We have already mentioned that in the campaign of 1844 he put on record, by public resolutions in Springfield, his disapprobation of, and opposition to, Native-Americanism.  In the later campaigns, while he did not allow his attention to be diverted from the slavery discussion, his disapproval of Know-Nothingism was quite as decided and as public.  Thus he wrote in a private letter, dated October 30, 1858:  “I understand the story is still being told and insisted upon that I have been a Know-Nothing.  I repeat what I stated in a public speech at Meredosia, that I am not, nor ever have been, connected with the party called the Know-Nothing party, or party calling themselves the American party.  Certainly no man of truth, and I believe no man of good character for truth, can be found to say on his own knowledge that I ever was connected with that party.”

  [Sidenote] Lincoln to Hon. A. Jonas, July 21, 1860.  MS.

So also in the summer of 1860, when his candidacy for President did not permit his writing public letters, he wrote in a confidential note to a friend:  “Yours of the 20th is received.  I suppose as good or even better men than I may have been in American or Know-Nothing lodges; but, in point of fact, I never was in one, at Quincy or elsewhere....  And now a word of caution.  Our adversaries think they can gain a point if they could force me to openly deny the charge, by which some degree of offense would be given to the Americans.  For this reason it must not publicly appear that I am paying any attention to the charge.”

  [Sidenote] Lincoln to Dr. Theodore Canisius, May 17, 1859.

His position on the main question involved was already sufficiently understood; for in his elsewhere quoted letter of May 17, 1859, he had declared himself against the adoption by Illinois, or any other place where he had a right to oppose it, of the recent Massachusetts constitutional provision restricting foreign-born citizens in the right of suffrage.  It is well to repeat the broad philosophical principle which guided him to this conclusion:  “Understanding the spirit of our institutions to aim at the elevation of men, I am opposed to whatever tends to degrade them.”

[Illustration:  JOHN BELL.]

As the campaign progressed the chances of the result underwent an important fluctuation, involving some degree of uncertainty.  The Democratic disruption, and the presence of four tickets in the field, rendered it possible that some very narrow plurality in one or more of the States might turn the scale of victory.  Calculating politicians, especially those belonging to the party hitherto in power, and who had enjoyed the benefits of its extensive Federal patronage, seized eagerly upon this possibility as a means of prolonging their official tenure, and showed themselves not unwilling to sacrifice the principles of the general contest to the mere material and local advantage which success would bring them.