardice
was odious among the bar, as among the hunters who had fought the
British and the Indians. Hence, insulting language, and the use of
billingsgate, were too hazardous to be indulged where a personal
accounting was a strong possibility. Not only did common prudence
dictate courtesy among the members of the bar, but an exalted spirit of
honor and well-bred politeness prevailed. The word of a counsel to his
adversary was his inviolable bond. The suggestion of a lawyer as to the
existence of a fact was accepted as verity by the court. To insinuate
unprofessional conduct was to impute infamy."
I distinctly recall the first time I saw Mr. Lincoln. In September, 1852,
two lawyers from Springfield, somewhat travel-stained with their sixty
miles' journey, alighted from the stage-coach in front of the old tavern

in Bloomington. The taller and younger of the two was Abraham
Lincoln; the other, his personal friend and former preceptor, John T.
Stuart. That evening it was my good fortune to hear Mr. Lincoln
address a political meeting at the old Courthouse in advocacy of the
election of General Winfield Scott to the Presidency. The speech was
one of great ability, and but little that was favorable of the military
record of General Pierce remained when the speech was concluded.
The Mexican War was then of recent occurrence, its startling events
fresh in the memory of all, and its heroes still the heroes of the hour.
The more than half-century that has passed has not wholly dispelled my
recollection of Mr. Lincoln's eloquent tribute to "the hero of Lundy's
Lane," and his humorous description of the military career of General
Franklin Pierce.
The incident now to be related occurred at the old National Hotel in
Bloomington in September, 1854. Senator Douglas had been advertised
to speak, and a large audience was in attendance. It was his first
appearance there since the passage of the Kansas-Nebraska Bill. The
writer, then a student at the Wesleyan University, with his classmate
James S. Ewing and many others, had called upon Mr. Douglas at his
hotel. While there the Hon. Jesse W. Fell, a prominent citizen of
Bloomington and the close friend of Mr. Lincoln, also called upon Mr.
Douglas, and after some conversation with him said in substance, that
inasmuch as there was profound interest felt in the great question then
pending, and the people were anxious to hear both sides, he thought it
would be well to have a joint discussion between Judge Douglas and
Mr. Lincoln. To which proposition Mr. Douglas at once demanded,
"What party does Mr. Lincoln represent?" The answer of Mr. Fell was,
"the Whig party, of course." Declining the proposition with much
feeling Mr. Douglas said, "When I came home from Washington I was
assailed in the northern part of the State by an old line abolitionist, in
the central part of the State by a