In all this there was a rude vehemence and coarse insinuation that was regrettable; yet Douglas sought to soften the asperity of his manner, by adding that he did not mean to be disrespectful or unkind to Mr. Lincoln.  He had known Mr. Lincoln for twenty-five years.  While he was a school-teacher, Lincoln was a flourishing grocery-keeper.  Lincoln was always more successful in business; Lincoln always did well whatever he undertook; Lincoln could beat any of the boys wrestling or running a foot-race; Lincoln could ruin more liquor than all the boys of the town together.  When in Congress, Lincoln had distinguished himself by his opposition to the Mexican War, taking the side of the enemy against his own country.[713] If this disparagement of an opponent seems mean and ungenerous, let it be remembered that in the rough give-and-take of Illinois politics, hard hitting was to be expected.  Lincoln had invited counter-blows by first charging Douglas with conspiracy.  No mere reading of cold print can convey the virile energy with which Douglas spoke.  The facial expression, the animated gesture, the toss of the head, and the stamp of the foot, the full, resonant voice—­all are wanting.

To a man of Lincoln’s temperament, this vigorous invective was indescribably irritating.  Rather unwisely he betrayed his vexation in his first words.  His manner was constrained.  He seemed awkward and ill at ease, but as he warmed to his task, his face became more animated, he recovered the use of his arms, and he pointed his remarks with forceful gestures.  His voice, never pleasant, rose to a shrill treble in moments of excitement.  After the familiar manner of Western speakers of that day, he was wont to bend his knees and then rise to his full height with a jerk, to enforce some point.[714] Yet with all his ungraceful mannerisms, Lincoln held his hearers, impressing most men with a sense of the honesty of his convictions.

Instead of replying categorically to Douglas’s questions, Lincoln read a long extract from a speech which he had made in 1854, to show his attitude then toward the Fugitive Slave Act.  He denied that he had had anything to do with the resolutions which had been read.  He believed that he was not even in Springfield at the time when they were adopted.[715] As for the charge that he favored the social and political equality of the black and white races, he said, “Anything that argues me into his idea of perfect social and political equality with the negro, is but a specious and fantastic arrangement of words, by which a man can prove a horse-chestnut to be a chestnut horse....  I have no purpose to introduce political and social equality between the white and the black races.  There is a physical difference between the two, which, in my judgment, will probably forever forbid their living together upon the footing of perfect equality ... notwithstanding all this, there is no reason in the world why the negro is not entitled to all the