the writings-4-第18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！



slave　and　part　free。　　I　insist　that　they　found　the　institution　of

slavery　existing　here。　　They　did　not　make　it　so　but　they　left　it　so

because　they　knew　of　no　way　to　get　rid　of　it　at　that　time。　　When

Judge　Douglas　undertakes　to　say　that；　as　a　matter　of　choice；　the

fathers　of　the　government　made　this　nation　part　slave　and　part　free；

he　assumes　what　is　historically　a　falsehood。　　More　than　that：　when

the　fathers　of　the　government　cut　off　the　source　of　slavery　by　the

abolition　of　the　slave…trade；　and　adopted　a　system　of　restricting　it

from　the　new　Territories　where　it　had　not　existed；　I　maintain　that

they　placed　it　where　they　understood；　and　all　sensible　men

understood；　it　was　in　the　course　of　ultimate　extinction；　and　when

Judge　Douglas　asks　me　why　it　cannot　continue　as　our　fathers　made　it；

I　ask　him　why　he　and　his　friends　could　not　let　it　remain　as　our

fathers　made　it？



It　is　precisely　all　I　ask　of　him　in　relation　to　the　institution　of

slavery；　that　it　shall　be　placed　upon　the　basis　that　our　fathers

placed　it　upon。　　Mr。　Brooks；　of　South　Carolina；　once　said；　and　truly

said；　that　when　this　government　was　established；　no　one　expected　the

institution　of　slavery　to　last　until　this　day；　and　that　the　men　who

formed　this　government　were　wiser　and　better　than　the　men　of　these

days；　but　the　men　of　these　days　had　experience　which　the　fathers　had

not；　and　that　experience　had　taught　them　the　invention　of　the

cotton…gin；　and　this　had　made　the　perpetuation　of　the　institution　of

slavery　a　necessity　in　this　country。　　Judge　Douglas　could　not　let　it

stand　upon　the　basis　which　our　fathers　placed　it；　but　removed　it；　and

put　it　upon　the　cotton…gin　basis。　　It　is　a　question；　therefore；　for

him　and　his　friends　to　answer；　why　they　could　not　let　it　remain　where

the　fathers　of　the　government　originally　placed　it。　　I　hope　nobody

has　understood　me　as　trying　to　sustain　the　doctrine　that　we　have　a

right　to　quarrel　with　Kentucky；　or　Virginia；　or　any　of　the　slave

States；　about　the　institution　of　slavery；thus　giving　the　Judge　an

opportunity　to　be　eloquent　and　valiant　against　us　in　fighting　for

their　rights。　　I　expressly　declared　in　my　opening　speech　that　I　had

neither　the　inclination　to　exercise；　nor　the　belief　in　the　existence

of；　the　right　to　interfere　with　the　States　of　Kentucky　or　Virginia　in

doing　as　they　pleased　with　slavery　Or　any　other　existing　institution。

Then　what　becomes　of　all　his　eloquence　in　behalf　of　the　rights　of

States；　which　are　assailed　by　no　living　man？



But　I　have　to　hurry　on；　for　I　have　but　a　half　hour。　　The　Judge　has

informed　me；　or　informed　this　audience；　that　the　Washington　Union　is

laboring　for　my　election　to　the　United　States　Senate。　　This　is　news

to　me；not　very　ungrateful　news　either。　　＇Turning　to　Mr。　W。　　H。

Carlin；　who　was　on　the　stand＇I　hope　that　Carlin　will　be　elected　to

the　State　Senate；　and　will　vote　for　me。　　＇Mr。　Carlin　shook　his　head。＇

Carlin　don't　fall　in；　I　perceive；　and　I　suppose　he　will　not　do　much

for　me；　but　I　am　glad　of　all　the　support　I　can　get；　anywhere；　if　I

can　get　it　without　practicing　any　deception　to　obtain　it。　　In　respect

to　this　large　portion　of　Judge　Douglas's　speech　in　which　he　tries　to

show　that　in　the　controversy　between　himself　and　the　Administration

party　he　is　in　the　right；　I　do　not　feel　myself　at　all　competent　or

inclined　to　answer　him。　　I　say　to　him；　〃Give　it　to　them；give　it　to

them　just　all　you　can！〃　and；　on　the　other　hand；　I　say　to　Carlin；　and

Jake　Davis；　and　to　this　man　Wogley　up　here　in　Hancock；　〃Give　it　to

Douglas；　just　pour　it　into　him！



Now；　in　regard　to　this　matter　of　the　Dred　Scott　decision；　I　wish　to

say　a　word　or　two。　　After　all；　the　Judge　will　not　say　whether；　if　a

decision　is　made　holding　that　the　people　of　the　States　cannot　exclude

slavery；　he　will　support　it　or　not。　　He　obstinately　refuses　to　say

what　he　will　do　in　that　case。　　The　judges　of　the　Supreme　Court　as

obstinately　refused　to　say　what　they　would　do　on　this　subject。

Before　this　I　reminded　him　that　at　Galesburgh　he　said　the　judges　had

expressly　declared　the　contrary；　and　you　remember　that　in　my　Opening

speech　I　told　him　I　had　the　book　containing　that　decision　here；　and　I

would　thank　him　to　lay　his　finger　on　the　place　where　any　such　thing

was　said。　　He　has　occupied　his　hour　and　a　half；　and　he　has　not

ventured　to　try　to　sustain　his　assertion。　　He　never　will。　　But　he　is

desirous　of　knowing　how　we　are　going　to　reverse　that　Dred　Scott

decision。　　Judge　Douglas　ought　to　know　how。　　Did　not　he　and　his

political　friends　find　a　way　to　reverse　the　decision　of　that　same

court　in　favor　of　the　constitutionality　of　the　National　Bank？　　Didn't

they　find　a　way　to　do　it　so　effectually　that　they　have　reversed　it　as

completely　as　any　decision　ever　was　reversed；　so　far　as　its　practical

operation　is　concerned？



And　let　me　ask　you；　did　n't　Judge　Douglas　find　a　way　to　reverse　the

decision　of　our　Supreme　Court　when　it　decided　that　Carlin's　father

old　Governor　Carlin　had　not　the　constitutional　power　to　remove　a

Secretary　of　State？　　Did　he　not　appeal　to　the　〃MOBS；〃　as　he　calls

them？　　Did　he　not　make　speeches　in　the　lobby　to　show　how　villainous

that　decision　was；　and　how　it　ought　to　be　overthrown？　　Did　he　not

succeed；　too；　in　getting　an　act　passed　by　the　Legislature　to　have　it

overthrown？　　And　did　n't　he　himself　sit　down　on　that　bench　as　one　of

the　five　added　judges；　who　were　to　overslaugh　the　four　old　ones；

getting　his　name　of　〃judge〃　in　that　way；　and　no　other？　　If　there　is　a

villainy　in　using　disrespect　or　making　opposition　to　Supreme　Court

decisions；　I　commend　it　to　Judge　Douglas's　earnest　consideration。　　I

know　of　no　man　in　the　State　of　Illinois　who　ought　to　know　so　well

about　how　much　villainy　it　takes　to　oppose　a　decision　of　the　Supreme

Court　as　our　honorable　friend　Stephen　A。　　Douglas。



Judge　Douglas　also　makes　the　declaration　that　I　say　the　Democrats　are

bound　by　the　Dred　Scott　decision；　while　the　Republicans　are　not。　　In

the　sense　in　which　he　argues；　I　never　said　it；　but　I　will　tell　you

what　I　have　said　and　what　I　do　not　hesitate　to　repeat　to…day。　　I　have

said　that　as　the　Democrats　believe　that　decision　to　be　correct；　and

that　the　extension　of　slavery　is　affirmed　in　the　National

Constitution；　they　are　bound　to　support　it　as　such；　and　I　will　tell

you　here　that　General　Jackson　once　said　each　man　was　bound　to　support

the　Constitution　〃as　he　understood　it。〃　　Now；　Judge　Douglas

understands　the　Constitution　according　to　the　Dred　Scott　decision；

and　he　is　bound　to　support　it　as　he　understands　it。　　I　understand　it

another　way；　and　therefore　I　am　bound　to　support　it　in　the　way　in

which　I　understand　it。　　And　as　Judge　Douglas　believes　that　decision

to　be　correct；　I　will　remake　that　argument　if　I　have　time　to　do　so。

Let　me　talk　to　some　gentleman　down　there　among　you　who　looks　me　in

the　face。　　We　will　say　you　are　a　member　of　the　Territorial

Legislature；　and；　like　Judge　Douglas；　you　believe　that　the　right　to

take　and　hold　slaves　there　is　a　constitutional　right　The　first　thing

you　do　is　to　swear　you　will　support　the　Constitution1；　and　all　rights

guaranteed　therein；　that　you　will；　whenever　your　neighbor　needs　your

legislation　to　support　his　constitutional　rights；　not　withhold　that

legislation。　　If　you　withhold　that　necessary　legislation　for　the

support　of　the　Constitution　and　constitutional　rights；　do　you　not

commit　perjury？　　I　ask　every　sensible　man　if　that　is　not　so？　　That　is

undoubtedly　just　so；　say　what　you　please。　　Now；　that　is　precisely

what　Judge　Douglas　says；　that　this　is　a　constitutional　right。　　Does

the　Judge　mean　to　say　that　the　Territorial　Legislature　in　legislating

may；　by　withholding　necessary　laws；　or　by　passing　unfriendly　laws；

nullify　that　constitutional　right？　　Does　he　mean　to　say　that？　　Does

he　mean　to　ignore　the　proposition　so　long　and　well　established　in

law；　that　what　you　cannot　do　directly；　you　cannot　do　indirectly？

Does　he　mean　that？　　The　truth　about　the　matter　is　this：　Judge　Douglas

h