From the outset his anti-Nebraska colleague was the object of his bitterest gibes, for Trumbull typified the deserter, who was causing such alarm in the ranks of the Democrats.  “I understand that my colleague has told the Senate,” said Douglas contemptuously, “that he comes here as a Democrat.  Sir, that fact will be news to the Democracy of Illinois.  I undertake to assert there is not a Democrat in Illinois who will not say that such a statement is a libel upon the Democracy of that State.  When he was elected he received every Abolition vote in the Legislature of Illinois.  He received every Know-Nothing vote in the Legislature of Illinois.  So far as I am advised and believe, he received no vote except from persons allied to Abolitionism or Know-Nothingism.  He came here as the Know-Nothing-Abolition candidate, in opposition to the united Democracy of his State, and to the Democratic candidate."[524]

When to desertion was added association with “Black Republicans,” Douglas found his vocabulary inadequate to express his scorn.  Like most Democrats he was sensitive on the subject of party nomenclature.[525] “Republican” was a term which had associations with the very father of Democracy, though the party had long since dropped the hyphenated title.  But this new, so-called Republican party had wisely dropped the prefix “national,” suggested Douglas, because “it is a purely sectional party, with a platform which cannot cross the Ohio river, and a creed which inevitably brings the North and South into hostile collision.”  In view of the emphasis which their platform put upon the negro, Douglas thought that consistency required the substitution of the word “Black” for “National.”  The Democratic party, on the other hand, had no sympathy with those who believed in making the negro the social and political equal of the white man.  “Our people are a white people; our State is a white State; and we mean to preserve the race pure, without any mixture with the negro.  If you,” turning to his Republican opponents, “wish your blood and that of the African mingled in the same channel, we trust that you will keep at a respectful distance from us, and not try to force that on us as one of your domestic institutions."[526] In such wise, Douglas labored to befog and discredit the issues for which the new party stood.  The demagogue in him overmastered the statesman.

Douglas believed himself—­and with good reason—­to be the probable nominee of his party in the approaching presidential election.  Several State conventions had already declared for him.  There was no other Democrat, save President Pierce, whose name was so intimately associated with the policy of the party as expressed in the Kansas-Nebraska bill.  Yet, while both were in favor at the South, neither Pierce nor Douglas was likely to secure the full party vote at the North.  This consideration led to a diversion in favor of James Buchanan, of Pennsylvania.  The peculiar availability of this