 |
| Judge Logan in the Sangamon County Circuit Court grants Abraham Lincoln's application to become an attorney by certifying in the court record that Lincoln was a person of good moral character on March 24, 1836. (1979 Print by Lloyd Ostendorf) |
Before he was the Great Emancipator, Abraham Lincoln was a young lawyer navigating the rough-and-tumble world of Illinois law. His first brush with a murder trial came in 1838, and it was anything but ordinary.
🏨 The Scene: A Hotel Lobby Turns Deadly
On a quiet evening in mid-March 1838, Dr. Jacob Early sat reading in the lobby of the Colonel Spottswood Hotel in Springfield, Illinois. Henry B. Truett, a politically embattled appointee, stood nearby by the fireplace—seething. Truett had recently been rejected for a federal land office post in Galena, and he believed Early was the author of the petition that torpedoed his nomination.
When confronted, Early admitted to writing the disapproval notice. The conversation quickly escalated. Truett hurled insults; Early demanded to know Truett’s source. When Truett refused, Early stood up and raised a chair in a threatening gesture. Truett backed away, pulled a pistol, and shot Early in the side. The doctor died days later, but not before giving a damning dying declaration.
🕵️♀️ Conflicting Accounts: Did Truett Leave to Get the Gun?
One curious detail in the Truett case involves the moment the fatal shot was fired. Some accounts suggest that Truett left the hotel lobby to retrieve a pistol before returning to confront Dr. Early. Others—like the Sangamon County narrative—describe him pulling the weapon on the spot after a heated exchange. [1 & 2]
So which version is accurate?
The truth is, we may never know for certain. Trial records from 1838 are sparse, and newspaper reporting at the time often relied on secondhand accounts or partisan perspectives. What we do know is that Lincoln’s defense hinged on the idea of immediacy—that Truett acted in self-defense when threatened with a raised chair. Whether the gun was already on him or fetched moments earlier, Lincoln’s argument focused on the perceived danger in that instant—a split-second act of self-preservation.
⚔️ The Legal Lineup: Lincoln vs. Douglas
The trial that followed was a political and legal spectacle. Truett retained a formidable defense team: Stephen T. Logan, Edward Baker, and a young newbie, Abraham Lincoln. The prosecution was led by Stephen A. Douglas—yes, that Douglas—who enlisted David Woodson to assist.
Lincoln was still a rookie, but he knew the defendant, the victim, and at least five of the jurors. Jury selection was intense: 20 people were struck peremptorily, and 300–400 were challenged for cause. Despite his inexperience, Lincoln was given full responsibility for the defense strategy. [1]
With public sentiment leaning heavily toward conviction, the prosecution—led by none other than Stephen A. Douglas—seemed to have a slam-dunk case. The question wasn’t guilt, but how soon the hanging would be.
🎤 Lincoln’s Role: The Power of Persuasion
The trial last three days. [1]
Truett's team built the case around a plea of self-defense. The raised chair, they argued, was a clear sign of imminent attack. Truett’s single shot was not premeditated murder—it was a reaction to a perceived threat.
When it came time for closing arguments, Logan handed the reins to Lincoln. It was a bold move, entrusting the final summation to a young lawyer who had never tried a murder case. But Lincoln delivered. His argument was so compelling that the jury deliberated for just 1 hour and 40 minutes before returning a verdict of not guilty. [1]
The public was stunned. Truett may have lost his political post and lived under suspicion for years, but he walked away from a surefire date with the hangman's noose.
🧩 Rethinking Lincoln’s Criminal Record
Critics often claim Lincoln wasn’t a strong criminal defense attorney, citing his limited number of cases and several convictions. But many of those “losses” were actually manslaughter verdicts—far preferable to the death penalty for a murder verdict. Lincoln’s legal practice was a business, and criminal cases rarely paid well, which explains his selective docket. [2]
Still, the Truett case reveals something deeper: Lincoln’s early ability to sway hearts and minds, even when the odds were stacked against him. That persuasive power would later become a hallmark of his political career.
🥊 Bonus Trivia: Lincoln vs. Douglas, Round One
Before they sparred on the national stage, Abraham Lincoln and Stephen A. Douglas met in a much smaller arena—a Springfield courtroom. In People v. Truett, Douglas served as prosecutor, while Lincoln was part of the defense team. Both were still relatively unknown, frontier lawyers carving out reputations in the rough political landscape of antebellum Illinois.
This trial marked the first recorded clash between the two men whose rivalry would later shape the course of American history. Though the stakes were local, the courtroom tension foreshadowed the ideological battles to come. Lincoln’s successful defense and Douglas’s failed prosecution were early signs of the persuasive power each man would wield in the years ahead.
This was another topic from the archives of Abraham Lincoln, Storyteller.
Mac
📚 Works Cited
[1] Little, Savannah. “People v. Truett – March 1838 – October 1838.” Sangamon County Circuit Clerk Archives, Lincoln Library, Springfield IL Microfilm Collection, March & Oct 1838 Illinois State Journal, www.lawpracticeofabrahamlincoln.org/Details.aspx?case=140184.. Accessed 18 Sept. 2025.
[2] Dekle, George R. Sr. Abraham Lincoln's Almanac Trial Blog - April 29, 2014. Retrieved September 18, 2025.
No comments:
Post a Comment