the writings-4-第16部分

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！



why　he　did　not　keep　that　promise？　　That　fraud　has　been　traced　up　so

that　it　lies　between　him；　Harris；　and　Lanphier。　　There　is　little　room

for　escape　for　Lanphier。　　Lanphier　is　doing　the　Judge　good　service；

and　Douglas　desires　his　word　to　be　taken　for　the　truth。　　He　desires

Lanphier　to　be　taken　as　authority　in　what　he　states　in　his　newspaper。

He　desires　Harris　to　be　taken　as　a　man　of　vast　credibility；　and　when

this　thing　lies　among　them；　they　will　not　press　it　to　show　where　the

guilt　really　belongs。　　Now；　as　he　has　said　that　he　would　investigate

it；　and　implied　that　he　would　tell　us　the　result　of　his

investigation；　I　demand　of　him　to　tell　why　he　did　not　investigate　it；

if　he　did　not；　and　if　he　did；　why　he　won't　tell　the　result。　　I　call

upon　him　for　that。



This　is　the　third　time　that　Judge　Douglas　has　assumed　that　he　learned

about　these　resolutions　by　Harris's　attempting　to　use　them　against

Norton　on　the　floor　of　Congress。　　I　tell　Judge　Douglas　the　public

records　of　the　country　show　that　he　himself　attempted　it　upon

Trumbull　a　month　before　Harris　tried　them　on　Norton；　that　Harris　had

the　opportunity　of　learning　it　from　him；　rather　than　he　from　Harris。

I　now　ask　his　attention　to　that　part　of　the　record　on　the　case。　　My

friends；　I　am　not　disposed　to　detain　you　longer　in　regard　to　that

matter。



I　am　told　that　I　still　have　five　minutes　left。　　There　is　another

matter　I　wish　to　call　attention　to。　　He　says；　when　he　discovered

there　was　a　mistake　in　that　case；　he　came　forward　magnanimously；

without　my　calling　his　attention　to　it；　and　explained　it。　　I　will

tell　you　how　he　became　so　magnanimous。　　When　the　newspapers　of　our

side　had　discovered　and　published　it；　and　put　it　beyond　his　power　to

deny　it；　then　he　came　forward　and　made　a　virtue　of　necessity　by

acknowledging　it。　　Now　he　argues　that　all　the　point　there　was　in

those　resolutions；　although　never　passed　at　Springfield；　is　retained

by　their　being　passed　at　other　localities。　　Is　that　true？　　He　said　I

had　a　hand　in　passing　them；　in　his　opening　speech；　that　I　was　in　the

convention　and　helped　to　pass　them。　　Do　the　resolutions　touch　me　at

all？　　It　strikes　me　there　is　some　difference　between　holding　a　man

responsible　for　an　act　which　he　has　not　done　and　holding　him

responsible　for　an　act　that　he　has

done。　　You　will　judge　whether　there　is　any　difference　in　the　〃spots。〃

And　he　has　taken　credit　for　great　magnanimity　in　coming　forward　and

acknowledging　what　is　proved　on　him　beyond　even　the　capacity　of　Judge

Douglas　to　deny；　and　he　has　more　capacity　in　that　way　than　any　other

living　man。



Then　he　wants　to　know　why　I　won't　withdraw　the　charge　in　regard　to　a

conspiracy　to　make　slavery　national；　as　he　has　withdrawn　the　one　he

made。　　May　it　please　his　worship；　I　will　withdraw　it　when　it　is

proven　false　on　me　as　that　was　proven　false　on　him。　　I　will　add　a

little　more　than　that；　I　will　withdraw　it　whenever　a　reasonable　man

shall　be　brought　to　believe　that　the　charge　is　not　true。　　I　have

asked　Judge　Douglas's　attention　to　certain　matters　of　fact　tending　to

prove　the　charge　of　a　conspiracy　to　nationalize　slavery；　and　he　says

he　convinces　me　that　this　is　all　untrue　because　Buchanan　was　not　in

the　country　at　that　time；　and　because　the　Dred　Scott　case　had　not

then　got　into　the　Supreme　Court；　and　he　says　that　I　say　the

Democratic　owners　of　Dred　Scott　got　up　the　case。　　I　never　did　say

that　I　defy　Judge　Douglas　to　show　that　I　ever　said　so；　for　I　never

uttered　it。　　＇One　of　Mr。　Douglas's　reporters　gesticulated

affirmatively　at　Mr。　Lincoln。＇　I　don't　care　if　your　hireling　does　say

I　did；　I　tell　you　myself　that　I　never　said　the　〃Democratic〃　owners　of

Dred　Scott　got　up　the　case。　　I　have　never　pretended　to　know　whether

Dred　Scott's　owners　were　Democrats；　or　Abolitionists；　or　Freesoilers

or　Border　Ruffians。　　I　have　said　that　there　is　evidence　about　the

case　tending　to　show　that　it　was　a　made…up　case；　for　the　purpose　of

getting　that　decision。　　I　have　said　that　that　evidence　was　very

strong　in　the　fact　that　when　Dred　Scott　was　declared　to　be　a　slave；

the　owner　of　him　made　him　free；　showing　that　he　had　had　the　case

tried　and　the　question　settled　for　such　use　as　could　be　made　of　that

decision；　he　cared　nothing　about　the　property　thus　declared　to　be　his

by　that　decision。　　But　my　time　is　out；　and　I　can　say　no　more。







LAST　JOINT　DEBATE；



AT　ALTON；　OCTOBER　15；　1858



Mr。　LINCOLN'S　REPLY



LADIES　AND　GENTLEMEN：I　have　been　somewhat；　in　my　own　mind；

complimented　by　a　large　portion　of　Judge　Douglas's　speech；I　mean

that　portion　which　he　devotes　to　the　controversy　between　himself　and

the　present　Administration。　　This　is　the　seventh　time　Judge　Douglas

and　myself　have　met　in　these　joint　discussions；　and　he　has　been

gradually　improving　in　regard　to　his　war　with　the　Administration。　　At

Quincy；　day　before　yesterday；　he　was　a　little　more　severe　upon　the

Administration　than　I　had　heard　him　upon　any　occasion；　and　I　took

pains　to　compliment　him　for　it。　　I　then　told　him　to　give　it　to　them

with　all　the　power　he　had；　and　as　some　of　them　were　present；　I　told

them　I　would　be　very　much　obliged　if　they　would　give　it　to　him　in

about　the　same　way。　　I　take　it　he　has　now　vastly　improved　upon　the

attack　he　made　then　upon　the　Administration。　　I　flatter　myself　he　has

really　taken　my　advice　on　this　subject。　　All　I　can　say　now　is　to

re…commend　to　him　and　to　them　what　I　then　commended；to　prosecute

the　war　against　one　another　in　the　most　vigorous　manner。　　I　say　to

them　again：　〃Go　it；　husband！Go　it；　bear！〃



There　is　one　other　thing　I　will　mention　before　I　leave　this　branch　of

the　discussion；although　I　do　not　consider　it　much　of　my　business；

anyway。　　I　refer　to　that　part　of　the　Judge's　remarks　where　he

undertakes　to　involve　Mr。　Buchanan　in　an　inconsistency。　　He　reads

something　from　Mr。　Buchanan；　from　which　he　undertakes　to　involve　him

in　an　inconsistency；　and　he　gets　something　of　a　cheer　for　having　done

so。　　I　would　only　remind　the　Judge　that　while　he　is　very　valiantly

fighting　for　the　Nebraska　Bill　and　the　repeal　of　the　Missouri

Compromise；　it　has　been　but　a　little　while　since　he　was　the　valiant

advocate　of　the　Missouri　Compromise。　　I　want　to　know　if　Buchanan　has

not　as　much　right　to　be　inconsistent　as　Douglas　has？　　Has　Douglas　the

exclusive　right；　in　this　country；　of　being　on　all　sides　of　all

questions？　　Is　nobody　allowed　that　high　privilege　but　himself？　　Is　he

to　have　an　entire　monopoly　on　that　subject？



So　far　as　Judge　Douglas　addressed　his　speech　to　me；　or　so　far　as　it

was　about　me；　it　is　my　business　to　pay　some　attention　to　it。　　I　have

heard　the　Judge　state　two　or　three　times　what　he　has　stated　to…day；

that　in　a　speech　which　I　made　at　Springfield；　Illinois；　I　had　in　a

very　especial　manner　complained　that　the　Supreme　Court　in　the　Dred

Scott　case　had　decided　that　a　negro　could　never　be　a　citizen　of　the

United　States。　　I　have　omitted　by　some　accident　heretofore　to　analyze

this　statement；　and　it　is　required　of　me　to　notice　it　now。　　In　point

of　fact　it　is　untrue。　　I　never　have　complained　especially　of　the　Dred

Scott　decision　because　it　held　that　a　negro　could　not　be　a　citizen；

and　the　Judge　is　always　wrong　when　he　says　I　ever　did　so　complain　of

it。　　I　have　the　speech　here；　and　I　will　thank　him　or　any　of　his

friends　to　show　where　I　said　that　a　negro　should　be　a　citizen；　and

complained　especially　of　the　Dred　Scott　decision　because　it　declared

he　could　not　be　one。　　I　have　done　no　such　thing；　and　Judge　Douglas；

so　persistently　insisting　that　I　have　done　so；　has　strongly　impressed

me　with　the　belief　of　a　predetermination　on　his　part　to　misrepresent

me。　　He　could　not　get　his　foundation　for　insisting　that　I　was　in

favor　of　this　negro　equality　anywhere　else　as　well　as　he　could　by

assuming　that　untrue　proposition。　　Let　me　tell　this　audience　what　is

true　in　regard　to　that　matter；　and　the　means　by　which　they　may

correct　me　if　I　do　not　tell　them　truly　is　by　a　recurrence　to　the

speech　itself。　　I　spoke　of　the　Dred　Scott　decision　in　my　Springfield

speech；　and　I　was　then　endeavoring　to　prove　that　the　Dred　Scott

decision　was　a　portion　of　a　system　or　scheme　to　make　slavery　national

in　this　country。　　I　pointed　out　what　things　had　been　decided　by　the

court。　　I　mentioned　as　a　fact　that　they　had　decided　that　a　negro

could　not　be　a　citizen；　that　they　had　done　so；　as　I　supposed；　to

deprive　the　negro；　under　all　circumstances；　of　the　remotest

possibility　of　ever　becoming　a　citizen　and　claiming　the　rights　of　a

citizen　of　the　United　States　under　a　certain　clause　of　the

Constitution。　　I　stated　that；　without　making　any　complaint　of　it　at

all。　　I　then　went　on　and　stated　the　other　points　decided　in　the　case；

namely；　that　the　bringing　of　a　negro　into　the　State　of　Illinois　and

holding　him　in　slavery　for　two　years　here　was　a　matter　in　regard　to

which　they　would　not　decide　whether　it　would　make　him　free　or　not；

that　they　decided　the　further　point　that　taking　him　into　a　United

States　Territory　where　slavery　was　prohibited　by　Act　of　Congress　did

not　make　him　free；　because　that　Act　of　Congress；　as　they　held；　was

unconstitutional。　　I　mentioned　these　three　things　as　making　up　the

points　decided　in　that　case。　　I　mentioned　them　in　a　lump；　taken　in

connection　with　the　introduction　of　the　Nebraska　Bill；　and　the

amendment　of　Chase；　offered　at　the　time；　declaratory　of　the　right　of

the　people　of　the　Territories　to　exclude　slavery；　which　was　voted

down　by　the　friends　of　the　bill。　　I　mentioned　all　these　things

together；　as　evidence　tending　to　prove　a　combination　and　conspiracy

to　make　the　institution　of　slavery　national。　　In　that　connection　and

in　that　way　I　mentioned　the　decision　on　the　point　that　a　negro　could

not　be　a　citizen；　and　in　no　other　connection。



Out　of　this　Judge　Douglas　builds　up　his　beautiful　fabrication　of　my

purpose　to　introduce　a　perfect　social　and　political　equality　between

the　white　and　black　races。　　His　assertion　that　I