the writings-5-第9章

按键盘上方向键 ← 或 → 可快速上下翻页，按键盘上的 Enter 键可回到本书目录页，按键盘上方向键 ↑ 可回到本页顶部！
————未阅读完？加入书签已便下次继续阅读！



the　original　and　chief　purpose　of　the　Republican　organization。　I　say

〃chief　purpose〃　of　the　Republican　organization；　for　it　is　certainly

true　that　if　the　National　House　shall　fall　into　the　hands　of　the

Republicans；　they　will　have　to　attend　to　all　the　other　matters　of

national　house…keeping；　as　well　as　this。　　The　chief　and　real　purpose

of　the　Republican　party　is　eminently　conservative。　　It　proposes

nothing　save　and　except　to　restore　this　government　to　its　original

tone　in　regard　to　this　element　of　slavery；　and　there　to　maintain　it；

looking　for　no　further　change　in　reference　to　it　than　that　which　the

original　framers　of　the　Government　themselves　expected　and　looked

forward　to。



The　chief　danger　to　this　purpose　of　the　Republican　party　is　not　just

now　the　revival　of　the　African　slave　trade；　or　the　passage　of　a

Congressional　slave　code；　or　the　declaring　of　a　second　Dred　Scott

decision；　making　slavery　lawful　in　all　the　States。　　These　are　not

pressing　us　just　now。　　They　are　not　quite　ready　yet。　　The　authors　of

these　measures　know　that　we　are　too　strong　for　them；　but　they　will　be

upon　us　in　due　time；　and　we　will　be　grappling　with　them　hand　to　hand；

if　they　are　not　now　headed　off。　　They　are　not　now　the　chief　danger　to

the　purpose　of　the　Republican　organization；　but　the　most　imminent

danger　that　now　threatens　that　purpose　is　that　insidious　Douglas

popular　sovereignty。　　This　is　the　miner　and　sapper。　　While　it　does

not　propose　to　revive　the　African　slave　trade；　nor　to　pass　a　slave

code；　nor　to　make　a　second　Dred　Scott　decision；　it　is　preparing　us

for　the　onslaught　and　charge　of　these　ultimate　enemies　when　they

shall　be　ready　to　come　on；　and　the　word　of　command　for　them　to

advance　shall　be　given。　　I　say　this　〃Douglas　popular　sovereignty〃；

for　there　is　a　broad　distinction；　as　I　now　understand　it；　between

that　article　and　a　genuine　popular　sovereignty。



I　believe　there　is　a　genuine　popular　sovereignty。　　I　think　a

definition　of　〃genuine　popular　sovereignty；〃　in　the　abstract；　would

be　about　this：　That　each　man　shall　do　precisely　as　he　pleases　with

himself；　and　with　all　those　things　which　exclusively　concern　him。

Applied　to　government；　this　principle　would　be；　that　a　general

government　shall　do　all　those　things　which　pertain　to　it；　and　all　the

local　governments　shall　do　precisely　as　they　please　in　respect　to

those　matters　which　exclusively　concern　them。　　I　understand　that　this

government　of　the　United　States；　under　which　we　live；　is　based　upon

this　principle；　and　I　am　misunderstood　if　it　is　supposed　that　I　have

any　war　to　make　upon　that　principle。



Now；　what　is　judge　Douglas's　popular　sovereignty？　　It　is；　as　a

principle；　no　other　than　that　if　one　man　chooses　to　make　a　slave　of

another　man　neither　that　other　man　nor　anybody　else　has　a　right　to

object。　　Applied　in　government；　as　he　seeks　to　apply　it；　it　is　this：

If；　in　a　new　Territory　into　which　a　few　people　are　beginning　to　enter

for　the　purpose　of　making　their　homes；　they　choose　to　either　exclude

slavery　from　their　limits　or　to　establish　it　there；　however　one　or

the　other　may　affect　the　persons　to　be　enslaved；　or　the　infinitely

greater　number　of　persons　who　are　afterwards　to　inhabit　that

Territory；　or　the　other　members　of　the　families　of　communities；　of

which　they　are　but　an　incipient　member；　or　the　general　head　of　the

family　of　States　as　parent　of　all；　however　their　action　may　affect

one　or　the　other　of　these；　there　is　no　power　or　right　to　interfere。

That　is　Douglas's　popular　sovereignty　applied。



He　has　a　good　deal　of　trouble　with　popular　sovereignty。　　His

explanations　explanatory　of　explanations　explained　are　interminable。

The　most　lengthy；　and；　as　I　suppose；　the　most　maturely　considered　of

this　long　series　of　explanations　is　his　great　essay　in　Harper's

Magazine。　　I　will　not　attempt　to　enter　on　any　very　thorough

investigation　of　his　argument　as　there　made　and　presented。　　I　will

nevertheless　occupy　a　good　portion　of　your　time　here　in　drawing　your

attention　to　certain　points　in　it。　　Such　of　you　as　may　have　read　this

document　will　have　perceived　that　the　judge　early　in　the　document

quotes　from　two　persons　as　belonging　to　the　Republican　party；　without

naming　them；　but　who　can　readily　be　recognized　as　being　Governor

Seward　of　New　York　and　myself。　　It　is　true　that　exactly　fifteen

months　ago　this　day；　I　believe；　I　for　the　first　time　expressed　a

sentiment　upon　this　subject；　and　in　such　a　manner　that　it　should　get

into　print；　that　the　public　might　see　it　beyond　the　circle　of　my

hearers；　and　my　expression　of　it　at　that　time　is　the　quotation　that

Judge　Douglas　makes。　He　has　not　made　the　quotation　with　accuracy；　but

justice　to　him　requires　me　to　say　that　it　is　sufficiently　accurate

not　to　change　the　sense。



The　sense　of　that　quotation　condensed　is　this：　that　this　slavery

element　is　a　durable　element　of　discord　among　us；　and　that　we　shall

probably　not　have　perfect　peace　in　this　country　with　it　until　it

either　masters　the　free　principle　in　our　government；　or　is　so　far

mastered　by　the　free　principle　as　for　the　public　mind　to　rest　in　the

belief　that　it　is　going　to　its　end。　　This　sentiment；　which　I　now

express　in　this　way；　was；　at　no　great　distance　of　time；　perhaps　in

different　language；　and　in　connection　with　some　collateral　ideas；

expressed　by　Governor　Seward。　　Judge　Douglas　has　been　so　much　annoyed

by　the　expression　of　that　sentiment　that　he　has　constantly；　I

believe；　in　almost　all　his　speeches　since　it　was　uttered；　been

referring　to　it。　　I　find　he　alluded　to　it　in　his　speech　here；　as　well

as　in　the　copyright　essay。　　I　do　not　now　enter　upon　this　for　the

purpose　of　making　an　elaborate　argument　to　show　that　we　were　right　in

the　expression　of　that　sentiment。　　In　other　words；　I　shall　not　stop

to　say　all　that　might　properly　be　said　upon　this　point；　but　I　only

ask　your　attention　to　it　for　the　purpose　of　making　one　or　two　points

upon　it。



If　you　will　read　the　copyright　essay；　you　will　discover　that　judge

Douglas　himself　says　a　controversy　between　the　American　Colonies　and

the　Government　of　Great　Britain　began　on　the　slavery　question　in

1699；　and　continued　from　that　time　until　the　Revolution；　and；　while

he　did　not　say　so；　we　all　know　that　it　has　continued　with　more　or

less　violence　ever　since　the　Revolution。



Then　we　need　not　appeal　to　history；　to　the　declarations　of　the

framers　of　the　government；　but　we　know　from　judge　Douglas　himself

that　slavery　began　to　be　an　element　of　discord　among　the　white　people

of　this　country　as　far　back　as　1699；　or　one　hundred　and　sixty　years

ago；　or　five　generations　of　men；counting　thirty　years　to　a

generation。　　Now；　it　would　seem　to　me　that　it　might　have　occurred　to

Judge　Douglas；　or　anybody　who　had　turned　his　attention　to　these

facts；　that　there　was　something　in　the　nature　of　that　thing；　slavery；

somewhat　durable　for　mischief　and　discord。



There　is　another　point　I　desire　to　make　in　regard　to　this　matter；

before　I　leave　it。　From　the　adoption　of　the　Constitution　down　to　1820

is　the　precise　period　of　our　history　when　we　had　comparative　peace

upon　this　question；the　precise　period　of　time　when　we　came　nearer

to　having　peace　about　it　than　any　other　time　of　that　entire　one

hundred　and　sixty　years　in　which　he　says　it　began；　or　of　the　eighty

years　of　our　own　Constitution。　　Then　it　would　be　worth　our　while　to

stop　and　examine　into　the　probable　reason　of　our　coming　nearer　to

having　peace　then　than　at　any　other　time。　　This　was　the　precise

period　of　time　in　which　our　fathers　adopted；　and　during　which　they

followed；　a　policy　restricting　the　spread　of　slavery；　and　the　whole

Union　was　acquiescing　in　it。　　The　whole　country　looked　forward　to　the

ultimate　extinction　of　the　institution。　　It　was　when　a　policy　had

been　adopted；　and　was　prevailing；　which　led　all　just　and　right…minded

men　to　suppose　that　slavery　was　gradually　coming　to　an　end；　and　that

they　might　be　quiet　about　it；　watching　it　as　it　expired。　　I　think

Judge　Dougl