the writings-5-第8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！



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　Douglas　might　have　perceived　that　too；　and　whether　he　did　or

not；　it　is　worth　the　attention　of　fair…minded　men；　here　and

elsewhere；　to　consider　whether　that　is　not　the　truth　of　the　case。　　If

he　had　looked　at　these　two　facts；that　this　matter　has　been　an

element　of　discord　for　one　hundred　and　sixty　years　among　this　people；

and　that　the　only　comparative　peace　we　have　had　about　it　was　when

that　policy　prevailed　in　this　government　which　he　now　wars　upon；　he

might　then；　perhaps；　have　been　brought　to　a　more　just　appreciation　of

what　I　said　fifteen　months　ago；that　〃a　house　divided　against　itself

cannot　stand。　　I　believe　that　this　government　cannot　endure

permanently；　half　slave　and　half　free。　I　do　not　expect　the　house　to

fall；　I　do　not　expect　the　Union　to　dissolve；　but　I　do　expect　it　will

cease　to　be　divided。　　It　will　become　all　one　thing；　or　all　the　other。

Either　the　opponents　of　slavery　will　arrest　the　further　spread　of　it；

and　place　it　where　the　public　mind　will　rest　in　the　belief　that　it　is

in　the　course　of　ultimate　extinction；　or　its　advocates　will　push　it

forward　until　it　shall　become　alike　lawful　in　all　the　States；　old　as

well　as　new；　North　as　well　as　South。〃　　That　was　my　sentiment　at　that

time。　　In　connection　with　it；　I　said：　〃We　are　now　far　into　the　fifth

year　since　a　policy　was　inaugurated　with　the　avowed　object　and

confident　promise　of　putting　an　end　to　slavery　agitation。　　Under　the

operation　of　the　policy　that　agitation　has　not　only　not　ceased；　but

has　constantly　augmented。〃　　I　now　say　to　you　here　that　we　are

advanced　still　farther　into　the　sixth　year　since　that　policy　of　Judge

Douglasthat　popular　sovereignty　of　hisfor　quieting　the　slavery

question　was　made　the　national　policy。　　Fifteen　months　more　have　been

added　since　I　uttered　that　sentiment；　and　I　call　upon　you　and　all

other　right…minded　men　to　say　whether　that　fifteen　months　have　belied

or　corroborated　my　words。



While　I　am　here　upon　this　subject；　I　cannot　but　express　gratitude

that　this　true　view　of　this　element　of　discord　among　usas　I　believe

it　isis　attracting　more　and　more　attention。　　I　do　not　believe　that

Governor　Seward　uttered　that　sentiment　because　I　had　done　so　before；

but　because　he　reflected　upon　this　subject　and　saw　the　truth　of　it。

Nor　do　I　believe　because　Governor　Seward　or　I　uttered　it　that　Mr。

Hickman　of　Pennsylvania；　in；　different　language；　since　that　time；　has

declared　his　belief　in　the　utter　antagonism　which　exists　between　the

principles　of　liberty　and　slavery。　　You　see　we　are　multiplying。　　Now；

while　I　am　speaking　of　Hickman；　let　me　say；　I　know　but　little　about

him。　　I　have　never　seen　him；　and　know　scarcely　anything　about　the

man；　but　I　will　say　this　much　of　him：　Of　all　the　anti…Lecompton

Democracy　that　have　been　brought　to　my　notice；　he　alone　has　the　true；

genuine　ring　of　the　metal。　　And　now；　without　indorsing　anything　else

he　has　said；　I　will　ask　this　audience　to　give　three　cheers　for

Hickman。　＇The　audience　responded　with　three　rousing　cheers　for

Hickman。＇



Another　point　in　the　copyright　essay　to　which　I　would　ask　your

attention　is　rather　a　feature　to　be　extracted　from　the　whole　thing；

than　from　any　express　declaration　of　it　at　any　point。　　It　is　a

general　feature　of　that　document；　and；　indeed；　of　all　of　Judge

Douglas's　discussions　of　this　question；　that　the　Territories　of　the

United　States　and　the　States　of　this　Union　are　exactly　alike；　that

there　is　no　difference　between　them　at　all；　that　the　Constitution

applies　to　the　Territories　precisely　as　it　does　to　the　States；　and

that　the　United　States　Government；　under　the　Constitution；　may　not　do

in　a　State　what　it　may　not　do　in　a　Territory；　and　what　it　must　do　in

a　State　it　must　do　in　a　Territory。　　Gentlemen；　is　that　a　true　view　of

the　case？　　It　is　necessary　for　this　squatter　sovereignty；　but　is　it

true？



Let　us　consider。　　What　does　it　depend　upon？　　It　depends　altogether

upon　the　proposition　that　the　States　must；　without　the　interference

of　the　General　Government；　do　all　those　things　that　pertain

exclusively　to　themselves；that　are　local　in　their　nature；　that　have

no　connection　with　the　General　Government。　　After　Judge　Douglas　has

established　this　proposition；　which　nobody　disputes　or　ever　has

disputed；　he　proceeds　to　assume；　without　proving　it；　that　slavery　is

one　of　those　little；　unimportant；　trivial　matters　which　are　of　just

about　as　much　consequence　as　the　question　would　be　to　me　whether　my

neighbor　should　raise　horned　cattle　or　plant　tobacco；　that　there　is

no　moral　question　about　it；　but　that　it　is　altogether　a　matter　of

dollars　and　cents；　that　when　a　new　Territory　is　opened　for

settlement；　the　first　man　who　goes　into　it　may　plant　there　a　thing

which；　like　the　Canada　thistle　or　some　other　of　those　pests　of　the

soil；　cannot　be　dug　out　by　the　millions　of　men　who　will　come

thereafter；　that　it　is　one　of　those　little　things　that　is　so　trivial

in　its　nature　that　it　has　nor　effect　upon　anybody　save　the　few　men

who　first　plant　upon　the　soil；　that　it　is　not　a　thing　which　in　any

way　affects　the　family　of　communities　composing　these　States；　nor　any

way　endangers　the　General　Government。　Judge　Douglas　ignores

altogether　the　very　well　known　fact　that　we　have　never　had　a　serious

menace　to　our　political　existence；　except　it　sprang　from　this　thing；

which　he　chooses　to　regard　as　only　upon　a　par　with　onions　and

potatoes。



Turn　it；　and　contemplate　it　in　another　view。　　He　says　that；　according

to　his　popular　sovereignty；　the　General　Government　may　give　to　the

Territories　governors；　judges；　marshals；　secretaries；　and　all　the

other　chief　men　to　govern　them；　but　they；　must　not　touch　upon　this

other　question。　　Why？　　The　question　of　who　shall　be　governor　of　a

Territory　for　a　year　or　two；　and　pass　away；　without　his　track　being

left　upon　the　soil；　or　an　act　which　he　did　for　good　or　for　evil　being

left　behind；　is　a　question　of　vast　national　magnitude；　it　is　so　much

opposed　in　its　nature　to　locality　that　the　nation　itself　must　decide

it：　while　this　other　matter　of　planting　slavery　upon　a　soil；a　thing

which；　once　planted；　cannot　be　eradicated　by　the　succeeding　millions

who　have　as　much　right　there　as　the　first　comers；　or；　if　eradicated；

not　without　infinite　difficulty　and　a　long　struggle；　he　considers　the

power　to　prohibit　it　as　one　of　these　little　local；　trivial　things

that　the　nation　ought　not　to　say　a　word　about；　that　it　affects　nobody

save　the　few　men　who　are　there。



Take　these　two　things　and　consider　them　together；　present　the

question　of　planting　a　State　with　the　institution　of　slavery　by　the

side　of　a　question　who　shall　be　Governor　of　Kansas　for　a　year　or　two；

and　is　there　a　man　here；　is　there　a　man　on　earth；　who　would　not　say

the　governor　question　is　the　little　one；　and　the　slavery　question　is

the　great　one？　　I　ask　any　honest　Democrat　if　the　small；　the　local；

and　the　trivial　and　temporary　question　is　not；　Who　shall　be　governor？

while　the　durable；　the　important；　and　the　mischievous　one　is；　Shall

this　soil　be　planted　with　slavery？



This　is　an　idea；　I　suppose；　which　has　arisen　in　Judge　Douglas's　mind

from　his　peculiar　structure。　　I　suppose　the　institution　of　slavery

really　looks　small　to　him。　　He　is　so　put　up　by　nature　that　a　lash

upon　his　back　would　hurt　him；　but　a　lash　upon　anybody　else's　back

does　not　hurt　him。　　That　is　the　build　of　the　man；　and　consequently　he

looks　upon　the　matter　of　slavery　in　this　unimportant　light。



Judge　Douglas　ought　to　remember；　when　he　is　endeavoring　to　force　this

policy　upon　the　American　people；　that　while　he　is　put　up　in　that　way；

a　good　many　are　not。　　He　ought　to　remember　that　there　was　once　in

this　country　a　man　by　the　name　of　Thomas　Jefferson；　supposed　to　be　a

Democrat；a　man　whose　principles　and　policy　are　not　very　prevalent

amongst　Democrats　to…day；　it　is　true；　but　that　man　did　not　take

exactly　this　view　of　the　insignificance