books, an ordinary table, and three or four splitbottom chairs. I got a man to paint my name on a piece of tin 12x12, "D. P. Dyer, Attorney and Counsellor at Law," and fastened it on the door. And thus it was that my ship was launched and a struggle for bread began.

I was reasonably successful, more so than my acquirements justified. I was, however, badly defeated in the first case I tried in the Circuit Court, as my client was speedily sent to the penitentiary for a period of five years. The case was this: A man by the name of Knapp was indicted by the Grand Jury for enticing and attempting to entice a negro man belonging to John McCormick of Ashley, Pike County, to leave his master and seek freedom in Canada. The defendant was poor and unable to employ a lawyer, and the Judge appointed me to defend him. Slavery was a recognized institution in the State and the Legislature had passed most drastic laws to protect slave property.

In what I have said, allusion has been frequently made to the wrongs of the negro, but in this case it was the wrong done a white man who was trying to help a negro. In those days a negro could not testify in court, nor could a defendant in a criminal case testify in his own behalf. The negro in this case had betrayed his friend and told his master of the attempt to induce him to leave. Thereupon McCormick and Sam Russell, his neighbor, laid a trap to catch Knapp, so they could testify in court against him. They concealed themselves from view and heard the conversation between Knapp and the negro, and in this way were qualified to testify. The pro

slavery sentiment in the county was so strong that Knapp had but a poor chance for even a fair hearing, much less an acquittal, before any jury that might be chosen. I did the very best I could, but the jury found him guilty and fixed his punishment in the penitentiary at five years.

A good friend of mine by the name of Johnson Hendrick lived in the neighborhood and was himself the owner of several negroes. He shared with others the prejudice that existed against all men who believed that slavery was wrong. He attended the trial, and when the verdict came in he promptly congratulated the defendant. Knapp was, of course, indignant and said, "I see nothing to be congratulated for in this verdict. I am an honest man and was only trying to do unto others what I would have others do unto me! For this I am to be sent to prison to be the associate of thieves and murderers, and it is for this you congratulate me?" Hendrick was for the moment speechless, but when he recovered, said, "I congratulate you on the size of the verdict. If you had had another lawyer like Dyer you would have gone for ten years instead of five." Thus it was I began the practice of law in the Circuit Court.

From that time on the political excitement ran very high. Men were divided as they had never been before. The discussion of the slavery question (and that was the chief one) became very bitter and the threat of disunion began to loom up. The decision in the Dred Scott case had been made by the Supreme Court of the United States, in which it denied to Scott, a negro, the right of freedom. The Court was

bitterly assailed by some for its decision, and vigorously defended by others. Political parties were formed and political battles of the fiercest character were fought.

In the fall of 1858, a joint debate between Senator Stephen A. Douglas and Honorable Abraham Lincoln was being held in the State of Illinois that attracted world-wide attention. On the 13th day of October of that year, I went to Quincy, Illinois, to hear them. I left Bowling Green at night and went to Louisiana, remaining there overnight, and took the boat about daylight the next morning for Quincy, some fifty miles distant. The boat arrived about 11:00 A. M., just as the Republican procession was passing. I had never seen a Republican procession before, and up to that time had never heard a Republican speech. I was curious to hear everything that was to be said by the representative of either party, and especially by the Republican. I fell in behind the procession, which after awhile halted in front of the hotel where Mr. Lincoln was stopping.

There was much enthusiasm and much cheering as Mr. Lincoln appeared upon the balcony to say a few words of thanks. I saw him on two or three occasions during the day, but never again after that time. His sincere face, so full of tenderness and seeming sadness, made a deep and lasting impression upon me.

The debate that day between Mr. Lincoln and Senator Douglas took place in a public park, and the crowd that gathered there was immense. Douglas was short in stature but a great orator. Lincoln was tall, ungainly-looking, with a bronzed face, a voice not near so charming as that of his opponent, but his

power as a logical and convincing debater, in my opinion, surpassed that of Mr. Douglas. I was only twenty years old at the time and my sympathies were with Mr. Douglas, but the logical reasoning of Mr. Lincoln shook my faith in the correctness of Mr. Douglas's position.

After the debate was over, I took the "down boat" for home. I heard Mr. Douglas once after that, but never saw or heard Mr. Lincoln again. The debate at Quincy was one of a series planned and agreed upon by the two. Douglas was the Democratic candidate for the United States Senate and Mr. Lincoln was his Republican opponent. The Legislature at that time chose the senator, and at the election in November a majority of three Democrats, I think, was elected to the Legislature. Mr. Douglas was chosen senator for another six years and Mr. Lincoln returned to Springfield and resumed the practice of law.

These debates resulted not only in the nomination of Douglas for President by a part of the Democratic party in 1860, but in the nomination by the Republicans of Mr. Lincoln for the Presidency, and his election in November of that year.

Within the ten days preceding the election on the 5th day of November, I visited many places in each of the five counties of the circuit "electioneering," as I was running for Circuit Attorney. These trips were made altogether on the back of a faithful horse named Sam that my mother had permitted me to use for many years. He was a fine saddle-horse and could gallop for many miles without seeming to tire.

Within these ten days I rode more than two hundred miles.

On Sunday night before the election, I stayed near Williamsburg, Callaway County, with a man by the name of Hobson. He was the father of five sons, all of whom were of age. He with the five sons were ardent "Douglas men." I had never been in Callaway County, but was careful to take letters of introduction from Honorable John B. Henderson to prominent men there. I took one to Mr. Hobson which seemed to satisfy him that I was the proper person to vote for for Circuit Attorney. He and his sons were very active for me at the election in the town of Williamsburg. In the same place was a merchant by the name of Woodlin. He had been an old Whig but was supporting for President, John Bell of Tennessee. Mr. Woodlin had previously lived in Warren County and was a warm friend of my brother George and his family. I called on him and he at once promised to "rally" the Bell men to my support, which he did. At this precinct I beat my chief opponent, Colonel Minor, more than three to one.

From Williamsburg, I rode on to Fulton, the county seat of Callaway County, arriving there about noon on the day before the election. I was a perfect stranger in the place but managed to find a few young friends who were there at school. These formed a sort of nucleus for a meeting at the court house that night. I also had letters to William Harrison and Daniel Tucker, prominent Douglas men in Fulton. They managed to get up quite a respectable meeting