inalienable right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness, as expressed in the Declaration of Independence.

In the splendid memorial address of George Bancroft, the historian, delivered before the two houses of Congress in 1865 upon the life and character of Abraham Lincoln, he said, among other things, "In supporting incipient measures for emancipation, Jefferson encountered difficulties greater than he could overcome and, after vain wrestling, the words that broke from him, 'I tremble for my country when I reflect that God is just, that His justice can not sleep forever,' were words of despair. It was the desire of Washington's heart that Virginia should remove slavery by a public act, and as the prospects of a general emancipation grew more and more dim, he, in utter hopelessness of the action of the State, did all that he could by bequeathing freedom to his own slaves.

"The mills of the gods grind slowly,

But they grind exceeding small.'"

On the 5th of January I returned to Bowling Green and resumed my place in the office of Mr. Broadhead. There was, outside of a few social gatherings, but little to be done there during the remainder of the winter.

On the first Monday in March, 1858, a term of the Circuit Court was begun with Aylett H. Buckner on the bench; N. P. Minor, Circuit Attorney; James M. Martin, Clerk; and Mastin H. Arthur, Sheriff in attendance. This was the first term of the Circuit Court that I was privileged to attend. Besides mem

bers of the local bar, which was indeed a strong one, including James O. Broadhead, Ezra Hunt, John B. Henderson, Thomas P. Hoy, Robert A. Campbell, N. P. Minor, William L. Gatewood and Samuel F. Murray, there were lawyers of great distinction from other parts of the State; namely, Thomas L. Anderson and John D. S. Dryden of Palmyra, Alfred W. Lamb and William Harrison of Hannibal, Uriel Wright of St. Louis, and others.

The docket was quite full of important cases, both civil and criminal. The most important criminal case docketed for trial was that of the State of Missouri against English, who was charged with the murder of a young man by the name of Rhea. The story of this trial and the result has been previously told.

I attended court every day during the term and my observations during the time were most interesting and beneficial. There is no place equal to a court room where lawyers are actively engaged in the trial of cases, for the education of a student of law. I made it a point to attend the sessions of all courts held in Bowling Green, whether the Circuit, Probate or County Court or Justice of the Peace Courts, and I am frank to say that the time given to them was of greater benefit to me than was double the time spent in studying over cases reported in the books.

In the Circuit Court of Pike County at Bowling Green, in March, 1859, I was admitted to the Bar by Aylett H. Buckner, then Judge. I opened a law office in one of the small rooms of the court house, for which I agreed with the County Court to pay the sum of twenty-five dollars per year. I had a few law

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