Cincinnati daily press. [volume] (Cincinnati [Ohio]) 1860-1862, 1860-06-19
The Lirooln-Dourln. pebnte..

Mr.. Douglas has seen fit to denounce the
publication of his speeches in the Lincoln
Douglas Debates, by Follett Foster & Co., as
unfair, and, he says, Especially against the
alterations and mutilations in the reports of
my speeches" These are serious charges,
and If true, the nature of the case is such
that Mr.. Douglas can prove them to demon
stration; and when he makes such charges
against work in which the publishers have
invested considerable money, and which in
wolves their integrity, he should prove them.
But, as far as he shows, the unfairness consists
in publishing the debates without submitting
them to Mr.. Douglas for revision, while Mr..
Lincoln had an opportunity to revise his.
This arose naturally from the fact that this
publication was made at the request of the
friends of Lincoln in Ohio, and he was called
on for his speeches. This gave him an oppor-
tunity to revise them. Whether he did so,
or to what extent, we presume Mr.. Douglas
does not know. But Mr.. Douglass speeches
were copied from the Chicago Times, his own
organ, as furnished to It by his own reporter.
There may have been verbal errors, inseper-
able from stenographic reporting, but it is
hardly probable that any important ones
could have escaped the notice Of Mr..
Douglass reporter and the editor of the
Times, saying nothing of their after
ward coming to the notice of Mr..
Douglas and of his vigilant friends
There certainly was no Intentional unfair
ness, and it does not seem probable that
there was any at all. The publication Of
these debates was extensively advertised for
more than six months, with the correspond
ence between the Committee and Mr.. Lin
coin, and it was not till several months after
their publication, and after the nomination
| Of Lincoln, that Mr.. Douglas demurred. The
specifications which Mr.. Douglas makes to
sustain his alleged alterations" and "mu-
tilations," are ethat they "have been mutilated
and, in some respects, the meaning changed
by the omission of interrogatories and ex.
pressions of appreciation and disapprobatior
by persons in the crowd, to which my re-
marks were made responsive, but by the
omission Of which my remarks seem inco
herent or unintelligible." W
1 1t is not usual for men engaged in debate
to digress largely in reply to remarks of the
crowd at any rate, these remarks can not bt
regarded as the important part of the debate
If there were any such left out, itwould moi
affect the coherency of Mr.. Douglass replies
to Lincoln. The proof ofthe charge of alter
alton and mutilation, when sifted, will proba
bly, amount to nothing but the fact that tn,
reporters notes of applause were left out o
the speeches of both.
Mr.. Douglas requests that his letter b.
published with future editions of the de
bates; that is, that Follett, Foster b Co
should publish, as a preface to their book,
letter inyalidating its authenticity by charge
which are not sustained by a particle 0
proof, and which they know to be unfounded
Mr.. Douglas has no proprietorship in hi
public speeches that warrants him in askinI
such thing, and if the demand were not
4 | signal of Distress it would be a remarkabl
| specimen of modesty. .a4,r ..a.gle