,of Eq ual ity
equality of opportunity cannot exist. Given this foundation, citizens have the responsibility of deciding how far their government shall go in striving to ensure, preserve and advance equality of opportunity. Opinions on the extent of the role that government should play vary widely. Clearly, however, a man with the genius of a Tagore or an Einstein cannot realize his talents if he does not have the chance to learn to read and write. Nor can a workman, with the potential for hard, constructive labour, fulfil himself if he cannot earn enough to eat. "Every man has an equal right to the necessaries of life even as the birds and beasts have," wrote Gandhi. We may infer, then, that inseparable from equality of opportunity are guarantees of such essentials as basic education, adequate food and housing, employment, a living wage, all of which a government founded on egali tarian principles will strive to ensure to the extent possible. Over the years the drive towards fulfilment of equality of opportunity in the United States has led to the government's playing an increasingly important role in providing or ensuring the "necessaries oflife." This drive "shifts the emphasis from the narrowly political~from the ballot and the constitutional guarantees~to the economy and the class system," said Max Lerner in his book, America as a Civilization. "It stresses the condition for putting within the reach of the ordinary man the opportuni ties of education and the making of a living, regardless of his confessional faith, his ethnic group, and his social level." As in India, so in the United States,
the problem often lies in deciding how far a government should go in exercising controls to guarantee equality for some without stifling it for others. Certain guidelines for what a government might do were suggested by the late President Franklin D. Roosevelt in his famous "four freedoms" speech in 1941. Looking forward to a worlel founded on freedom of speech and worship and freedom from; want and fear, he declared that "the basic things expected by our people of their political and economic systems are simple." These he enumerated as "equality of opportunity for youth and for others; jobs for those who can work; security for those who need it; the ending ofspecial privilege for the few; the preservation of civil liberties for all; the enjoyment of the fruits of scientific progress in a wider and constantly rising standard of living." In a very real sense all "the basic things" that President Roosevelt cited are necessary if men are to have the chance to compete on equal terms vvith other men. Roosevelt applied his philosophy to government in the many economic and social welfare acts he urged in domestic legislation during his thirteen years as President. That succeeding administrations have tended to agree with him is shown by the many more bills of similar character since enacted. Indeed, the American government has come to adopt a "socialistic" character that contrasts with earlier thinking in American history in which equality of opportunity was more narrowly viewed as the right of men to seek out their future with little direct control or
assistance from the government. But why, it might be asked, if a government guarantees such benefits as education, food and housing, a living wage and so forth, are privileges such as freedom of speech and religion and universal suffrage necessary to create equality ofopportunity? Citizens' opportunities cannot be said to be equal if a select few make the laws that control what others do, and do not permit the others to express freely their point of view or to vote for a new government. Equality of opportunity, moreover, does not end with guarantees of equal political rights and the material requirements for survival, or even with a levelling of material prosperity. If the principle of equality is to be a fact, the individual man must have the opportunity to develop his individual potential. A citizen must be free to work, think and live as he wishes. Without this kind of basic freedom the opportunity of individuals to develop is seriously curtailed. A writer, for instance, cannot be expected to follow a state-directed code, if he is to realize the scope of crea tivity of which his mind is capable. Neither he nor the teacher nor the philosopher nor anyone else with creative talents can adhere'to the dictates of a government and still express himself adequately. Men must have the opportunity to think as they please, even if, as often happens, what they please to think differs from the thinking of their governmen t leaders or even proves erroneous. The individual freedom implicit in the concept of equality applies to people in all walks of life, at all levels of ability or potential. A clerk who
Lincoln the Lawyer
Abram Bergen, who later became a prominent Kansas attorney and judge, first entered the practice of law about I8S8 in tlie State of Illinois. As ayoung lawyer, hefrequently met Abraham Lincoln in the courts of thefive counties comprising the district in which young Bergen practised. In I898, Judge Bergen gave the following recollection qf his impressions qf Lincoln as a lawyer:
I
HAVE READ all the descriptions of Lincoln's remarkable face and examined all his portraits as they have appeared in magazines and elsewhere, but to my mind none of them conveys a perfect idea of the irregularity of his features. Studying his face directly from the side, the lowest part of his forehead projected beyond the eyes to a greater distance than I have ever observed in any other person. In the court room, while waiting for the celebrated Armstrong case to be called for trial, I looked at him closely for full two hours, and was so struck by this peculiarity of his profile that I remember to have estimated that his forehead protruded more than two inches, and then retreated about twenty-five degrees from the perpendicular until it reached a usual height in a straight line above his eves. During the two hours referred to Lincoln sat with his head thrown back, his steady gaze apparently fixed upon one spot of the blank ceiling, entirely oblivious to what . was happening about him, and without a single variation or noticeable movement of any muscle of his face. But when he began to talk his eyes brightened perceptibly, and every facial movement seemed to emphasize his feeling and add expression to his thoughts. Then vanished all consciousness of his uncouth appearance, his awkward manner, or even his high-keyed, unpleasant voice, and it required an extraordinary effort of the will to divert attention to the man, so concentrated was every mind upon what he was saying. The first time I saw Lincoln as a lawver was in the old Morgan County Court-House, at Jack~onville, when he was defending Colonel Dunlap, a wealthy, aristocratic Democrat, in an action for $ IO,OOO damages, brought against him by the editor of what was then called the abolition paper. The action grew out of a deliberatelyplanned and severe beating administered by the Colonel to the editor, on a bright Saturday afternoon, in the public square, in the presence of hundreds of the town and country people whom the Colonel desired to witness that novel and exciting performance. Besides local counsel, the editor had employed Ben Edwards, who was the most noted for eloquence of all the Democratic lawyers in the State. Colonel Dunlap retained Lincoln as one of his lawyers for the defence. I ran off from my work for the sole purpose of hearing Lincoln. Edwards used all the arts of the orator and advocate. He pictured, until it could almost be felt, the
odium and disgrace to the editor, which he declared were worse than death. He wept, and made the jury and spectators weep. The feelings of those in the court-house was roused to the highest pitch of indignation against the perpetrator of such an outrage. It was felt that all the Colonel's fortune could not compensate for the lawless indignity, and that the editor would in all probability recover No possible defence or palliation the full $ IO,OOO. existed. Before all eyes were dried, it was Lincoln's turn to speak. He dragged his feet off the table, on the top of which they had been resting, set them on the floor, gradually lifted up and straightened out his great length of legs and body, and took off his coat. While removing his coat it was noticed by all present that his eyes were intently fixed upon something on the table before him. He picked up the object, a paper, scrutinized it closely, and, without uttering a word, indulged in a long, loud laugh, accompanied by his most wonderfully grotesque facial expression. There was never anything like the laugh or the expression. It was magnetic. The whole audience grinned. Then he laid the paper down slowly, took off his cravat, again picked up the paper, re-examined it, and repeated the laugh. It was contagious. He then deliberately removed his vest, showing his one yarn suspender, took up the paper, again looked at it curiously, and again indulged in his peculiar laugh. Its effect was absolutely irresistible. The usually solemn and dignified Judge Woodson, members of the jury, and the whole audience joined in the merriment, and all this before Lincoln had spoken. When the laughter had subsided, he apologized to the court for his seemingly rude behavior and explained that the amount of damages claimed by the editor was at first written $ I,OOO. He supposed the plaintiff afterwards had taken a second look at the Colonel's pile, and concluded that the wounds to his honor were worth an additional $9,000. The result was to at once destroy the effect of Edwards's tears, pathos, towering indignation, and high-wrought eloquence, and to render improbable a verdict for more than $1,000. Lincoln immediately and fully admitted that the plaintiff was entitled to a judgment for some amount, argued in mitigation of damages, told a funny story applicable to the peculiar nature of the case, and specially urged the jury to agree upon some amount. The verdict was for a few hundred dollars, and was entirely satisfactory to Lincoln's client.