diff options
| author | Roger Frank <rfrank@pglaf.org> | 2025-10-15 05:19:36 -0700 |
|---|---|---|
| committer | Roger Frank <rfrank@pglaf.org> | 2025-10-15 05:19:36 -0700 |
| commit | b652b9db58fd0f977d977eebdbb4b08719221877 (patch) | |
| tree | 3c88f8b37486eeb41c3000f7fdbf070a558b3188 /2655-h | |
Diffstat (limited to '2655-h')
| -rw-r--r-- | 2655-h/2655-h.htm | 5013 |
1 files changed, 5013 insertions, 0 deletions
diff --git a/2655-h/2655-h.htm b/2655-h/2655-h.htm new file mode 100644 index 0000000..749962e --- /dev/null +++ b/2655-h/2655-h.htm @@ -0,0 +1,5013 @@ +<?xml version="1.0" encoding="us-ascii"?> + +<!DOCTYPE html + PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD XHTML 1.0 Strict//EN" + "http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml1/DTD/xhtml1-strict.dtd" > + +<html xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml" lang="en"> + <head> + <title> + The Papers and Writings of Abraham Lincoln, Volume Three + </title> + <style type="text/css" xml:space="preserve"> + + body { margin:5%; background:#faebd7; text-align:justify} + P { text-indent: 1em; margin-top: .25em; margin-bottom: .25em; } + H1,H2,H3,H4,H5,H6 { text-align: center; margin-left: 15%; margin-right: 15%; } + hr { width: 50%; text-align: center;} + .foot { margin-left: 20%; margin-right: 20%; text-align: justify; text-indent: -3em; font-size: 90%; } + blockquote {font-size: 97%; font-style: italic; margin-left: 10%; margin-right: 10%;} + .mynote {background-color: #DDE; color: #000; padding: .5em; margin-left: 10%; margin-right: 10%; font-family: sans-serif; font-size: 95%;} + .toc { margin-left: 10%; margin-bottom: .75em;} + .toc2 { margin-left: 20%;} + div.fig { display:block; margin:0 auto; text-align:center; } + .figleft {float: left; margin-left: 0%; margin-right: 1%;} + .figright {float: right; margin-right: 0%; margin-left: 1%;} + pre { font-style: italic; font-size: 90%; margin-left: 10%;} + +</style> + </head> + <body> +<pre xml:space="preserve"> + +The Project Gutenberg EBook of The Papers And Writings Of Abraham Lincoln, +Volume Three, by Abraham Lincoln + +This eBook is for the use of anyone anywhere at no cost and with +almost no restrictions whatsoever. You may copy it, give it away or +re-use it under the terms of the Project Gutenberg License included +with this eBook or online at www.gutenberg.org + + +Title: The Papers And Writings Of Abraham Lincoln, Volume Three + Constitutional Edition + +Author: Abraham Lincoln + +Commentator: Theodore Roosevelt, Carl Schurz, and Joseph Choate + +Editor: Arthur Brooks Lapsley + +Release Date: July 5, 2009 [EBook #2655] +Last Updated: October 29, 2012 + +Language: English + +Character set encoding: ASCII + +*** START OF THIS PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK LINCOLN'S PAPERS *** + + + + +Produced by David Widger + + + + + +</pre> + <p> + <br /><br /> + </p> + <h1> + THE PAPERS AND WRITINGS OF ABRAHAM LINCOLN + </h1> + <h2> + VOLUME THREE + </h2> + <h3> + CONSTITUTIONAL EDITION + </h3> + <h4> + Edited by Arthur Brooks Lapsley + </h4> + <p> + <br /> <br /> + </p> + <hr /> + <p> + <br /> <br /> + </p> + <blockquote> + <p class="toc"> + <big><b>CONTENTS</b></big> + </p> + <p> + <br /> + </p> + <p class="toc"> + <a href="#link2H_4_0001"> <b>THE LINCOLN-DOUGLAS DEBATES I</b> </a> + </p> + <p class="toc"> + <a href="#link2H_4_0002"> SPEECH AT CHICAGO, JULY 10, 1858. </a> + </p> + <p class="toc"> + <a href="#link2H_4_0003"> SPEECH AT SPRINGFIELD, JULY 17, 1858. </a> + </p> + <p class="toc"> + <a href="#link2H_4_0004"> CORRESPONDENCE BETWEEN LINCOLN AND DOUGLAS + </a> + </p> + <p class="toc"> + <a href="#link2H_4_0005"> MR. LINCOLN TO MR. DOUGLAS. </a> + </p> + <p class="toc"> + <a href="#link2H_4_0006"> Mr. DOUGLAS TO Mr. LINCOLN. </a> + </p> + <p class="toc"> + <a href="#link2H_4_0007"> Mr. LINCOLN TO Mr. DOUGLAS. </a> + </p> + <p class="toc"> + <a href="#link2H_4_0008"> FIRST JOINT DEBATE, AT OTTAWA, </a> + </p> + <p class="toc"> + <a href="#link2H_4_0009"> SECOND JOINT DEBATE, AT FREEPORT, </a> + </p> + <p class="toc"> + <a href="#link2H_4_0010"> Mr. LINCOLN'S REJOINDER. </a> + </p> + <p class="toc"> + <a href="#link2H_4_0011"> THIRD JOINT DEBATE, AT JONESBORO, </a> + </p> + <p class="toc"> + <a href="#link2H_4_0012"> INTERROGATORIES: </a> + </p> + <p class="toc"> + <a href="#link2H_4_0013"> CAMPBELL'S REPLY. </a> + </p> + </blockquote> + <p> + <br /> <br /> + </p> + <hr /> + <p> + <br /> <br /> <a name="link2H_4_0001" id="link2H_4_0001"> + <!-- H2 anchor --> </a> + </p> + <div style="height: 4em;"> + <br /><br /><br /><br /> + </div> + <h1> + THE LINCOLN-DOUGLAS DEBATES I + </h1> + <p> + POLITICAL SPEECHES & DEBATES of LINCOLN WITH DOUGLAS In the Senatorial + Campaign of 1858 in Illinois SPEECH AT SPRINGFIELD, JUNE 17, 1858 + </p> + <p> + [The following speech was delivered at Springfield, Ill., at the close of + the Republican State Convention held at that time and place, and by which + Convention Mr. LINCOLN had been named as their candidate for United States + Senator. Mr. DOUGLAS was not present.] + </p> + <p> + Mr. PRESIDENT AND GENTLEMEN OF THE CONVENTION:—If we could first + know where we are, and whither we are tending, we could better judge what + to do, and how to do it. We are now far into the fifth year since a policy + was initiated with the avowed object and confident promise of putting an + end to slavery agitation. Under the operation of that policy, that + agitation has not only not ceased, but has constantly augmented. In my + opinion, it will not cease until a crisis shall have been reached and + passed. "A house divided against itself cannot stand." I believe this + government cannot endure permanently half slave and half free. I do not + expect the Union to be dissolved; I do not expect the house to fall; 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 shall rest in the belief + that it is in the course of ultimate extinction, or its advocates will + push it forward till it shall become alike lawful in all the States, old + as well as new, North as well as South. + </p> + <p> + Have we no tendency to the latter condition? + </p> + <p> + Let any one who doubts, carefully contemplate that now almost complete + legal combination-piece of machinery, so to speak compounded of the + Nebraska doctrine and the Dred Scott decision. Let him consider, not only + what work the machinery is adapted to do, and how well adapted, but also + let him study the history of its construction, and trace, if he can, or + rather fail, if he can, to trace the evidences of design, and concert of + action, among its chief architects, from the beginning. + </p> + <p> + The new year of 1854 found slavery excluded from more than half the States + by State Constitutions, and from most of the National territory by + Congressional prohibition. Four days later, commenced the struggle which + ended in repealing that Congressional prohibition. This opened all the + National territory to slavery, and was the first point gained. + </p> + <p> + But, so far, Congress only had acted, and an indorsement by the people, + real or apparent, was indispensable to save the point already gained, and + give chance for more. + </p> + <p> + This necessity had not been overlooked, but had been provided for, as well + as might be, in the notable argument of "squatter sovereignty," otherwise + called "sacred right of self-government," which latter phrase, though + expressive of the only rightful basis of any government, was so perverted + in this attempted use of it as to amount to just this: That if any one man + choose to enslave another, no third man shall be allowed to object. That + argument was incorporated into the Nebraska Bill itself, in the language + which follows: + </p> + <p> + "It being the true intent and meaning of this Act not to legislate slavery + into any Territory or State, nor to exclude it therefrom, but to leave the + people thereof perfectly free to form and regulate their domestic + institutions in their own way, subject only to the Constitution of the + United States." + </p> + <p> + Then opened the roar of loose declamation in favor of "squatter + sovereignty," and "sacred right of self-government." "But," said + opposition members, "let us amend the bill so as to expressly declare that + the people of the Territory may exclude slavery." "Not we," said the + friends of the measure, and down they voted the amendment. + </p> + <p> + While the Nebraska Bill was passing through Congress, a law case, + involving the question of a negro's freedom, by reason of his owner having + voluntarily taken him first into a free State, and then into a territory + covered by the Congressional Prohibition, and held him as a slave for a + long time in each, was passing through the United States Circuit Court for + the District of Missouri; and both Nebraska Bill and lawsuit were brought + to a decision in the same month of May, 1854. The negro's name was "Dred + Scott," which name now designates the decision finally made in the case. + Before the then next Presidential election, the law case came to, and was + argued in, the Supreme Court of the United States; but the decision of it + was deferred until after the election. Still, before the election, Senator + Trumbull, on the floor of the Senate, requested the leading advocate of + the Nebraska Bill to state his opinion whether the people of a territory + can constitutionally exclude slavery from their limits; and the latter + answers: "That is a question for the Supreme Court." + </p> + <p> + The election came. Mr. Buchanan was elected, and the indorsement, such as + it was, secured. That was the second point gained. The indorsement, + however, fell short of a clear popular majority by nearly four hundred + thousand votes,(approximately 10% of the vote) and so, perhaps, was not + overwhelmingly reliable and satisfactory. The outgoing President, in his + last annual message, as impressively as possible echoed back upon the + people the weight and authority of the indorsement. The Supreme Court met + again, did not announce their decision, but ordered a reargument. The + Presidential inauguration came, and still no decision of the court; but + the incoming President, in his inaugural address, fervently exhorted the + people to abide by the forth-coming decision, whatever it might be. Then, + in a few days, came the decision. + </p> + <p> + The reputed author of the Nebraska Bill finds an early occasion to make a + speech at this capital indorsing the Dred Scott decision, and vehemently + denouncing all opposition to it. The new President, too, seizes the early + occasion of the Silliman letter to indorse and strongly construe that + decision, and to express his astonishment that any different view had ever + been entertained! + </p> + <p> + At length a squabble springs up between the President and the author of + the Nebraska Bill, on the mere question of fact, whether the Lecompton + Constitution was or was not in any just sense made by the people of + Kansas; and in that quarrel the latter declares that all he wants is a + fair vote for the people, and that he cares not whether slavery be voted + down or voted up. I do not understand his declaration, that he cares not + whether slavery be voted down or voted up, to be intended by him other + than as an apt definition of the policy he would impress upon the public + mind,—the principle for which he declares he has suffered so much, + and is ready to suffer to the end. And well may he cling to that + principle! If he has any parental feeling, well may he cling to it. That + principle is the only shred left of his original Nebraska doctrine. Under + the Dred Scott decision "squatter sovereignty" squatted out of existence, + tumbled down like temporary scaffolding; like the mould at the foundry, + served through one blast, and fell back into loose sand; helped to carry + an election, and then was kicked to the winds. His late joint struggle + with the Republicans, against the Lecompton Constitution, involves nothing + of the original Nebraska doctrine. That struggle was made on a point—the + right of a people to make their own constitution—upon which he and + the Republicans have never differed. + </p> + <p> + The several points of the Dred Scott decision, in connection with Senator + Douglas's "care not" policy, constitute the piece of machinery, in its + present state of advancement. This was the third point gained. The working + points of that machinery are: + </p> + <p> + Firstly, That no negro slave, imported as such from Africa, and no + descendant of such slave, can ever be a citizen of any State, in the sense + of that term as used in the Constitution of the United States. This point + is made in order to deprive the negro, in every possible event, of the + benefit of that provision of the United States Constitution which declares + that "The citizens of each State shall be entitled to all privileges and + immunities of citizens in the several States." + </p> + <p> + Secondly, That, "subject to the Constitution of the United States," + neither Congress nor a Territorial Legislature can exclude slavery from + any United States Territory. This point is made in order that individual + men may fill up the Territories with slaves, without danger of losing them + as property, and thus to enhance the chances of permanency to the + institution through all the future. + </p> + <p> + Thirdly, That whether the holding a negro in actual slavery in a free + State makes him free, as against the holder, the United States courts will + not decide, but will leave to be decided by the courts of any slave State + the negro may be forced into by the master. This point is made, not to be + pressed immediately; but, if acquiesced in for a while, and apparently + indorsed by the people at an election, then to sustain the logical + conclusion that what Dred Scott's master might lawfully do with Dred + Scott, in the free State of Illinois, every other master may lawfully do + with any other one, or one thousand slaves, in Illinois, or in any other + free State. + </p> + <p> + Auxiliary to all this, and working hand in hand with it, the Nebraska + doctrine, or what is left of it, is to educate and mould public opinion, + at least Northern public opinion, not to care whether slavery is voted + down or voted up. This shows exactly where we now are; and partially, + also, wither we are tending. + </p> + <p> + It will throw additional light on the latter, to go back and run the mind + over the string of historical facts already stated. Several things will + now appear less dark and mysterious than they did when they were + transpiring. The people were to be left "perfectly free," "subject only to + the Constitution." What the Constitution had to do with it, outsiders + could not then see. Plainly enough now,—it was an exactly fitted + niche, for the Dred Scott decision to afterward come in, and declare the + perfect freedom of the people to be just no freedom at all. Why was the + amendment, expressly declaring the right of the people, voted down? + Plainly enough now,—the adoption of it would have spoiled the niche + for the Dred Scott decision. Why was the court decision held up? Why even + a Senator's individual opinion withheld, till after the Presidential + election? Plainly enough now,—the speaking out then would have + damaged the "perfectly free" argument upon which the election was to be + carried. Why the outgoing President's felicitation on the indorsement? Why + the delay of a reargument? Why the incoming President's advance + exhortation in favor of the decision? These things look like the cautious + patting and petting of a spirited horse preparatory to mounting him, when + it is dreaded that he may give the rider a fall. And why the hasty + after-indorsement of the decision by the President and others? + </p> + <p> + We cannot absolutely know that all these exact adaptations are the result + of preconcert. But when we see a lot of framed timbers, different portions + of which we know have been gotten out at different times and places and by + different workmen, Stephen, Franklin, Roger, and James, for instance, and + when we see these timbers joined together, and see they exactly make the + frame of a house or a mill, all the tenons and mortises exactly fitting, + and all the lengths and proportions of the different pieces exactly + adapted to their respective places, and not a piece too many or too few,—not + omitting even scaffolding,—or, if a single piece be lacking, we see + the place in the frame exactly fitted and prepared yet to bring such piece + in,—in such a case, we find it impossible not to believe that + Stephen and Franklin and Roger and James all understood one another from + the beginning, and all worked upon a common plan or draft drawn up before + the first blow was struck. + </p> + <p> + It should not be overlooked that by the Nebraska Bill the people of a + State as well as Territory were to be left "perfectly free," "subject only + to the Constitution." Why mention a State? They were legislating for + Territories, and not for or about States. Certainly the people of a State + are and ought to be subject to the Constitution of the United States; but + why is mention of this lugged into this merely Territorial law? Why are + the people of a Territory and the people of a State therein lumped + together, and their relation to the Constitution therefore treated as + being precisely the same? While the opinion of the court, by Chief Justice + Taney, in the Dred Scott case, and the separate opinions of all the + concurring Judges, expressly declare that the Constitution of the United + States neither permits Congress nor a Territorial Legislature to exclude + slavery from any United States Territory, they all omit to declare whether + or not the same Constitution permits a State, or the people of a State, to + exclude it. Possibly, this is a mere omission; but who can be quite sure, + if McLean or Curtis had sought to get into the opinion a declaration of + unlimited power in the people of a State to exclude slavery from their + limits, just as Chase and Mace sought to get such declaration, in behalf + of the people of a Territory, into the Nebraska Bill,—I ask, who can + be quite sure that it would not have been voted down in the one case as it + had been in the other? The nearest approach to the point of declaring the + power of a State over slavery is made by Judge Nelson. He approaches it + more than once, Using the precise idea, and almost the language, too, of + the Nebraska Act. On one occasion, his exact language is, "Except in cases + where the power is restrained by the Constitution of the United States, + the law of the State is supreme over the subject of slavery within its + jurisdiction." In what cases the power of the States is so restrained by + the United States Constitution, is left an open question, precisely as the + same question, as to the restraint on the power of the Territories, was + left open in the Nebraska Act. Put this and that together, and we have + another nice little niche, which we may, ere long, see filled with another + Supreme Court decision, declaring that the Constitution of the United + States does not permit a State to exclude slavery from its limits. And + this may especially be expected if the doctrine of "care not whether + slavery be voted down or voted up" shall gain upon the public mind + sufficiently to give promise that such a decision can be maintained when + made. + </p> + <p> + Such a decision is all that slavery now lacks of being alike lawful in all + the States. Welcome or unwelcome, such decision is probably coming, and + will soon be upon us, unless the power of the present political dynasty + shall be met and overthrown. We shall lie down pleasantly dreaming that + the people of Missouri are on the verge of making their State free, and we + shall awake to the reality instead that the Supreme Court has made + Illinois a slave State. To meet and overthrow the power of that dynasty is + the work now before all those who would prevent that consummation. That is + what we have to do. How can we best do it? + </p> + <p> + There are those who denounce us openly to their friends, and yet whisper + to us softly that Senator Douglas is the aptest instrument there is with + which to effect that object. They wish us to infer all, from the fact that + he now has a little quarrel with the present head of the dynasty, and that + he has regularly voted with us on a single point, upon which he and we + have never differed. They remind us that he is a great man, and that the + largest of us are very small ones. Let this be granted. But "a living dog + is better than a dead lion." Judge Douglas, if not a dead lion, for this + work is at least a caged and toothless one. How can he oppose the advances + of slavery? He don't care anything about it. His avowed mission is + impressing the "public heart" to care nothing about it. A leading Douglas + Democratic newspaper thinks Douglas's superior talent will be needed to + resist the revival of the African slave trade. Does Douglas believe an + effort to revive that trade is approaching? He has not said so. Does he + really think so? But if it is, how can he resist it? For years he has + labored to prove it a sacred right of white men to take negro slaves into + the new Territories. Can he possibly show that it is less a sacred right + to buy them where they can be bought cheapest? And unquestionably they can + be bought cheaper in Africa than in Virginia. He has done all in his power + to reduce the whole question of slavery to one of a mere right of + property; and, as such, how can he oppose the foreign slave trade, how can + he refuse that trade in that "property" shall be "perfectly free,"—unless + he does it as a protection to the home production? And as the home + producers will probably not ask the protection, he will be wholly without + a ground of opposition. + </p> + <p> + Senator Douglas holds, we know, that a man may rightfully be wiser to-day + than he was yesterday; that he may rightfully change when he finds himself + wrong. But can we, for that reason, run ahead, and infer that he will make + any particular change, of which he himself has given no intimation? Can we + safely base our action upon any such vague inference? Now, as ever, I wish + not to misrepresent Judge Douglas's position, question his motives, or do + aught that can be personally offensive to him. Whenever, if ever, he and + we can come together on principle so that our cause may have assistance + from his great ability, I hope to have interposed no adventitious + obstacles. But clearly he is not now with us; he does not pretend to be,—he + does not promise ever to be. + </p> + <p> + Our cause, then, must be intrusted to, and conducted by, its own undoubted + friends,—those whose hands are free, whose hearts are in the work, + who do care for the result. Two years ago the Republicans of the nation + mustered over thirteen hundred thousand strong. We did this under the + single impulse of resistance to a common danger, with every external + circumstance against us. Of strange, discordant, and even hostile elements + we gathered from the four winds, and formed and fought the battle through, + under the constant hot fire of a disciplined, proud, and pampered enemy. + Did we brave all then to falter now,—now, when that same enemy is + wavering, dissevered, and belligerent? The result is not doubtful. We + shall not fail; if we stand firm, we shall not fail. Wise counsels may + accelerate, or mistakes delay it, but, sooner or later, the victory is + sure to come. + </p> + <p> + <a name="link2H_4_0002" id="link2H_4_0002"> + <!-- H2 anchor --> </a> + </p> + <div style="height: 4em;"> + <br /><br /><br /><br /> + </div> + <h2> + SPEECH AT CHICAGO, JULY 10, 1858. + </h2> + <h3> + IN REPLY TO SENATOR DOUGLAS + </h3> + <p> + DELIVERED AT CHICAGO, SATURDAY EVENING, JULY 10, 1858. + </p> + <p> + (Mr. DOUGLAS WAS NOT PRESENT.) + </p> + <p> + [Mr. LINCOLN was introduced by C. L. Wilson, Esq., and as he made his + appearance he was greeted with a perfect storm of applause. For some + moments the enthusiasm continued unabated. At last, when by a wave of his + hand partial silence was restored, Mr. LINCOLN said,] + </p> + <p> + MY FELLOW-CITIZENS:—On yesterday evening, upon the occasion of the + reception given to Senator Douglas, I was furnished with a seat very + convenient for hearing him, and was otherwise very courteously treated by + him and his friends, and for which I thank him and them. During the course + of his remarks my name was mentioned in such a way as, I suppose, renders + it at least not improper that I should make some sort of reply to him. I + shall not attempt to follow him in the precise order in which he addressed + the assembled multitude upon that occasion, though I shall perhaps do so + in the main. + </p> + <p> + There was one question to which he asked the attention of the crowd, which + I deem of somewhat less importance—at least of propriety—for + me to dwell upon than the others, which he brought in near the close of + his speech, and which I think it would not be entirely proper for me to + omit attending to, and yet if I were not to give some attention to it now, + I should probably forget it altogether. While I am upon this subject, + allow me to say that I do not intend to indulge in that inconvenient mode + sometimes adopted in public speaking, of reading from documents; but I + shall depart from that rule so far as to read a little scrap from his + speech, which notices this first topic of which I shall speak,—that + is, provided I can find it in the paper: + </p> + <p> + "I have made up my mind to appeal to the people against the combination + that has been made against me; the Republican leaders having formed an + alliance, an unholy and unnatural alliance, with a portion of unscrupulous + Federal office-holders. I intend to fight that allied army wherever I meet + them. I know they deny the alliance; but yet these men who are trying to + divide the Democratic party for the purpose of electing a Republican + Senator in my place are just as much the agents and tools of the + supporters of Mr. Lincoln. Hence I shall deal with this allied army just + as the Russians dealt with the Allies at Sebastopol,—that is, the + Russians did not stop to inquire, when they fired a broadside, whether it + hit an Englishman, a Frenchman, or a Turk. Nor will I stop to inquire, nor + shall I hesitate, whether my blows shall hit the Republican leaders or + their allies, who are holding the Federal offices, and yet acting in + concert with them." + </p> + <p> + Well, now, gentlemen, is not that very alarming? Just to think of it! + right at the outset of his canvass, I, a poor, kind, amiable, intelligent + gentleman,—I am to be slain in this way! Why, my friend the Judge is + not only, as it turns out, not a dead lion, nor even a living one,—he + is the rugged Russian Bear! + </p> + <p> + But if they will have it—for he says that we deny it—that + there is any such alliance, as he says there is,—and I don't propose + hanging very much upon this question of veracity,—but if he will + have it that there is such an alliance, that the Administration men and we + are allied, and we stand in the attitude of English, French, and Turk, he + occupying the position of the Russian, in that case I beg that he will + indulge us while we barely suggest to him that these allies took + Sebastopol. + </p> + <p> + Gentlemen, only a few more words as to this alliance. For my part, I have + to say that whether there be such an alliance depends, so far as I know, + upon what may be a right definition of the term alliance. If for the + Republican party to see the other great party to which they are opposed + divided among themselves, and not try to stop the division, and rather be + glad of it,—if that is an alliance, I confess I am in; but if it is + meant to be said that the Republicans had formed an alliance going beyond + that, by which there is contribution of money or sacrifice of principle on + the one side or the other, so far as the Republican party is concerned,—if + there be any such thing, I protest that I neither know anything of it, nor + do I believe it. I will, however, say,—as I think this branch of the + argument is lugged in,—I would before I leave it state, for the + benefit of those concerned, that one of those same Buchanan men did once + tell me of an argument that he made for his opposition to Judge Douglas. + He said that a friend of our Senator Douglas had been talking to him, and + had, among other things, said to him: + </p> + <p> + "...why, you don't want to beat Douglas?" "Yes," said he, "I do want to + beat him, and I will tell you why. I believe his original Nebraska Bill + was right in the abstract, but it was wrong in the time that it was + brought forward. It was wrong in the application to a Territory in regard + to which the question had been settled; it was brought forward at a time + when nobody asked him; it was tendered to the South when the South had not + asked for it, but when they could not well refuse it; and for this same + reason he forced that question upon our party. It has sunk the best men + all over the nation, everywhere; and now, when our President, struggling + with the difficulties of this man's getting up, has reached the very + hardest point to turn in the case, he deserts him and I am for putting him + where he will trouble us no more." + </p> + <p> + Now, gentlemen, that is not my argument; that is not my argument at all. I + have only been stating to you the argument of a Buchanan man. You will + judge if there is any force in it. + </p> + <p> + Popular sovereignty! Everlasting popular sovereignty! Let us for a moment + inquire into this vast matter of popular sovereignty. What is popular + sovereignty? We recollect that at an early period in the history of this + struggle there was another name for the same thing,—"squatter + sovereignty." It was not exactly popular sovereignty, but squatter + sovereignty. What do those terms mean? What do those terms mean when used + now? And vast credit is taken by our friend the Judge in regard to his + support of it, when he declares the last years of his life have been, and + all the future years of his life shall be, devoted to this matter of + popular sovereignty. What is it? Why, it is the sovereignty of the people! + What was squatter sovereignty? I suppose, if it had any significance at + all, it was the right of the people to govern themselves, to be sovereign + in their own affairs while they were squatted down in a country not their + own, while they had squatted on a Territory that did not belong to them, + in the sense that a State belongs to the people who inhabit it, when it + belonged to the nation; such right to govern themselves was called + "squatter sovereignty." + </p> + <p> + Now, I wish you to mark: What has become of that squatter sovereignty? + what has become of it? Can you get anybody to tell you now that the people + of a Territory have any authority to govern themselves, in regard to this + mooted question of slavery, before they form a State constitution? No such + thing at all; although there is a general running fire, and although there + has been a hurrah made in every speech on that side, assuming that policy + had given the people of a Territory the right to govern themselves upon + this question, yet the point is dodged. To-day it has been decided—no + more than a year ago it was decided—by the Supreme Court of the + United States, and is insisted upon to-day that the people of a Territory + have no right to exclude slavery from a Territory; that if any one man + chooses to take slaves into a Territory, all the rest of the people have + no right to keep them out. This being so, and this decision being made one + of the points that the Judge approved, and one in the approval of which he + says he means to keep me down,—put me down I should not say, for I + have never been up,—he says he is in favor of it, and sticks to it, + and expects to win his battle on that decision, which says that there is + no such thing as squatter sovereignty, but that any one man may take + slaves into a Territory, and all the other men in the Territory may be + opposed to it, and yet by reason of the Constitution they cannot prohibit + it. When that is so, how much is left of this vast matter of squatter + sovereignty, I should like to know? + </p> + <p> + When we get back, we get to the point of the right of the people to make a + constitution. Kansas was settled, for example, in 1854. It was a Territory + yet, without having formed a constitution, in a very regular way, for + three years. All this time negro slavery could be taken in by any few + individuals, and by that decision of the Supreme Court, which the Judge + approves, all the rest of the people cannot keep it out; but when they + come to make a constitution, they may say they will not have slavery. But + it is there; they are obliged to tolerate it some way, and all experience + shows it will be so, for they will not take the negro slaves and + absolutely deprive the owners of them. All experience shows this to be so. + All that space of time that runs from the beginning of the settlement of + the Territory until there is sufficiency of people to make a State + constitution,—all that portion of time popular sovereignty is given + up. The seal is absolutely put down upon it by the court decision, and + Judge Douglas puts his own upon the top of that; yet he is appealing to + the people to give him vast credit for his devotion to popular + sovereignty. + </p> + <p> + Again, when we get to the question of the right of the people to form a + State constitution as they please, to form it with slavery or without + slavery, if that is anything new, I confess I don't know it. Has there + ever been a time when anybody said that any other than the people of a + Territory itself should form a constitution? What is now in it that Judge + Douglas should have fought several years of his life, and pledge himself + to fight all the remaining years of his life for? Can Judge Douglas find + anybody on earth that said that anybody else should form a constitution + for a people? [A voice, "Yes."] Well, I should like you to name him; I + should like to know who he was. [Same voice, "John Calhoun."] + </p> + <p> + No, sir, I never heard of even John Calhoun saying such a thing. He + insisted on the same principle as Judge Douglas; but his mode of applying + it, in fact, was wrong. It is enough for my purpose to ask this crowd + whenever a Republican said anything against it. They never said anything + against it, but they have constantly spoken for it; and whoever will + undertake to examine the platform, and the speeches of responsible men of + the party, and of irresponsible men, too, if you please, will be unable to + find one word from anybody in the Republican ranks opposed to that popular + sovereignty which Judge Douglas thinks that he has invented. I suppose + that Judge Douglas will claim, in a little while, that he is the inventor + of the idea that the people should govern themselves; that nobody ever + thought of such a thing until he brought it forward. We do not remember + that in that old Declaration of Independence it is said that: + </p> + <p> + "We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal; + that they are endowed by their Creator with certain inalienable rights; + that among these are life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness; that to + secure these rights, governments are instituted among men, deriving their + just powers from the consent of the governed." + </p> + <p> + There is the origin of popular sovereignty. Who, then, shall come in at + this day and claim that he invented it? + </p> + <p> + The Lecompton Constitution connects itself with this question, for it is + in this matter of the Lecompton Constitution that our friend Judge Douglas + claims such vast credit. I agree that in opposing the Lecompton + Constitution, so far as I can perceive, he was right. I do not deny that + at all; and, gentlemen, you will readily see why I could not deny it, even + if I wanted to. But I do not wish to; for all the Republicans in the + nation opposed it, and they would have opposed it just as much without + Judge Douglas's aid as with it. They had all taken ground against it long + before he did. Why, the reason that he urges against that constitution I + urged against him a year before. I have the printed speech in my hand. The + argument that he makes, why that constitution should not be adopted, that + the people were not fairly represented nor allowed to vote, I pointed out + in a speech a year ago, which I hold in my hand now, that no fair chance + was to be given to the people. ["Read it, Read it."] I shall not waste + your time by trying to read it. ["Read it, Read it."] Gentlemen, reading + from speeches is a very tedious business, particularly for an old man that + has to put on spectacles, and more so if the man be so tall that he has to + bend over to the light. + </p> + <p> + A little more, now, as to this matter of popular sovereignty and the + Lecompton Constitution. The Lecompton Constitution, as the Judge tells us, + was defeated. The defeat of it was a good thing or it was not. He thinks + the defeat of it was a good thing, and so do I, and we agree in that. Who + defeated it? + </p> + <p> + [A voice: Judge Douglas.] + </p> + <p> + Yes, he furnished himself, and if you suppose he controlled the other + Democrats that went with him, he furnished three votes; while the + Republicans furnished twenty. + </p> + <p> + That is what he did to defeat it. In the House of Representatives he and + his friends furnished some twenty votes, and the Republicans furnished + ninety odd. Now, who was it that did the work? + </p> + <p> + [A voice: Douglas.] + </p> + <p> + Why, yes, Douglas did it! To be sure he did. + </p> + <p> + Let us, however, put that proposition another way. The Republicans could + not have done it without Judge Douglas. Could he have done it without + them? Which could have come the nearest to doing it without the other? + </p> + <p> + [A voice: Who killed the bill?] + </p> + <p> + [Another voice: Douglas.] + </p> + <p> + Ground was taken against it by the Republicans long before Douglas did it. + The proportion of opposition to that measure is about five to one. + </p> + <p> + [A voice: Why don't they come out on it?] + </p> + <p> + You don't know what you are talking about, my friend. I am quite willing + to answer any gentleman in the crowd who asks an intelligent question. + </p> + <p> + Now, who in all this country has ever found any of our friends of Judge + Douglas's way of thinking, and who have acted upon this main question, + that has ever thought of uttering a word in behalf of Judge Trumbull? + </p> + <p> + [A voice: We have.] + </p> + <p> + I defy you to show a printed resolution passed in a Democratic meeting—I + take it upon myself to defy any man to show a printed resolution of a + Democratic meeting, large or small—in favor of Judge Trumbull, or + any of the five to one Republicans who beat that bill. Everything must be + for the Democrats! They did everything, and the five to the one that + really did the thing they snub over, and they do not seem to remember that + they have an existence upon the face of the earth. + </p> + <p> + Gentlemen, I fear that I shall become tedious. I leave this branch of the + subject to take hold of another. I take up that part of Judge Douglas's + speech in which he respectfully attended to me. + </p> + <p> + Judge Douglas made two points upon my recent speech at Springfield. He + says they are to be the issues of this campaign. The first one of these + points he bases upon the language in a speech which I delivered at + Springfield, which I believe I can quote correctly from memory. I said + there that "we are now far into the fifth year since a policy was + instituted for the avowed object, and with the confident promise, of + putting an end to slavery agitation; under the operation of that policy, + that agitation has not only not ceased, but has constantly augmented." "I + believe it will not cease until a crisis shall have been reached and + passed. 'A house divided against itself cannot stand.' I believe this + government cannot endure permanently half slave and half free." "I do not + expect the Union to be dissolved,"—I am quoting from my speech, "—I + do not expect the house to fall, 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 spread of it and place it where the + public mind shall 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, north as well as south." + </p> + <p> + What is the paragraph? In this paragraph, which I have quoted in your + hearing, and to which I ask the attention of all, Judge Douglas thinks he + discovers great political heresy. I want your attention particularly to + what he has inferred from it. He says I am in favor of making all the + States of this Union uniform in all their internal regulations; that in + all their domestic concerns I am in favor of making them entirely uniform. + He draws this inference from the language I have quoted to you. He says + that I am in favor of making war by the North upon the South for the + extinction of slavery; that I am also in favor of inviting (as he + expresses it) the South to a war upon the North for the purpose of + nationalizing slavery. Now, it is singular enough, if you will carefully + read that passage over, that I did not say that I was in favor of anything + in it. I only said what I expected would take place. I made a prediction + only,—it may have been a foolish one, perhaps. I did not even say + that I desired that slavery should be put in course of ultimate + extinction. I do say so now, however, so there need be no longer any + difficulty about that. It may be written down in the great speech. + </p> + <p> + Gentlemen, Judge Douglas informed you that this speech of mine was + probably carefully prepared. I admit that it was. I am not master of + language; I have not a fine education; I am not capable of entering into a + disquisition upon dialectics, as I believe you call it; but I do not + believe the language I employed bears any such construction as Judge + Douglas puts upon it. But I don't care about a quibble in regard to words. + I know what I meant, and I will not leave this crowd in doubt, if I can + explain it to them, what I really meant in the use of that paragraph. + </p> + <p> + I am not, in the first place, unaware that this government has endured + eighty-two years half slave and half free. I know that. I am tolerably + well acquainted with the history of the country, and I know that it has + endured eighty-two years half slave and half free. I believe—and + that is what I meant to allude to there—I believe it has endured + because during all that time, until the introduction of the Nebraska Bill, + the public mind did rest all the time in the belief that slavery was in + course of ultimate extinction. That was what gave us the rest that we had + through that period of eighty-two years,—at least, so I believe. I + have always hated slavery, I think, as much as any Abolitionist,—I + have been an Old Line Whig,—I have always hated it; but I have + always been quiet about it until this new era of the introduction of the + Nebraska Bill began. I always believed that everybody was against it, and + that it was in course of ultimate extinction. [Pointing to Mr. Browning, + who stood near by.] Browning thought so; the great mass of the nation have + rested in the belief that slavery was in course of ultimate extinction. + They had reason so to believe. + </p> + <p> + The adoption of the Constitution and its attendant history led the people + to believe so; and that such was the belief of the framers of the + Constitution itself, why did those old men, about the time of the adoption + of the Constitution, decree that slavery should not go into the new + Territory, where it had not already gone? Why declare that within twenty + years the African slave trade, by which slaves are supplied, might be cut + off by Congress? Why were all these acts? I might enumerate more of these + acts; but enough. What were they but a clear indication that the framers + of the Constitution intended and expected the ultimate extinction of that + institution? And now, when I say, as I said in my speech that Judge + Douglas has quoted from, when I say that I think the opponents of slavery + will resist the farther spread of it, and place it where the public mind + shall rest with the belief that it is in course of ultimate extinction, I + only mean to say that they will place it where the founders of this + government originally placed it. + </p> + <p> + I have said a hundred times, and I have now no inclination to take it + back, that I believe there is no right, and ought to be no inclination, in + the people of the free States to enter into the slave States and interfere + with the question of slavery at all. I have said that always; Judge + Douglas has heard me say it, if not quite a hundred times, at least as + good as a hundred times; and when it is said that I am in favor of + interfering with slavery where it exists, I know it is unwarranted by + anything I have ever intended, and, as I believe, by anything I have ever + said. If, by any means, I have ever used language which could fairly be so + construed (as, however, I believe I never have), I now correct it. + </p> + <p> + So much, then, for the inference that Judge Douglas draws, that I am in + favor of setting the sections at war with one another. I know that I never + meant any such thing, and I believe that no fair mind can infer any such + thing from anything I have ever said. + </p> + <p> + Now, in relation to his inference that I am in favor of a general + consolidation of all the local institutions of the various States. I will + attend to that for a little while, and try to inquire, if I can, how on + earth it could be that any man could draw such an inference from anything + I said. I have said, very many times, in Judge Douglas's hearing, that no + man believed more than I in the principle of self-government; that it lies + at the bottom of all my ideas of just government, from beginning to end. I + have denied that his use of that term applies properly. But for the thing + itself, I deny that any man has ever gone ahead of me in his devotion to + the principle, whatever he may have done in efficiency in advocating it. I + think that I have said it in your hearing, that I believe each individual + is naturally entitled to do as he pleases with himself and the fruit of + his labor, so far as it in no wise interferes with any other man's rights; + that each community as a State has a right to do exactly as it pleases + with all the concerns within that State that interfere with the right of + no other State; and that the General Government, upon principle, has no + right to interfere with anything other than that general class of things + that does concern the whole. I have said that at all times. I have said, + as illustrations, that I do not believe in the right of Illinois to + interfere with the cranberry laws of Indiana, the oyster laws of Virginia, + or the liquor laws of Maine. I have said these things over and over again, + and I repeat them here as my sentiments. + </p> + <p> + How is it, then, that Judge Douglas infers, because I hope to see slavery + put where the public mind shall rest in the belief that it is in the + course of ultimate extinction, that I am in favor of Illinois going over + and interfering with the cranberry laws of Indiana? What can authorize him + to draw any such inference? + </p> + <p> + I suppose there might be one thing that at least enabled him to draw such + an inference that would not be true with me or many others: that is, + because he looks upon all this matter of slavery as an exceedingly little + thing,—this matter of keeping one sixth of the population of the + whole nation in a state of oppression and tyranny unequaled in the world. + He looks upon it as being an exceedingly little thing,—only equal to + the question of the cranberry laws of Indiana; as something having no + moral question in it; as something on a par with the question of whether a + man shall pasture his land with cattle, or plant it with tobacco; so + little and so small a thing that he concludes, if I could desire that + anything should be done to bring about the ultimate extinction of that + little thing, I must be in favor of bringing about an amalgamation of all + the other little things in the Union. Now, it so happens—and there, + I presume, is the foundation of this mistake—that the Judge thinks + thus; and it so happens that there is a vast portion of the American + people that do not look upon that matter as being this very little thing. + They look upon it as a vast moral evil; they can prove it as such by the + writings of those who gave us the blessings of liberty which we enjoy, and + that they so looked upon it, and not as an evil merely confining itself to + the States where it is situated; and while we agree that, by the + Constitution we assented to, in the States where it exists, we have no + right to interfere with it, because it is in the Constitution; and we are + by both duty and inclination to stick by that Constitution, in all its + letter and spirit, from beginning to end. + </p> + <p> + So much, then, as to my disposition—my wish to have all the State + legislatures blotted out, and to have one consolidated government, and a + uniformity of domestic regulations in all the States, by which I suppose + it is meant, if we raise corn here, we must make sugar-cane grow here too, + and we must make those which grow North grow in the South. All this I + suppose he understands I am in favor of doing. Now, so much for all this + nonsense; for I must call it so. The Judge can have no issue with me on a + question of establishing uniformity in the domestic regulations of the + States. + </p> + <p> + A little now on the other point,—the Dred Scott decision. Another of + the issues he says that is to be made with me is upon his devotion to the + Dred Scott decision, and my opposition to it. + </p> + <p> + I have expressed heretofore, and I now repeat, my opposition to the Dred + Scott decision; but I should be allowed to state the nature of that + opposition, and I ask your indulgence while I do so. What is fairly + implied by the term Judge Douglas has used, "resistance to the decision"? + I do not resist it. If I wanted to take Dred Scott from his master, I + would be interfering with property, and that terrible difficulty that + Judge Douglas speaks of, of interfering with property, would arise. But I + am doing no such thing as that, but all that I am doing is refusing to + obey it as a political rule. If I were in Congress, and a vote should come + up on a question whether slavery should be prohibited in a new Territory, + in spite of the Dred Scott decision, I would vote that it should. + </p> + <p> + That is what I should do. Judge Douglas said last night that before the + decision he might advance his opinion, and it might be contrary to the + decision when it was made; but after it was made he would abide by it + until it was reversed. Just so! We let this property abide by the + decision, but we will try to reverse that decision. We will try to put it + where Judge Douglas would not object, for he says he will obey it until it + is reversed. Somebody has to reverse that decision, since it is made, and + we mean to reverse it, and we mean to do it peaceably. + </p> + <p> + What are the uses of decisions of courts? They have two uses. As rules of + property they have two uses. First, they decide upon the question before + the court. They decide in this case that Dred Scott is a slave. Nobody + resists that, not only that, but they say to everybody else that persons + standing just as Dred Scott stands are as he is. That is, they say that + when a question comes up upon another person, it will be so decided again, + unless the court decides in another way, unless the court overrules its + decision. Well, we mean to do what we can to have the court decide the + other way. That is one thing we mean to try to do. + </p> + <p> + The sacredness that Judge Douglas throws around this decision is a degree + of sacredness that has never been before thrown around any other decision. + I have never heard of such a thing. Why, decisions apparently contrary to + that decision, or that good lawyers thought were contrary to that + decision, have been made by that very court before. It is the first of its + kind; it is an astonisher in legal history. It is a new wonder of the + world. It is based upon falsehood in the main as to the facts; allegations + of facts upon which it stands are not facts at all in many instances, and + no decision made on any question—the first instance of a decision + made under so many unfavorable circumstances—thus placed, has ever + been held by the profession as law, and it has always needed confirmation + before the lawyers regarded it as settled law. But Judge Douglas will have + it that all hands must take this extraordinary decision, made under these + extraordinary circumstances, and give their vote in Congress in accordance + with it, yield to it, and obey it in every possible sense. Circumstances + alter cases. Do not gentlemen here remember the case of that same Supreme + Court some twenty-five or thirty years ago deciding that a National Bank + was constitutional? I ask, if somebody does not remember that a National + Bank was declared to be constitutional? Such is the truth, whether it be + remembered or not. The Bank charter ran out, and a recharter was granted + by Congress. That recharter was laid before General Jackson. It was urged + upon him, when he denied the constitutionality of the Bank, that the + Supreme Court had decided that it was constitutional; and General Jackson + then said that the Supreme Court had no right to lay down a rule to govern + a coordinate branch of the government, the members of which had sworn to + support the Constitution; that each member had sworn to support that + Constitution as he understood it. I will venture here to say that I have + heard Judge Douglas say that he approved of General Jackson for that act. + What has now become of all his tirade about "resistance of the Supreme + Court"? + </p> + <p> + My fellow-citizens, getting back a little,—for I pass from these + points,—when Judge Douglas makes his threat of annihilation upon the + "alliance," he is cautious to say that that warfare of his is to fall upon + the leaders of the Republican party. Almost every word he utters, and + every distinction he makes, has its significance. He means for the + Republicans who do not count themselves as leaders, to be his friends; he + makes no fuss over them; it is the leaders that he is making war upon. He + wants it understood that the mass of the Republican party are really his + friends. It is only the leaders that are doing something that are + intolerant, and that require extermination at his hands. As this is dearly + and unquestionably the light in which he presents that matter, I want to + ask your attention, addressing myself to the Republicans here, that I may + ask you some questions as to where you, as the Republican party, would be + placed if you sustained Judge Douglas in his present position by a + re-election? I do not claim, gentlemen, to be unselfish; I do not pretend + that I would not like to go to the United States Senate,—I make no + such hypocritical pretense; but I do say to you that in this mighty issue + it is nothing to you—nothing to the mass of the people of the + nation,—whether or not Judge Douglas or myself shall ever be heard + of after this night; it may be a trifle to either of us, but in connection + with this mighty question, upon which hang the destinies of the nation, + perhaps, it is absolutely nothing: but where will you be placed if you + reindorse Judge Douglas? Don't you know how apt he is, how exceedingly + anxious he is at all times, to seize upon anything and everything to + persuade you that something he has done you did yourselves? Why, he tried + to persuade you last night that our Illinois Legislature instructed him to + introduce the Nebraska Bill. There was nobody in that Legislature ever + thought of such a thing; and when he first introduced the bill, he never + thought of it; but still he fights furiously for the proposition, and that + he did it because there was a standing instruction to our Senators to be + always introducing Nebraska bills. He tells you he is for the Cincinnati + platform, he tells you he is for the Dred Scott decision. He tells you, + not in his speech last night, but substantially in a former speech, that + he cares not if slavery is voted up or down; he tells you the struggle on + Lecompton is past; it may come up again or not, and if it does, he stands + where he stood when, in spite of him and his opposition, you built up the + Republican party. If you indorse him, you tell him you do not care whether + slavery be voted up or down, and he will close or try to close your mouths + with his declaration, repeated by the day, the week, the month, and the + year. Is that what you mean? [Cries of "No," one voice "Yes."] Yes, I have + no doubt you who have always been for him, if you mean that. No doubt of + that, soberly I have said, and I repeat it. I think, in the position in + which Judge Douglas stood in opposing the Lecompton Constitution, he was + right; he does not know that it will return, but if it does we may know + where to find him, and if it does not, we may know where to look for him, + and that is on the Cincinnati platform. Now, I could ask the Republican + party, after all the hard names that Judge Douglas has called them by all + his repeated charges of their inclination to marry with and hug negroes; + all his declarations of Black Republicanism,—by the way, we are + improving, the black has got rubbed off,—but with all that, if he be + indorsed by Republican votes, where do you stand? Plainly, you stand ready + saddled, bridled, and harnessed, and waiting to be driven over to the + slavery extension camp of the nation,—just ready to be driven over, + tied together in a lot, to be driven over, every man with a rope around + his neck, that halter being held by Judge Douglas. That is the question. + If Republican men have been in earnest in what they have done, I think + they had better not do it; but I think that the Republican party is made + up of those who, as far as they can peaceably, will oppose the extension + of slavery, and who will hope for its ultimate extinction. If they believe + it is wrong in grasping up the new lands of the continent and keeping them + from the settlement of free white laborers, who want the land to bring up + their families upon; if they are in earnest, although they may make a + mistake, they will grow restless, and the time will come when they will + come back again and reorganize, if not by the same name, at least upon the + same principles as their party now has. It is better, then, to save the + work while it is begun. You have done the labor; maintain it, keep it. If + men choose to serve you, go with them; but as you have made up your + organization upon principle, stand by it; for, as surely as God reigns + over you, and has inspired your mind, and given you a sense of propriety, + and continues to give you hope, so surely will you still cling to these + ideas, and you will at last come back again after your wanderings, merely + to do your work over again. + </p> + <p> + We were often,—more than once, at least,—in the course of + Judge Douglas's speech last night, reminded that this government was made + for white men; that he believed it was made for white men. Well, that is + putting it into a shape in which no one wants to deny it; but the Judge + then goes into his passion for drawing inferences that are not warranted. + I protest, now and forever, against that counterfeit logic which presumes + that because I did not want a negro woman for a slave, I do necessarily + want her for a wife. My understanding is that I need not have her for + either, but, as God made us separate, we can leave one another alone, and + do one another much good thereby. There are white men enough to marry all + the white women, and enough black men to marry all the black women; and in + God's name let them be so married. The Judge regales us with the terrible + enormities that take place by the mixture of races; that the inferior race + bears the superior down. Why, Judge, if we do not let them get together in + the Territories, they won't mix there. + </p> + <p> + [A voice: "Three cheers for Lincoln".—The cheers were given with a + hearty good-will.] + </p> + <p> + I should say at least that that is a self-evident truth. + </p> + <p> + Now, it happens that we meet together once every year, sometimes about the + 4th of July, for some reason or other. These 4th of July gatherings I + suppose have their uses. If you will indulge me, I will state what I + suppose to be some of them. + </p> + <p> + We are now a mighty nation; we are thirty or about thirty millions of + people, and we own and inhabit about one fifteenth part of the dry land of + the whole earth. We run our memory back over the pages of history for + about eighty-two years, and we discover that we were then a very small + people in point of numbers, vastly inferior to what we are now, with a + vastly less extent of country, with vastly less of everything we deem + desirable among men; we look upon the change as exceedingly advantageous + to us and to our posterity, and we fix upon something that happened away + back, as in some way or other being connected with this rise of + prosperity. We find a race of men living in that day whom we claim as our + fathers and grandfathers; they were iron men; they fought for the + principle that they were contending for; and we understood that by what + they then did it has followed that the degree of prosperity which we now + enjoy has come to us. We hold this annual celebration to remind ourselves + of all the good done in this process of time, of how it was done and who + did it, and how we are historically connected with it; and we go from + these meetings in better humor with ourselves, we feel more attached the + one to the other, and more firmly bound to the country we inhabit. In + every way we are better men in the age and race and country in which we + live, for these celebrations. But after we have done all this we have not + yet reached the whole. There is something else connected with it. We have—besides + these, men descended by blood from our ancestors—among us perhaps + half our people who are not descendants at all of these men; they are men + who have come from Europe, German, Irish, French, and Scandinavian,—men + that have come from Europe themselves, or whose ancestors have come hither + and settled here, finding themselves our equals in all things. If they + look back through this history to trace their connection with those days + by blood, they find they have none, they cannot carry themselves back into + that glorious epoch and make themselves feel that they are part of us; but + when they look through that old Declaration of Independence, they find + that those old men say that "We hold these truths to be self-evident, that + all men are created equal"; and then they feel that that moral sentiment, + taught in that day, evidences their relation to those men, that it is the + father of all moral principle in them, and that they have a right to claim + it as though they were blood of the blood, and flesh of the flesh, of the + men who wrote that Declaration; and so they are. That is the electric cord + in that Declaration that links the hearts of patriotic and liberty-loving + men together, that will link those patriotic hearts as long as the love of + freedom exists in the minds of men throughout the world. + </p> + <p> + Now, sirs, for the purpose of squaring things with this idea of "don't + care if slavery is voted up or voted down," for sustaining the Dred Scott + decision, for holding that the Declaration of Independence did not mean + anything at all, we have Judge Douglas giving his exposition of what the + Declaration of Independence means, and we have him saying that the people + of America are equal to the people of England. According to his + construction, you Germans are not connected with it. Now, I ask you in all + soberness if all these things, if indulged in, if ratified, if confirmed + and indorsed, if taught to our children, and repeated to them, do not tend + to rub out the sentiment of liberty in the country, and to transform this + government into a government of some other form. Those arguments that are + made, that the inferior race are to be treated with as much allowance as + they are capable of enjoying; that as much is to be done for them as their + condition will allow,—what are these arguments? They are the + arguments that kings have made for enslaving the people in all ages of the + world. You will find that all the arguments in favor of kingcraft were of + this class; they always bestrode the necks of the people not that they + wanted to do it, but because the people were better off for being ridden. + That is their argument, and this argument of the Judge is the same old + serpent that says, You work, and I eat; you toil, and I will enjoy the + fruits of it. Turn in whatever way you will, whether it come from the + mouth of a king, an excuse for enslaving the people of his country, or + from the mouth of men of one race as a reason for enslaving the men of + another race, it is all the same old serpent; and I hold, if that course + of argumentation that is made for the purpose of convincing the public + mind that we should not care about this should be granted, it does not + stop with the negro. I should like to know, if taking this old Declaration + of Independence, which declares that all men are equal upon principle, and + making exceptions to it, where will it stop? If one man says it does not + mean a negro, why not another say it does not mean some other man? If that + Declaration is not the truth, let us get the statute book, in which we + find it, and tear it out! Who is so bold as to do it? If it is not true, + let us tear it out! [Cries of "No, no."] Let us stick to it, then; let us + stand firmly by it, then. + </p> + <p> + It may be argued that there are certain conditions that make necessities + and impose them upon us; and to the extent that a necessity is imposed + upon a man, he must submit to it. I think that was the condition in which + we found ourselves when we established this government. We had slavery + among us, we could not get our Constitution unless we permitted them to + remain in slavery, we could not secure the good we did secure if we + grasped for more; and having by necessity submitted to that much, it does + not destroy the principle that is the charter of our liberties. Let that + charter stand as our standard. + </p> + <p> + My friend has said to me that I am a poor hand to quote Scripture. I will + try it again, however. It is said in one of the admonitions of our Lord, + "As your Father in heaven is perfect, be ye also perfect." The Savior, I + suppose, did not expect that any human creature could be perfect as the + Father in heaven; but he said, "As your Father in heaven is perfect, be ye + also perfect." He set that up as a standard; and he who did most towards + reaching that standard attained the highest degree of moral perfection. So + I say in relation to the principle that all men are created equal, let it + be as nearly reached as we can. If we cannot give freedom to every + creature, let us do nothing that will impose slavery upon any other + creature. Let us then turn this government back into the channel in which + the framers of the Constitution originally placed it. Let us stand firmly + by each other. If we do not do so, we are turning in the contrary + direction, that our friend Judge Douglas proposes—not intentionally—as + working in the traces tends to make this one universal slave nation. He is + one that runs in that direction, and as such I resist him. + </p> + <p> + My friends, I have detained you about as long as I desired to do, and I + have only to say: Let us discard all this quibbling about this man and the + other man, this race and that race and the other race being inferior, and + therefore they must be placed in an inferior position; discarding our + standard that we have left us. Let us discard all these things, and unite + as one people throughout this land, until we shall once more stand up + declaring that all men are created equal. + </p> + <p> + My friends, I could not, without launching off upon some new topic, which + would detain you too long, continue to-night. I thank you for this most + extensive audience that you have furnished me to-night. I leave you, + hoping that the lamp of liberty will burn in your bosoms until there shall + no longer be a doubt that all men are created free and equal. + </p> + <p> + <a name="link2H_4_0003" id="link2H_4_0003"> + <!-- H2 anchor --> </a> + </p> + <div style="height: 4em;"> + <br /><br /><br /><br /> + </div> + <h2> + SPEECH AT SPRINGFIELD, JULY 17, 1858. + </h2> + <h3> + DELIVERED SATURDAY EVENING + </h3> + <p> + (Mr. Douglas was not present.) + </p> + <p> + FELLOW-CITIZENS:—Another election, which is deemed an important one, + is approaching, and, as I suppose, the Republican party will, without much + difficulty, elect their State ticket. But in regard to the Legislature, + we, the Republicans, labor under some disadvantages. In the first place, + we have a Legislature to elect upon an apportionment of the representation + made several years ago, when the proportion of the population was far + greater in the South (as compared with the North) than it now is; and + inasmuch as our opponents hold almost entire sway in the South, and we a + correspondingly large majority in the North, the fact that we are now to + be represented as we were years ago, when the population was different, is + to us a very great disadvantage. We had in the year 1855, according to + law, a census, or enumeration of the inhabitants, taken for the purpose of + a new apportionment of representation. We know what a fair apportionment + of representation upon that census would give us. We know that it could + not, if fairly made, fail to give the Republican party from six to ten + more members of the Legislature than they can probably get as the law now + stands. It so happened at the last session of the Legislature that our + opponents, holding the control of both branches of the Legislature, + steadily refused to give us such an apportionment as we were rightly + entitled to have upon the census already taken. The Legislature steadily + refused to give us such an apportionment as we were rightfully entitled to + have upon the census taken of the population of the State. The Legislature + would pass no bill upon that subject, except such as was at least as + unfair to us as the old one, and in which, in some instances, two men in + the Democratic regions were allowed to go as far toward sending a member + to the Legislature as three were in the Republican regions. Comparison was + made at the time as to representative and senatorial districts, which + completely demonstrated that such was the fact. Such a bill was passed and + tendered to the Republican Governor for his signature; but, principally + for the reasons I have stated, he withheld his approval, and the bill fell + without becoming a law. + </p> + <p> + Another disadvantage under which we labor is that there are one or two + Democratic Senators who will be members of the next Legislature, and will + vote for the election of Senator, who are holding over in districts in + which we could, on all reasonable calculation, elect men of our own, if we + only had the chance of an election. When we consider that there are but + twenty-five Senators in the Senate, taking two from the side where they + rightfully belong, and adding them to the other, is to us a disadvantage + not to be lightly regarded. Still, so it is; we have this to contend with. + Perhaps there is no ground of complaint on our part. In attending to the + many things involved in the last general election for President, Governor, + Auditor, Treasurer, Superintendent of Public Instruction, Members of + Congress, of the Legislature, County Officers, and so on, we allowed these + things to happen by want of sufficient attention, and we have no cause to + complain of our adversaries, so far as this matter is concerned. But we + have some cause to complain of the refusal to give us a fair + apportionment. + </p> + <p> + There is still another disadvantage under which we labor, and to which I + will ask your attention. It arises out of the relative positions of the + two persons who stand before the State as candidates for the Senate. + Senator Douglas is of world-wide renown. All the anxious politicians of + his party, or who have been of his party for years past, have been looking + upon him as certainly, at no distant day, to be the President of the + United States. They have seen in his round, jolly, fruitful face + post-offices, land-offices, marshalships, and cabinet appointments, + charge-ships and foreign missions bursting and sprouting out in wonderful + exuberance, ready to be laid hold of by their greedy hands. And as they + have been gazing upon this attractive picture so long, they cannot, in the + little distraction that has taken place in the party, bring themselves to + give up the charming hope; but with greedier anxiety they rush about him, + sustain him, and give him marches, triumphal entries, and receptions + beyond what even in the days of his highest prosperity they could have + brought about in his favor. On the contrary, nobody has ever expected me + to be President. In my poor, lean, lank face, nobody has ever seen that + any cabbages were sprouting out. These are disadvantages all, taken + together, that the Republicans labor under. We have to fight this battle + upon principle, and upon principle alone. I am, in a certain sense, made + the standard-bearer in behalf of the Republicans. I was made so merely + because there had to be some one so placed,—I being in nowise + preferable to any other one of twenty-five, perhaps a hundred, we have in + the Republican ranks. Then I say I wish it to be distinctly understood and + borne in mind that we have to fight this battle without many—perhaps + without any of the external aids which are brought to bear against us. So + I hope those with whom I am surrounded have principle enough to nerve + themselves for the task, and leave nothing undone that can be fairly done + to bring about the right result. + </p> + <p> + After Senator Douglas left Washington, as his movements were made known by + the public prints, he tarried a considerable time in the city of New York; + and it was heralded that, like another Napoleon, he was lying by and + framing the plan of his campaign. It was telegraphed to Washington City, + and published in the Union, that he was framing his plan for the purpose + of going to Illinois to pounce upon and annihilate the treasonable and + disunion speech which Lincoln had made here on the 16th of June. Now, I do + suppose that the Judge really spent some time in New York maturing the + plan of the campaign, as his friends heralded for him. I have been able, + by noting his movements since his arrival in Illinois, to discover + evidences confirmatory of that allegation. I think I have been able to see + what are the material points of that plan. I will, for a little while, ask + your attention to some of them. What I shall point out, though not showing + the whole plan, are, nevertheless, the main points, as I suppose. + </p> + <p> + They are not very numerous. The first is popular sovereignty. The second + and third are attacks upon my speech made on the 16th of June. Out of + these three points—drawing within the range of popular sovereignty + the question of the Lecompton Constitution—he makes his principal + assault. Upon these his successive speeches are substantially one and the + same. On this matter of popular sovereignty I wish to be a little careful. + Auxiliary to these main points, to be sure, are their thunderings of + cannon, their marching and music, their fizzlegigs and fireworks; but I + will not waste time with them. They are but the little trappings of the + campaign. + </p> + <p> + Coming to the substance,—the first point, "popular sovereignty." It + is to be labeled upon the cars in which he travels; put upon the hacks he + rides in; to be flaunted upon the arches he passes under, and the banners + which wave over him. It is to be dished up in as many varieties as a + French cook can produce soups from potatoes. Now, as this is so great a + staple of the plan of the campaign, it is worth while to examine it + carefully; and if we examine only a very little, and do not allow + ourselves to be misled, we shall be able to see that the whole thing is + the most arrant Quixotism that was ever enacted before a community. What + is the matter of popular sovereignty? The first thing, in order to + understand it, is to get a good definition of what it is, and after that + to see how it is applied. + </p> + <p> + I suppose almost every one knows that, in this controversy, whatever has + been said has had reference to the question of negro slavery. We have not + been in a controversy about the right of the people to govern themselves + in the ordinary matters of domestic concern in the States and Territories. + Mr. Buchanan, in one of his late messages (I think when he sent up the + Lecompton Constitution) urged that the main point to which the public + attention had been directed was not in regard to the great variety of + small domestic matters, but was directed to the question of negro slavery; + and he asserts that if the people had had a fair chance to vote on that + question there was no reasonable ground of objection in regard to minor + questions. Now, while I think that the people had not had given, or + offered, them a fair chance upon that slavery question, still, if there + had been a fair submission to a vote upon that main question, the + President's proposition would have been true to the utmost. Hence, when + hereafter I speak of popular sovereignty, I wish to be understood as + applying what I say to the question of slavery only, not to other minor + domestic matters of a Territory or a State. + </p> + <p> + Does Judge Douglas, when he says that several of the past years of his + life have been devoted to the question of "popular sovereignty," and that + all the remainder of his life shall be devoted to it, does he mean to say + that he has been devoting his life to securing to the people of the + Territories the right to exclude slavery from the Territories? If he means + so to say he means to deceive; because he and every one knows that the + decision of the Supreme Court, which he approves and makes especial ground + of attack upon me for disapproving, forbids the people of a Territory to + exclude slavery. This covers the whole ground, from the settlement of a + Territory till it reaches the degree of maturity entitling it to form a + State Constitution. So far as all that ground is concerned, the Judge is + not sustaining popular sovereignty, but absolutely opposing it. He + sustains the decision which declares that the popular will of the + Territory has no constitutional power to exclude slavery during their + territorial existence. This being so, the period of time from the first + settlement of a Territory till it reaches the point of forming a State + Constitution is not the thing that the Judge has fought for or is fighting + for, but, on the contrary, he has fought for, and is fighting for, the + thing that annihilates and crushes out that same popular sovereignty. + </p> + <p> + Well, so much being disposed of, what is left? Why, he is contending for + the right of the people, when they come to make a State Constitution, to + make it for themselves, and precisely as best suits themselves. I say + again, that is quixotic. I defy contradiction when I declare that the + Judge can find no one to oppose him on that proposition. I repeat, there + is nobody opposing that proposition on principle. Let me not be + misunderstood. I know that, with reference to the Lecompton Constitution, + I may be misunderstood; but when you understand me correctly, my + proposition will be true and accurate. Nobody is opposing, or has opposed, + the right of the people, when they form a constitution, to form it for + themselves. Mr. Buchanan and his friends have not done it; they, too, as + well as the Republicans and the Anti-Lecompton Democrats, have not done + it; but on the contrary, they together have insisted on the right of the + people to form a constitution for themselves. The difference between the + Buchanan men on the one hand, and the Douglas men and the Republicans on + the other, has not been on a question of principle, but on a question of + fact. + </p> + <p> + The dispute was upon the question of fact, whether the Lecompton + Constitution had been fairly formed by the people or not. Mr. Buchanan and + his friends have not contended for the contrary principle any more than + the Douglas men or the Republicans. They have insisted that whatever of + small irregularities existed in getting up the Lecompton Constitution were + such as happen in the settlement of all new Territories. The question was, + Was it a fair emanation of the people? It was a question of fact, and not + of principle. As to the principle, all were agreed. Judge Douglas voted + with the Republicans upon that matter of fact. + </p> + <p> + He and they, by their voices and votes, denied that it was a fair + emanation of the people. The Administration affirmed that it was. With + respect to the evidence bearing upon that question of fact, I readily + agree that Judge Douglas and the Republicans had the right on their side, + and that the Administration was wrong. But I state again that, as a matter + of principle, there is no dispute upon the right of a people in a + Territory, merging into a State, to form a constitution for themselves + without outside interference from any quarter. This being so, what is + Judge Douglas going to spend his life for? Is he going to spend his life + in maintaining a principle that nobody on earth opposes? Does he expect to + stand up in majestic dignity, and go through his apotheosis and become a + god in the maintaining of a principle which neither man nor mouse in all + God's creation is opposing? Now something in regard to the Lecompton + Constitution more specially; for I pass from this other question of + popular sovereignty as the most arrant humbug that has ever been attempted + on an intelligent community. + </p> + <p> + As to the Lecompton Constitution, I have already said that on the question + of fact, as to whether it was a fair emanation of the people or not, Judge + Douglas, with the Republicans and some Americans, had greatly the argument + against the Administration; and while I repeat this, I wish to know what + there is in the opposition of Judge Douglas to the Lecompton Constitution + that entitles him to be considered the only opponent to it,—as being + par excellence the very quintessence of that opposition. I agree to the + rightfulness of his opposition. He in the Senate and his class of men + there formed the number three and no more. In the House of Representatives + his class of men—the Anti-Lecompton Democrats—formed a number + of about twenty. It took one hundred and twenty to defeat the measure, + against one hundred and twelve. Of the votes of that one hundred and + twenty, Judge Douglas's friends furnished twenty, to add to which there + were six Americans and ninety-four Republicans. I do not say that I am + precisely accurate in their numbers, but I am sufficiently so for any use + I am making of it. + </p> + <p> + Why is it that twenty shall be entitled to all the credit of doing that + work, and the hundred none of it? Why, if, as Judge Douglas says, the + honor is to be divided and due credit is to be given to other parties, why + is just so much given as is consonant with the wishes, the interests, and + advancement of the twenty? My understanding is, when a common job is done, + or a common enterprise prosecuted, if I put in five dollars to your one, I + have a right to take out five dollars to your one. But he does not so + understand it. He declares the dividend of credit for defeating Lecompton + upon a basis which seems unprecedented and incomprehensible. + </p> + <p> + Let us see. Lecompton in the raw was defeated. It afterward took a sort of + cooked-up shape, and was passed in the English bill. It is said by the + Judge that the defeat was a good and proper thing. If it was a good thing, + why is he entitled to more credit than others for the performance of that + good act, unless there was something in the antecedents of the Republicans + that might induce every one to expect them to join in that good work, and + at the same time something leading them to doubt that he would? Does he + place his superior claim to credit on the ground that he performed a good + act which was never expected of him? He says I have a proneness for + quoting Scripture. If I should do so now, it occurs that perhaps he places + himself somewhat upon the ground of the parable of the lost sheep which + went astray upon the mountains, and when the owner of the hundred sheep + found the one that was lost, and threw it upon his shoulders and came home + rejoicing, it was said that there was more rejoicing over the one sheep + that was lost and had been found than over the ninety and nine in the + fold. The application is made by the Saviour in this parable, thus: + "Verily, I say unto you, there is more rejoicing in heaven over one sinner + that repenteth, than over ninety and nine just persons that need no + repentance." + </p> + <p> + And now, if the Judge claims the benefit of this parable, let him repent. + Let him not come up here and say: "I am the only just person; and you are + the ninety-nine sinners!" Repentance before forgiveness is a provision of + the Christian system, and on that condition alone will the Republicans + grant his forgiveness. + </p> + <p> + How will he prove that we have ever occupied a different position in + regard to the Lecompton Constitution or any principle in it? He says he + did not make his opposition on the ground as to whether it was a free or + slave constitution, and he would have you understand that the Republicans + made their opposition because it ultimately became a slave constitution. + To make proof in favor of himself on this point, he reminds us that he + opposed Lecompton before the vote was taken declaring whether the State + was to be free or slave. But he forgets to say that our Republican + Senator, Trumbull, made a speech against Lecompton even before he did. + </p> + <p> + Why did he oppose it? Partly, as he declares, because the members of the + convention who framed it were not fairly elected by the people; that the + people were not allowed to vote unless they had been registered; and that + the people of whole counties, some instances, were not registered. For + these reasons he declares the Constitution was not an emanation, in any + true sense, from the people. He also has an additional objection as to the + mode of submitting the Constitution back to the people. But bearing on the + question of whether the delegates were fairly elected, a speech of his, + made something more than twelve months ago, from this stand, becomes + important. It was made a little while before the election of the delegates + who made Lecompton. In that speech he declared there was every reason to + hope and believe the election would be fair; and if any one failed to + vote, it would be his own culpable fault. + </p> + <p> + I, a few days after, made a sort of answer to that speech. In that answer + I made, substantially, the very argument with which he combated his + Lecompton adversaries in the Senate last winter. I pointed to the facts + that the people could not vote without being registered, and that the time + for registering had gone by. I commented on it as wonderful that Judge + Douglas could be ignorant of these facts which every one else in the + nation so well knew. + </p> + <p> + I now pass from popular sovereignty and Lecompton. I may have occasion to + refer to one or both. + </p> + <p> + When he was preparing his plan of campaign, Napoleon-like, in New York, as + appears by two speeches I have heard him deliver since his arrival in + Illinois, he gave special attention to a speech of mine, delivered here on + the 16th of June last. He says that he carefully read that speech. He told + us that at Chicago a week ago last night and he repeated it at Bloomington + last night. Doubtless, he repeated it again to-day, though I did not hear + him. In the first two places—Chicago and Bloomington I heard him; + to-day I did not. He said he had carefully examined that speech,—when, + he did not say; but there is no reasonable doubt it was when he was in New + York preparing his plan of campaign. I am glad he did read it carefully. + He says it was evidently prepared with great care. I freely admit it was + prepared with care. I claim not to be more free from errors than others,—perhaps + scarcely so much; but I was very careful not to put anything in that + speech as a matter of fact, or make any inferences, which did not appear + to me to be true and fully warrantable. If I had made any mistake, I was + willing to be corrected; if I had drawn any inference in regard to Judge + Douglas or any one else which was not warranted, I was fully prepared to + modify it as soon as discovered. I planted myself upon the truth and the + truth only, so far as I knew it, or could be brought to know it. + </p> + <p> + Having made that speech with the most kindly feelings toward Judge + Douglas, as manifested therein, I was gratified when I found that he had + carefully examined it, and had detected no error of fact, nor any + inference against him, nor any misrepresentations of which he thought fit + to complain. In neither of the two speeches I have mentioned did he make + any such complaint. I will thank any one who will inform me that he, in + his speech to-day, pointed out anything I had stated respecting him as + being erroneous. I presume there is no such thing. I have reason to be + gratified that the care and caution used in that speech left it so that + he, most of all others interested in discovering error, has not been able + to point out one thing against him which he could say was wrong. He seizes + upon the doctrines he supposes to be included in that speech, and declares + that upon them will turn the issues of this campaign. He then quotes, or + attempts to quote, from my speech. I will not say that he wilfully + misquotes, but he does fail to quote accurately. His attempt at quoting is + from a passage which I believe I can quote accurately from memory. I shall + make the quotation now, with some comments upon it, as I have already + said, in order that the Judge shall be left entirely without excuse for + misrepresenting me. I do so now, as I hope, for the last time. I do this + in great caution, in order that if he repeats his misrepresentation it + shall be plain to all that he does so wilfully. If, after all, he still + persists, I shall be compelled to reconstruct the course I have marked out + for myself, and draw upon such humble resources, as I have, for a new + course, better suited to the real exigencies of the case. I set out in + this campaign with the intention of conducting it strictly as a gentleman, + in substance at least, if not in the outside polish. The latter I shall + never be; but that which constitutes the inside of a gentleman I hope I + understand, and am not less inclined to practice than others. It was my + purpose and expectation that this canvass would be conducted upon + principle, and with fairness on both sides, and it shall not be my fault + if this purpose and expectation shall be given up. + </p> + <p> + He charges, in substance, that I invite a war of sections; that I propose + all the local institutions of the different States shall become + consolidated and uniform. What is there in the language of that speech + which expresses such purpose or bears such construction? I have again and + again said that I would not enter into any of the States to disturb the + institution of slavery. Judge Douglas said, at Bloomington, that I used + language most able and ingenious for concealing what I really meant; and + that while I had protested against entering into the slave States, I + nevertheless did mean to go on the banks of the Ohio and throw missiles + into Kentucky, to disturb them in their domestic institutions. + </p> + <p> + I said in that speech, and I meant no more, that the institution of + slavery ought to be placed in the very attitude where the framers of this + government placed it and left it. I do not understand that the framers of + our Constitution left the people of the free States in the attitude of + firing bombs or shells into the slave States. I was not using that passage + for the purpose for which he infers I did use it. I said: + </p> + <p> + "We are now far advanced into the fifth year since a policy was created + for the avowed object and with the confident promise of putting an end to + slavery agitation. Under the operation of that policy that agitation has + not only not ceased, but has constantly augmented. In my opinion it will + not cease till a crisis shall have been reached and passed. 'A house + divided against itself cannot stand.' I believe that this government + cannot endure permanently half slave and half free; 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 shall rest in the + belief that it is in the course of ultimate extinction, or its advocates + will push it forward till it shall become alike lawful in all the States, + old as well as new, North as well as South." + </p> + <p> + Now, you all see, from that quotation, I did not express my wish on + anything. In that passage I indicated no wish or purpose of my own; I + simply expressed my expectation. Cannot the Judge perceive a distinction + between a purpose and an expectation? I have often expressed an + expectation to die, but I have never expressed a wish to die. I said at + Chicago, and now repeat, that I am quite aware this government has + endured, half slave and half free, for eighty-two years. I understand that + little bit of history. I expressed the opinion I did because I perceived—or + thought I perceived—a new set of causes introduced. I did say at + Chicago, in my speech there, that I do wish to see the spread of slavery + arrested, and to see it placed where the public mind shall rest in the + belief that it is in the course of ultimate extinction. I said that + because I supposed, when the public mind shall rest in that belief, we + shall have peace on the slavery question. I have believed—and now + believe—the public mind did rest on that belief up to the + introduction of the Nebraska Bill. + </p> + <p> + Although I have ever been opposed to slavery, so far I rested in the hope + and belief that it was in the course of ultimate extinction. For that + reason it had been a minor question with me. I might have been mistaken; + but I had believed, and now believe, that the whole public mind, that is, + the mind of the great majority, had rested in that belief up to the repeal + of the Missouri Compromise. But upon that event I became convinced that + either I had been resting in a delusion, or the institution was being + placed on a new basis, a basis for making it perpetual, national, and + universal. Subsequent events have greatly confirmed me in that belief. I + believe that bill to be the beginning of a conspiracy for that purpose. So + believing, I have since then considered that question a paramount one. So + believing, I thought the public mind will never rest till the power of + Congress to restrict the spread of it shall again be acknowledged and + exercised on the one hand or, on the other, all resistance be entirely + crushed out. I have expressed that opinion, and I entertain it to-night. + It is denied that there is any tendency to the nationalization of slavery + in these States. + </p> + <p> + Mr. Brooks, of South Carolina, in one of his speeches, when they were + presenting him canes, silver plate, gold pitchers, and the like, for + assaulting Senator Sumner, distinctly affirmed his opinion that when this + Constitution was formed it was the belief of no man that slavery would + last to the present day. He said, what I think, that the framers of our + Constitution placed the institution of slavery where the public mind + rested in the hope that it was in the course of ultimate extinction. But + he went on to say that the men of the present age, by their experience, + have become wiser than the framers of the Constitution, and the invention + of the cotton gin had made the perpetuity of slavery a necessity in this + country. + </p> + <p> + As another piece of evidence tending to this same point: Quite recently in + Virginia, a man—the owner of slaves—made a will providing that + after his death certain of his slaves should have their freedom if they + should so choose, and go to Liberia, rather than remain in slavery. They + chose to be liberated. But the persons to whom they would descend as + property claimed them as slaves. A suit was instituted, which finally came + to the Supreme Court of Virginia, and was therein decided against the + slaves upon the ground that a negro cannot make a choice; that they had no + legal power to choose, could not perform the condition upon which their + freedom depended. + </p> + <p> + I do not mention this with any purpose of criticizing it, but to connect + it with the arguments as affording additional evidence of the change of + sentiment upon this question of slavery in the direction of making it + perpetual and national. I argue now as I did before, that there is such a + tendency; and I am backed, not merely by the facts, but by the open + confession in the slave States. + </p> + <p> + And now as to the Judge's inference that because I wish to see slavery + placed in the course of ultimate extinction,—placed where our + fathers originally placed it,—I wish to annihilate the State + Legislatures, to force cotton to grow upon the tops of the Green + Mountains, to freeze ice in Florida, to cut lumber on the broad Illinois + prairie,—that I am in favor of all these ridiculous and impossible + things. + </p> + <p> + It seems to me it is a complete answer to all this to ask if, when + Congress did have the fashion of restricting slavery from free territory; + when courts did have the fashion of deciding that taking a slave into a + free country made him free,—I say it is a sufficient answer to ask + if any of this ridiculous nonsense about consolidation and uniformity did + actually follow. Who heard of any such thing because of the Ordinance of + '87? because of the Missouri restriction? because of the numerous court + decisions of that character? + </p> + <p> + Now, as to the Dred Scott decision; for upon that he makes his last point + at me. He boldly takes ground in favor of that decision. + </p> + <p> + This is one half the onslaught, and one third of the entire plan of the + campaign. I am opposed to that decision in a certain sense, but not in the + sense which he puts it. I say that in so far as it decided in favor of + Dred Scott's master, and against Dred Scott and his family, I do not + propose to disturb or resist the decision. + </p> + <p> + I never have proposed to do any such thing. I think that in respect for + judicial authority my humble history would not suffer in comparison with + that of Judge Douglas. He would have the citizen conform his vote to that + decision; the member of Congress, his; the President, his use of the veto + power. He would make it a rule of political action for the people and all + the departments of the government. I would not. By resisting it as a + political rule, I disturb no right of property, create no disorder, excite + no mobs. + </p> + <p> + When he spoke at Chicago, on Friday evening of last week, he made this + same point upon me. On Saturday evening I replied, and reminded him of a + Supreme Court decision which he opposed for at least several years. Last + night, at Bloomington, he took some notice of that reply, but entirely + forgot to remember that part of it. + </p> + <p> + He renews his onslaught upon me, forgetting to remember that I have turned + the tables against himself on that very point. I renew the effort to draw + his attention to it. I wish to stand erect before the country, as well as + Judge Douglas, on this question of judicial authority; and therefore I add + something to the authority in favor of my own position. I wish to show + that I am sustained by authority, in addition to that heretofore + presented. I do not expect to convince the Judge. It is part of the plan + of his campaign, and he will cling to it with a desperate grip. Even turn + it upon him,—the sharp point against him, and gaff him through,—he + will still cling to it till he can invent some new dodge to take the place + of it. + </p> + <p> + In public speaking it is tedious reading from documents; but I must beg to + indulge the practice to a limited extent. I shall read from a letter + written by Mr. Jefferson in 1820, and now to be found in the seventh + volume of his correspondence, at page 177. It seems he had been presented + by a gentleman of the name of Jarvis with a book, or essay, or periodical, + called the Republican, and he was writing in acknowledgment of the + present, and noting some of its contents. After expressing the hope that + the work will produce a favorable effect upon the minds of the young, he + proceeds to say: + </p> + <p> + "That it will have this tendency may be expected, and for that reason I + feel an urgency to note what I deem an error in it, the more requiring + notice as your opinion is strengthened by that of many others. You seem, + in pages 84 and 148, to consider the judges as the ultimate arbiters of + all constitutional questions,—a very dangerous doctrine indeed, and + one which would place us under the despotism of an oligarchy. Our judges + are as honest as other men, and not more so. They have, with others, the + same passions for party, for power, and the privilege of their corps. + Their maxim is, 'Boni judicis est ampliare jurisdictionem'; and their + power is the more dangerous as they are in office for life, and not + responsible, as the other functionaries are, to the elective control. The + Constitution has erected no such single tribunal, knowing that, to + whatever hands confided, with the corruptions of time and party, its + members would become despots. It has more wisely made all the departments + co-equal and co-sovereign with themselves." + </p> + <p> + Thus we see the power claimed for the Supreme Court by Judge Douglas, Mr. + Jefferson holds, would reduce us to the despotism of an oligarchy. + </p> + <p> + Now, I have said no more than this,—in fact, never quite so much as + this; at least I am sustained by Mr. Jefferson. + </p> + <p> + Let us go a little further. You remember we once had a National Bank. Some + one owed the bank a debt; he was sued, and sought to avoid payment on the + ground that the bank was unconstitutional. The case went to the Supreme + Court, and therein it was decided that the bank was constitutional. The + whole Democratic party revolted against that decision. General Jackson + himself asserted that he, as President, would not be bound to hold a + National Bank to be constitutional, even though the court had decided it + to be so. He fell in precisely with the view of Mr. Jefferson, and acted + upon it under his official oath, in vetoing a charter for a National Bank. + The declaration that Congress does not possess this constitutional power + to charter a bank has gone into the Democratic platform, at their National + Conventions, and was brought forward and reaffirmed in their last + Convention at Cincinnati. They have contended for that declaration, in the + very teeth of the Supreme Court, for more than a quarter of a century. In + fact, they have reduced the decision to an absolute nullity. That + decision, I repeat, is repudiated in the Cincinnati platform; and still, + as if to show that effrontery can go no further, Judge Douglas vaunts in + the very speeches in which he denounces me for opposing the Dred Scott + decision that he stands on the Cincinnati platform. + </p> + <p> + Now, I wish to know what the Judge can charge upon me, with respect to + decisions of the Supreme Court, which does not lie in all its length, + breadth, and proportions at his own door. The plain truth is simply this: + Judge Douglas is for Supreme Court decisions when he likes and against + them when he does not like them. He is for the Dred Scott decision because + it tends to nationalize slavery; because it is part of the original + combination for that object. It so happens, singularly enough, that I + never stood opposed to a decision of the Supreme Court till this, on the + contrary, I have no recollection that he was ever particularly in favor of + one till this. He never was in favor of any nor opposed to any, till the + present one, which helps to nationalize slavery. + </p> + <p> + Free men of Sangamon, free men of Illinois, free men everywhere, judge ye + between him and me upon this issue. + </p> + <p> + He says this Dred Scott case is a very small matter at most,—that it + has no practical effect; that at best, or rather, I suppose, at worst, it + is but an abstraction. I submit that the proposition that the thing which + determines whether a man is free or a slave is rather concrete than + abstract. I think you would conclude that it was, if your liberty depended + upon it, and so would Judge Douglas, if his liberty depended upon it. But + suppose it was on the question of spreading slavery over the new + Territories that he considers it as being merely an abstract matter, and + one of no practical importance. How has the planting of slavery in new + countries always been effected? It has now been decided that slavery + cannot be kept out of our new Territories by any legal means. In what do + our new Territories now differ in this respect from the old Colonies when + slavery was first planted within them? It was planted, as Mr. Clay once + declared, and as history proves true, by individual men, in spite of the + wishes of the people; the Mother Government refusing to prohibit it, and + withholding from the people of the Colonies the authority to prohibit it + for themselves. Mr. Clay says this was one of the great and just causes of + complaint against Great Britain by the Colonies, and the best apology we + can now make for having the institution amongst us. In that precise + condition our Nebraska politicians have at last succeeded in placing our + own new Territories; the government will not prohibit slavery within them, + nor allow the people to prohibit it. + </p> + <p> + I defy any man to find any difference between the policy which originally + planted slavery in these Colonies and that policy which now prevails in + our new Territories. If it does not go into them, it is only because no + individual wishes it to go. The Judge indulged himself doubtless to-day + with the question as to what I am going to do with or about the Dred Scott + decision. Well, Judge, will you please tell me what you did about the bank + decision? Will you not graciously allow us to do with the Dred Scott + decision precisely as you did with the bank decision? You succeeded in + breaking down the moral effect of that decision: did you find it necessary + to amend the Constitution, or to set up a court of negroes in order to do + it? + </p> + <p> + There is one other point. Judge Douglas has a very affectionate leaning + toward the Americans and Old Whigs. Last evening, in a sort of weeping + tone, he described to us a death-bed scene. He had been called to the side + of Mr. Clay, in his last moments, in order that the genius of "popular + sovereignty" might duly descend from the dying man and settle upon him, + the living and most worthy successor. He could do no less than promise + that he would devote the remainder of his life to "popular sovereignty"; + and then the great statesman departs in peace. By this part of the "plan + of the campaign" the Judge has evidently promised himself that tears shall + be drawn down the cheeks of all Old Whigs, as large as half-grown apples. + </p> + <p> + Mr. Webster, too, was mentioned; but it did not quite come to a death-bed + scene as to him. It would be amusing, if it were not disgusting, to see + how quick these compromise-breakers administer on the political effects of + their dead adversaries, trumping up claims never before heard of, and + dividing the assets among themselves. If I should be found dead to-morrow + morning, nothing but my insignificance could prevent a speech being made + on my authority, before the end of next week. It so happens that in that + "popular sovereignty" with which Mr. Clay was identified, the Missouri + Compromise was expressly reversed; and it was a little singular if Mr. + Clay cast his mantle upon Judge Douglas on purpose to have that compromise + repealed. + </p> + <p> + Again, the Judge did not keep faith with Mr. Clay when he first brought in + his Nebraska Bill. He left the Missouri Compromise unrepealed, and in his + report accompanying the bill he told the world he did it on purpose. The + manes of Mr. Clay must have been in great agony till thirty days later, + when "popular sovereignty" stood forth in all its glory. + </p> + <p> + One more thing. Last night Judge Douglas tormented himself with horrors + about my disposition to make negroes perfectly equal with white men in + social and political relations. He did not stop to show that I have said + any such thing, or that it legitimately follows from anything I have said, + but he rushes on with his assertions. I adhere to the Declaration of + Independence. If Judge Douglas and his friends are not willing to stand by + it, let them come up and amend it. Let them make it read that all men are + created equal except negroes. Let us have it decided whether the + Declaration of Independence, in this blessed year of 1858, shall be thus + amended. In his construction of the Declaration last year, he said it only + meant that Americans in America were equal to Englishmen in England. Then, + when I pointed out to him that by that rule he excludes the Germans, the + Irish, the Portuguese, and all the other people who have come among us + since the revolution, he reconstructs his construction. In his last speech + he tells us it meant Europeans. + </p> + <p> + I press him a little further, and ask if it meant to include the Russians + in Asia; or does he mean to exclude that vast population from the + principles of our Declaration of Independence? I expect ere long he will + introduce another amendment to his definition. He is not at all + particular. He is satisfied with anything which does not endanger the + nationalizing of negro slavery. It may draw white men down, but it must + not lift negroes up. + </p> + <p> + Who shall say, "I am the superior, and you are the inferior"? + </p> + <p> + My declarations upon this subject of negro slavery may be misrepresented, + but cannot be misunderstood. I have said that I do not understand the + Declaration to mean that all men were created equal in all respects. They + are not our equal in color; but I suppose that it does mean to declare + that all men are equal in some respects; they are equal in their right to + "life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness." Certainly the negro is not + our equal in color, perhaps not in many other respects; still, in the + right to put into his mouth the bread that his own hands have earned, he + is the equal of every other man, white or black. In pointing out that more + has been given you, you cannot be justified in taking away the little + which has been given him. All I ask for the negro is that if you do not + like him, let him alone. If God gave him but little, that little let him + enjoy. + </p> + <p> + When our government was established we had the institution of slavery + among us. We were in a certain sense compelled to tolerate its existence. + It was a sort of necessity. We had gone through our struggle and secured + our own independence. The framers of the Constitution found the + institution of slavery amongst their own institutions at the time. They + found that by an effort to eradicate it they might lose much of what they + had already gained. They were obliged to bow to the necessity. They gave + power to Congress to abolish the slave trade at the end of twenty years. + They also prohibited it in the Territories where it did not exist. They + did what they could, and yielded to the necessity for the rest. I also + yield to all which follows from that necessity. What I would most desire + would be the separation of the white and black races. + </p> + <p> + One more point on this Springfield speech which Judge Douglas says he has + read so carefully. I expressed my belief in the existence of a conspiracy + to perpetuate and nationalize slavery. I did not profess to know it, nor + do I now. I showed the part Judge Douglas had played in the string of + facts constituting to my mind the proof of that conspiracy. I showed the + parts played by others. + </p> + <p> + I charged that the people had been deceived into carrying the last + Presidential election, by the impression that the people of the + Territories might exclude slavery if they chose, when it was known in + advance by the conspirators that the court was to decide that neither + Congress nor the people could so exclude slavery. These charges are more + distinctly made than anything else in the speech. + </p> + <p> + Judge Douglas has carefully read and reread that speech. He has not, so + far as I know, contradicted those charges. In the two speeches which I + heard he certainly did not. On this own tacit admission, I renew that + charge. I charge him with having been a party to that conspiracy and to + that deception for the sole purpose of nationalizing slavery. + </p> + <p> + <a name="link2H_4_0004" id="link2H_4_0004"> + <!-- H2 anchor --> </a> + </p> + <div style="height: 4em;"> + <br /><br /><br /><br /> + </div> + <h2> + CORRESPONDENCE BETWEEN LINCOLN AND DOUGLAS + </h2> + <p> + [The following is the correspondence between the two rival candidates for + the United States Senate] + </p> + <p> + <a name="link2H_4_0005" id="link2H_4_0005"> + <!-- H2 anchor --> </a> + </p> + <div style="height: 4em;"> + <br /><br /><br /><br /> + </div> + <h2> + MR. LINCOLN TO MR. DOUGLAS. + </h2> + <h3> + CHICAGO, ILL., July 24, 1558. + </h3> + <p> + HON. S. A. DOUGLAS: + </p> + <p> + My dear Sir,—Will it be agreeable to you to make an arrangement for + you and myself to divide time, and address the same audiences the present + canvass? Mr. Judd, who will hand you this, is authorized to receive your + answer; and, if agreeable to you, to enter into the terms of such + arrangement. + </p> + <p> + Your obedient servant, + </p> + <p> + A. LINCOLN. <a name="link2H_4_0006" id="link2H_4_0006"> + <!-- H2 anchor --> </a> + </p> + <div style="height: 4em;"> + <br /><br /><br /><br /> + </div> + <h2> + Mr. DOUGLAS TO Mr. LINCOLN. + </h2> + <h3> + BEMENT, PLATT Co., ILL., July 30, 1858. + </h3> + <p> + Dear Sir,—Your letter dated yesterday, accepting my proposition for + a joint discussion at one prominent point in each Congressional District, + as stated in my previous letter, was received this morning. + </p> + <p> + The times and places designated are as follows: + </p> +<pre xml:space="preserve"> + Ottawa, La Salle County August 21st, 1858. + Freeport, Stephenson County " 27th, + Jonesboro, Union County, September 15th, + Charleston, Coles County " 18th, + Galesburgh, Knox County October 7th, + Quincy, Adams County " 13th, + Alton, Madison County " 15th, +</pre> + <p> + I agree to your suggestion that we shall alternately open and close the + discussion. I will speak at Ottawa one hour, you can reply, occupying an + hour and a half, and I will then follow for half an hour. At Freeport, you + shall open the discussion and speak one hour; I will follow for an hour + and a half, and you can then reply for half an hour. We will alternate in + like manner in each successive place. + </p> + <p> + Very respectfully, your obedient servant, + </p> + <p> + S. A. DOUGLAS. <a name="link2H_4_0007" id="link2H_4_0007"> + <!-- H2 anchor --> </a> + </p> + <div style="height: 4em;"> + <br /><br /><br /><br /> + </div> + <h2> + Mr. LINCOLN TO Mr. DOUGLAS. + </h2> + <h3> + SPRINGFIELD, July 31, 1858. HON. S. A. DOUGLAS: + </h3> + <p> + Dear Sir,—Yours of yesterday, naming places, times, and terms for + joint discussions between us, was received this morning. Although, by the + terms, as you propose, you take four openings and closes, to my three, I + accede, and thus close the arrangement. I direct this to you at + Hillsborough, and shall try to have both your letter and this appear in + the Journal and Register of Monday morning. + </p> + <p> + Your obedient servant, + </p> + <p> + A. LINCOLN. <a name="link2H_4_0008" id="link2H_4_0008"> + <!-- H2 anchor --> </a> + </p> + <div style="height: 4em;"> + <br /><br /><br /><br /> + </div> + <h2> + FIRST JOINT DEBATE, AT OTTAWA, + </h2> + <h3> + AUGUST 21, 1858 + </h3> + <p> + Mr. LINCOLN'S REPLY + </p> + <p> + MY FELLOW-CITIZENS:—When a man hears himself somewhat + misrepresented, it provokes him, at least, I find it so with myself; but + when misrepresentation becomes very gross and palpable, it is more apt to + amuse him. The first thing I see fit to notice is the fact that Judge + Douglas alleges, after running through the history of the old Democratic + and the old Whig parties, that Judge Trumbull and myself made an + arrangement in 1854, by which I was to have the place of General Shields + in the United States Senate, and Judge Trumbull was to have the place of + Judge Douglas. Now, all I have to say upon that subject is that I think no + man not even Judge Douglas can prove it, because it is not true. I have no + doubt he is "conscientious" in saying it. As to those resolutions that he + took such a length of time to read, as being the platform of the + Republican party in 1854, I say I never had anything to do with them, and + I think Trumbull never had. Judge Douglas cannot show that either of us + ever did have anything to do with them. + </p> + <p> + I believe this is true about those resolutions: There was a call for a + convention to form a Republican party at Springfield, and I think that my + friend Mr. Lovejoy, who is here upon this stand, had a hand in it. I think + this is true, and I think if he will remember accurately he will be able + to recollect that he tried to get me into it, and I would not go in. I + believe it is also true that I went away from Springfield when the + convention was in session, to attend court in Tazewell county. It is true + they did place my name, though without authority, upon the committee, and + afterward wrote me to attend the meeting of the committee; but I refused + to do so, and I never had anything to do with that organization. This is + the plain truth about all that matter of the resolutions. + </p> + <p> + Now, about this story that Judge Douglas tells of Trumbull bargaining to + sell out the old Democratic party, and Lincoln agreeing to sell out the + old Whig party, I have the means of knowing about that: Judge Douglas + cannot have; and I know there is no substance to it whatever. Yet I have + no doubt he is "conscientious" about it. I know that after Mr. Lovejoy got + into the Legislature that winter, he complained of me that I had told all + the old Whigs of his district that the old Whig party was good enough for + them, and some of them voted against him because I told them so. Now, I + have no means of totally disproving such charges as this which the Judge + makes. A man cannot prove a negative; but he has a right to claim that + when a man makes an affirmative charge, he must offer some proof to show + the truth of what he says. I certainly cannot introduce testimony to show + the negative about things, but I have a right to claim that if a man says + he knows a thing, then he must show how he knows it. I always have a right + to claim this, and it is not satisfactory to me that he may be + "conscientious" on the subject. + </p> + <p> + Now, gentlemen, I hate to waste my time on such things; but in regard to + that general Abolition tilt that Judge Douglas makes, when he says that I + was engaged at that time in selling out and Abolitionizing the old Whig + party, I hope you will permit me to read a part of a printed speech that I + made then at Peoria, which will show altogether a different view of the + position I took in that contest of 1854. + </p> + <p> + [Voice: "Put on your specs."] + </p> + <p> + Mr. LINCOLN: Yes, sir, I am obliged to do so; I am no longer a young man. + </p> + <p> + "This is the repeal of the Missouri Compromise. The foregoing history may + not be precisely accurate in every particular, but I am sure it is + sufficiently so for all the uses I shall attempt to make of it, and in it + we have before us the chief materials enabling us to correctly judge + whether the repeal of the Missouri Compromise is right or wrong. + </p> + <p> + "I think, and shall try to show, that it is wrong—wrong in its + direct effect, letting slavery into Kansas and Nebraska, and wrong in its + prospective principle, allowing it to spread to every other part of the + wide world where men can be found inclined to take it. + </p> + <p> + "This declared indifference, but, as I must think, covert real zeal for + the spread of slavery, I cannot but hate. I hate it because of the + monstrous injustice of slavery itself. I hate it because it deprives our + republican example of its just influence in the world,—enables the + enemies of free institutions, with plausibility, to taunt us as + hypocrites; causes the real friends of freedom to doubt our sincerity, and + especially because it forces so many really good men amongst ourselves + into an open war with the very fundamental principles of civil liberty, + criticizing the Declaration of Independence, and insisting that there is + no right principle of action but self-interest. + </p> + <p> + "Before proceeding, let me say I think I have no prejudice against the + Southern people. They are just what we would be in their situation. If + slavery did not now exist among them, they would not introduce it. If it + did now exist among us, we should not instantly give it up. This I believe + of the masses north and south. Doubtless there are individuals on both + sides who would not hold slaves under any circumstances; and others who + would gladly introduce slavery anew, if it were out of existence. We know + that some Southern men do free their slaves, go north, and become tip-top + Abolitionists; while some Northern ones go south and become most cruel + slave-masters. + </p> + <p> + "When Southern people tell us they are no more responsible for the origin + of slavery than we, I acknowledge the fact. When it is said that the + institution exists, and that it is very difficult to get rid of it, in any + satisfactory way, I can understand and appreciate the saying. I will not + blame them for not doing what I should not know how to do myself. If all + earthly power were given me, I should not know what to do, as to the + existing institution. My first impulse would be to free all the slaves and + send them to Liberia,—to their own native land. But a moment's + reflection would convince me that whatever of high hope (as I think there + is) there may be in this in the long term, its sudden execution is + impossible. If they were all landed there in a day, they would all perish + in the next ten days; and there are not surplus shipping and surplus money + enough in the world to carry them there in many times ten days. What then? + Free them all and keep them among us as underlings? Is it quite certain + that this betters their condition? I think I would not hold one in + slavery, at any rate; yet the point is not clear enough to me to denounce + people upon. What next? Free them, and make them politically and socially + our equals? My own feelings will not admit of this; and if mine would, we + well know that those of the great mass of white people will not. Whether + this feeling accords with justice and sound judgment, is not the sole + question, if, indeed, it is any part of it. A universal feeling, whether + well or ill founded, cannot be safely disregarded. We cannot, then, make + them equals. It does seem to me that systems of gradual emancipation might + be adopted; but for their tardiness in this I will not undertake to judge + our brethren of the South. + </p> + <p> + "When they remind us of their constitutional rights, I acknowledge them, + not grudgingly, but fully and fairly; and I would give them any + legislation for the reclaiming of their fugitives, which should not, in + its stringency, be more likely to carry a free man into slavery than Our + ordinary criminal laws are to hang an innocent one. + </p> + <p> + "But all this, to my judgment, furnishes no more excuse for permitting + slavery to go into our own free territory than it would for reviving the + African slave-trade by law. The law which forbids the bringing of slaves + from Africa, and that which has so long forbid the taking of them to + Nebraska, can hardly be distinguished on any moral principle; and the + repeal of the former could find quite as plausible excuses as that of the + latter." + </p> + <p> + I have reason to know that Judge Douglas knows that I said this. I think + he has the answer here to one of the questions he put to me. I do not mean + to allow him to catechize me unless he pays back for it in kind. I will + not answer questions one after another, unless he reciprocates; but as he + has made this inquiry, and I have answered it before, he has got it + without my getting anything in return. He has got my answer on the + Fugitive Slave law. + </p> + <p> + Now, gentlemen, I don't want to read at any greater length; but this is + the true complexion of all I have ever said in regard to the institution + of slavery and the black race. This is the whole of it; and anything that + argues me into his idea of perfect social and political equality with the + negro is but a specious and fantastic arrangement of words, by which a man + can prove a horse-chestnut to be a chestnut horse. I will say here, while + upon this subject, that I have no purpose, directly or indirectly, to + interfere with the institution of slavery in the States where it exists. I + believe I have no lawful right to do so, and I have no inclination to do + so. I have no purpose to introduce political and social equality between + the white and the black races. There is a physical difference between the + two which, in my judgment, will probably forever forbid their living + together upon the footing of perfect equality; and inasmuch as it becomes + a necessity that there must be a difference, I, as well as Judge Douglas, + am in favor of the race to which I belong having the superior position. I + have never said anything to the contrary, but I hold that, notwithstanding + all this, there is no reason in the world why the negro is not entitled to + all the natural rights enumerated in the Declaration of Independence, the + right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. I hold that he is as + much entitled to these as the white man. I agree with Judge Douglas he is + not my equal in many respects, certainly not in color, perhaps not in + moral or intellectual endowment. But in the right to eat the bread, + without the leave of anybody else, which his own hand earns, he is my + equal, and the equal of Judge Douglas, and the equal of every living man. + </p> + <p> + Now I pass on to consider one or two more of these little follies. The + Judge is woefully at fault about his early friend Lincoln being a + "grocery-keeper." I don't know as it would be a great sin, if I had been; + but he is mistaken. Lincoln never kept a grocery anywhere in the world. It + is true that Lincoln did work the latter part of one winter in a little + stillhouse, up at the head of a hollow. And so I think my friend the Judge + is equally at fault when he charges me at the time when I was in Congress + of having opposed our soldiers who were fighting in the Mexican war. The + Judge did not make his charge very distinctly, but I can tell you what he + can prove, by referring to the record. You remember I was an old Whig, and + whenever the Democratic party tried to get me to vote that the war had + been righteously begun by the President, I would not do it. But whenever + they asked for any money, or landwarrants, or anything to pay the soldiers + there, during all that time, I gave the same vote that Judge Douglas did. + You can think as you please as to whether that was consistent. Such is the + truth, and the Judge has the right to make all he can out of it. But when + he, by a general charge, conveys the idea that I withheld supplies from + the soldiers who were fighting in the Mexican war, or did anything else to + hinder the soldiers, he is, to say the least, grossly and altogether + mistaken, as a consultation of the records will prove to him. + </p> + <p> + As I have not used up so much of my time as I had supposed, I will dwell a + little longer upon one or two of these minor topics upon which the Judge + has spoken. He has read from my speech in Springfield, in which I say that + "a house divided against itself cannot stand" Does the Judge say it can + stand? I don't know whether he does or not. The Judge does not seem to be + attending to me just now, but I would like to know if it is his opinion + that a house divided against itself can stand. If he does, then there is a + question of veracity, not between him and me, but between the Judge and an + Authority of a somewhat higher character. + </p> + <p> + Now, my friends, I ask your attention to this matter for the purpose of + saying something seriously. I know that the Judge may readily enough agree + with me that the maxim which was put forth by the Savior is true, but he + may allege that I misapply it; and the Judge has a right to urge that, in + my application, I do misapply it, and then I have a right to show that I + do not misapply it, When he undertakes to say that because I think this + nation, so far as the question of slavery is concerned, will all become + one thing or all the other, I am in favor of bringing about a dead + uniformity in the various States, in all their institutions, he argues + erroneously. The great variety of the local institutions in the States, + springing from differences in the soil, differences in the face of the + country, and in the climate, are bonds of Union. They do not make "a house + divided against itself," but they make a house united. If they produce in + one section of the country what is called for, by the wants of another + section, and this other section can supply the wants of the first, they + are not matters of discord, but bonds of union, true bonds of union. But + can this question of slavery be considered as among these varieties in the + institutions of the country? I leave it to you to say whether, in the + history of our government, this institution of slavery has not always + failed to be a bond of union, and, on the contrary, been an apple of + discord and an element of division in the house. I ask you to consider + whether, so long as the moral constitution of men's minds shall continue + to be the same, after this generation and assemblage shall sink into the + grave, and another race shall arise, with the same moral and intellectual + development we have, whether, if that institution is standing in the same + irritating position in which it now is, it will not continue an element of + division? If so, then I have a right to say that, in regard to this + question, the Union is a house divided against itself; and when the Judge + reminds me that I have often said to him that the institution of slavery + has existed for eighty years in some States, and yet it does not exist in + some others, I agree to the fact, and I account for it by looking at the + position in which our fathers originally placed it—restricting it + from the new Territories where it had not gone, and legislating to cut off + its source by the abrogation of the slave trade, thus putting the seal of + legislation against its spread. The public mind did rest in the belief + that it was in the course of ultimate extinction. But lately, I think—and + in this I charge nothing on the Judge's motives—lately, I think that + he, and those acting with him, have placed that institution on a new + basis, which looks to the perpetuity and nationalization of slavery. And + while it is placed upon this new basis, I say, and I have said, that I + believe we shall not have peace upon the question until the opponents of + slavery arrest the further spread of it, and place it where the public + mind shall rest in the belief that it is in the course of ultimate + extinction; or, on the other hand, that 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. Now, I believe if we could arrest the spread, and + place it where Washington and Jefferson and Madison placed it, it would be + in the course of ultimate extinction, and the public mind would, as for + eighty years past, believe that it was in the course of ultimate + extinction. The crisis would be past, and the institution might be let + alone for a hundred years, if it should live so long, in the States where + it exists; yet it would be going out of existence in the way best for both + the black and the white races. + </p> + <p> + [A voice: "Then do you repudiate popular sovereignty?"] + </p> + <p> + Well, then, let us talk about popular sovereignty! what is popular + sovereignty? Is it the right of the people to have slavery or not have it, + as they see fit, in the Territories? I will state—and I have an able + man to watch me—my understanding is that popular sovereignty, as now + applied to the question of slavery, does allow the people of a Territory + to have slavery if they want to, but does not allow them not to have it if + they do not want it. I do not mean that if this vast concourse of people + were in a Territory of the United States, any one of them would be obliged + to have a slave if he did not want one; but I do say that, as I understand + the Dred Scott decision, if any one man wants slaves, all the rest have no + way of keeping that one man from holding them. + </p> + <p> + When I made my speech at Springfield, of which the Judge complains, and + from which he quotes, I really was not thinking of the things which he + ascribes to me at all. I had no thought in the world that I was doing + anything to bring about a war between the free and slave states. I had no + thought in the world that I was doing anything to bring about a political + and social equality of the black and white races. It never occurred to me + that I was doing anything or favoring anything to reduce to a dead + uniformity all the local institutions of the various States. But I must + say, in all fairness to him, if he thinks I am doing something which leads + to these bad results, it is none the better that I did not mean it. It is + just as fatal to the country, if I have any influence in producing it, + whether I intend it or not. But can it be true that placing this + institution upon the original basis—the basis upon which our fathers + placed it—can have any tendency to set the Northern and the Southern + States at war with one another, or that it can have any tendency to make + the people of Vermont raise sugar-cane, because they raise it in + Louisiana, or that it can compel the people of Illinois to cut pine logs + on the Grand Prairie, where they will not grow, because they cut pine logs + in Maine, where they do grow? The Judge says this is a new principle + started in regard to this question. Does the Judge claim that he is + working on the plan of the founders of government? I think he says in some + of his speeches indeed, I have one here now—that he saw evidence of + a policy to allow slavery to be south of a certain line, while north of it + it should be excluded, and he saw an indisposition on the part of the + country to stand upon that policy, and therefore he set about studying the + subject upon original principles, and upon original principles he got up + the Nebraska Bill! I am fighting it upon these "original principles," + fighting it in the Jeffersonian, Washingtonian, and Madisonian fashion. + </p> + <p> + Now, my friends, I wish you to attend for a little while to one or two + other things in that Springfield speech. My main object was to show, so + far as my humble ability was capable of showing, to the people of this + country what I believed was the truth,—that there was a tendency, if + not a conspiracy, among those who have engineered this slavery question + for the last four or five years, to make slavery perpetual and universal + in this nation. Having made that speech principally for that object, after + arranging the evidences that I thought tended to prove my proposition, I + concluded with this bit of comment: + </p> + <p> + "We cannot absolutely know that these exact adaptations are the result of + preconcert; but when we see a lot of framed timbers, different portions of + which we know have been gotten out at different times and places, and by + different workmen—Stephen, Franklin, Roger, and James, for instance,—and + when we see these timbers joined together, and see they exactly make the + frame of a house or a mill, all the tenons and mortises exactly fitting, + and all the lengths and proportions of the different pieces exactly + adapted to their respective places, and not a piece too many or too few,—not + omitting even the scaffolding,—or if a single piece be lacking, we + see the place in the frame exactly fitted and prepared yet to bring such + piece in,—in such a case we feel it impossible not to believe that + Stephen and Franklin and Roger and James all understood one another from + the beginning, and all worked upon a common plan or draft drawn before the + first blow was struck." + </p> + <p> + When my friend Judge Douglas came to Chicago on the 9th of July, this + speech having been delivered on the 16th of June, he made an harangue + there, in which he took hold of this speech of mine, showing that he had + carefully read it; and while he paid no attention to this matter at all, + but complimented me as being a "kind, amiable, and intelligent gentleman," + notwithstanding I had said this, he goes on and eliminates, or draws out, + from my speech this tendency of mine to set the States at war with one + another, to make all the institutions uniform, and set the niggers and + white people to marrying together. Then, as the Judge had complimented me + with these pleasant titles (I must confess to my weakness), I was a little + "taken," for it came from a great man. I was not very much accustomed to + flattery, and it came the sweeter to me. I was rather like the Hoosier, + with the gingerbread, when he said he reckoned he loved it better than any + other man, and got less of it. As the Judge had so flattered me, I could + not make up my mind that he meant to deal unfairly with me; so I went to + work to show him that he misunderstood the whole scope of my speech, and + that I really never intended to set the people at war with one another. As + an illustration, the next time I met him, which was at Springfield, I used + this expression, that I claimed no right under the Constitution, nor had I + any inclination, to enter into the slave States and interfere with the + institutions of slavery. He says upon that: Lincoln will not enter into + the slave States, but will go to the banks of the Ohio, on this side, and + shoot over! He runs on, step by step, in the horse-chestnut style of + argument, until in the Springfield speech he says: "Unless he shall be + successful in firing his batteries until he shall have extinguished + slavery in all the States the Union shall be dissolved." Now, I don't + think that was exactly the way to treat "a kind, amiable, intelligent + gentleman." I know if I had asked the Judge to show when or where it was I + had said that, if I didn't succeed in firing into the slave States until + slavery should be extinguished, the Union should be dissolved, he could + not have shown it. I understand what he would do. He would say: I don't + mean to quote from you, but this was the result of what you say. But I + have the right to ask, and I do ask now, Did you not put it in such a form + that an ordinary reader or listener would take it as an expression from + me? + </p> + <p> + In a speech at Springfield, on the night of the 17th, I thought I might as + well attend to my own business a little, and I recalled his attention as + well as I could to this charge of conspiracy to nationalize slavery. I + called his attention to the fact that he had acknowledged in my hearing + twice that he had carefully read the speech, and, in the language of the + lawyers, as he had twice read the speech, and still had put in no plea or + answer, I took a default on him. I insisted that I had a right then to + renew that charge of conspiracy. Ten days afterward I met the Judge at + Clinton,—that is to say, I was on the ground, but not in the + discussion,—and heard him make a speech. Then he comes in with his + plea to this charge, for the first time; and his plea when put in, as well + as I can recollect it, amounted to this: that he never had any talk with + Judge Taney or the President of the United States with regard to the Dred + Scott decision before it was made. I (Lincoln) ought to know that the man + who makes a charge without knowing it to be true falsifies as much as he + who knowingly tells a falsehood; and, lastly, that he would pronounce the + whole thing a falsehood; but, he would make no personal application of the + charge of falsehood, not because of any regard for the "kind, amiable, + intelligent gentleman," but because of his own personal self-respect! I + have understood since then (but [turning to Judge Douglas] will not hold + the Judge to it if he is not willing) that he has broken through the + "self-respect," and has got to saying the thing out. The Judge nods to me + that it is so. It is fortunate for me that I can keep as good-humored as I + do, when the Judge acknowledges that he has been trying to make a question + of veracity with me. I know the Judge is a great man, while I am only a + small man, but I feel that I have got him. I demur to that plea. I waive + all objections that it was not filed till after default was taken, and + demur to it upon the merits. What if Judge Douglas never did talk with + Chief Justice Taney and the President before the Dred Scott decision was + made, does it follow that he could not have had as perfect an + understanding without talking as with it? I am not disposed to stand upon + my legal advantage. I am disposed to take his denial as being like an + answer in chancery, that he neither had any knowledge, information, or + belief in the existence of such a conspiracy. I am disposed to take his + answer as being as broad as though he had put it in these words. And now, + I ask, even if he had done so, have not I a right to prove it on him, and + to offer the evidence of more than two witnesses, by whom to prove it; and + if the evidence proves the existence of the conspiracy, does his broader + answer denying all knowledge, information, or belief, disturb the fact? It + can only show that he was used by conspirators, and was not a leader of + them. + </p> +<pre xml:space="preserve"> +Now, in regard to his reminding me of the moral rule that persons who tell +what they do not know to be true falsify as much as those who knowingly +tell falsehoods. I remember the rule, and it must be borne in mind that +in what I have read to you, I do not say that I know such a conspiracy +to exist. To that I reply, I believe it. If the Judge says that I do not +believe it, then he says what he does not know, and falls within his +own rule, that he who asserts a thing which he does not know to be true, +falsifies as much as he who knowingly tells a falsehood. I want to call +your attention to a little discussion on that branch of the case, and the +evidence which brought my mind to the conclusion which I expressed as +my belief. If, in arraying that evidence I had stated anything which was +false or erroneous, it needed but that Judge Douglas should point it out, +and I would have taken it back, with all the kindness in the world. I do +not deal in that way. If I have brought forward anything not a fact, if he +will point it out, it will not even ruffle me to take it back. But if he +will not point out anything erroneous in the evidence, is it not rather +for him to show, by a comparison of the evidence, that I have reasoned +falsely, than to call the "kind, amiable, intelligent gentleman" a liar? +If I have reasoned to a false conclusion, it is the vocation of an +able debater to show by argument that I have wandered to an erroneous +conclusion. I want to ask your attention to a portion of the Nebraska +Bill, which Judge Douglas has quoted: + + "It being the true intent and meaning of this Act, not to +legislate slavery into any Territory or State, nor to exclude it +therefrom, but to leave the people thereof perfectly free to form and +regulate their domestic institutions in their own way, subject only to the +Constitution of the United States." +</pre> + <p> + Thereupon Judge Douglas and others began to argue in favor of "popular + sovereignty," the right of the people to have slaves if they wanted them, + and to exclude slavery if they did not want them. "But," said, in + substance, a Senator from Ohio (Mr. Chase, I believe), "we more than + suspect that you do not mean to allow the people to exclude slavery if + they wish to; and if you do mean it, accept an amendment which I propose, + expressly authorizing the people to exclude slavery." + </p> + <p> + I believe I have the amendment here before me, which was offered, and + under which the people of the Territory, through their representatives, + might, if they saw fit, prohibit the existence of slavery therein. And now + I state it as a fact, to be taken back if there is any mistake about it, + that Judge Douglas and those acting with him voted that amendment down. I + now think that those men who voted it down had a real reason for doing so. + They know what that reason was. It looks to us, since we have seen the + Dred Scott decision pronounced, holding that "under the Constitution" the + people cannot exclude slavery, I say it looks to outsiders, poor, simple, + "amiable, intelligent gentlemen," as though the niche was left as a place + to put that Dred Scott decision in,—a niche which would have been + spoiled by adopting the amendment. And now, I say again, if this was not + the reason, it will avail the Judge much more to calmly and good-humoredly + point out to these people what that other reason was for voting the + amendment down, than, swelling himself up, to vociferate that he may be + provoked to call somebody a liar. + </p> + <p> + Again: There is in that same quotation from the Nebraska Bill this clause: + "It being the true intent and meaning of this bill not to legislate + slavery into any Territory or State." I have always been puzzled to know + what business the word "State" had in that connection. Judge Douglas + knows. He put it there. He knows what he put it there for. We outsiders + cannot say what he put it there for. The law they were passing was not + about States, and was not making provisions for States. What was it placed + there for? After seeing the Dred Scott decision, which holds that the + people cannot exclude slavery from a Territory, if another Dred Scott + decision shall come, holding that they cannot exclude it from a State, we + shall discover that when the word was originally put there, it was in view + of something which was to come in due time, we shall see that it was the + other half of something. I now say again, if there is any different reason + for putting it there, Judge Douglas, in a good-humored way, without + calling anybody a liar, can tell what the reason was. + </p> + <p> + When the Judge spoke at Clinton, he came very near making a charge of + falsehood against me. He used, as I found it printed in a newspaper, + which, I remember, was very nearly like the real speech, the following + language: + </p> + <p> + "I did not answer the charge [of conspiracy] before, for the reason that I + did not suppose there was a man in America with a heart so corrupt as to + believe such a charge could be true. I have too much respect for Mr. + Lincoln to suppose he is serious in making the charge." + </p> + <p> + I confess this is rather a curious view, that out of respect for me he + should consider I was making what I deemed rather a grave charge in fun. I + confess it strikes me rather strangely. But I let it pass. As the Judge + did not for a moment believe that there was a man in America whose heart + was so "corrupt" as to make such a charge, and as he places me among the + "men in America" who have hearts base enough to make such a charge, I hope + he will excuse me if I hunt out another charge very like this; and if it + should turn out that in hunting I should find that other, and it should + turn out to be Judge Douglas himself who made it, I hope he will + reconsider this question of the deep corruption of heart he has thought + fit to ascribe to me. In Judge Douglas's speech of March 22, 1858, which I + hold in my hand, he says: + </p> + <p> + "In this connection there is another topic to which I desire to allude. I + seldom refer to the course of newspapers, or notice the articles which + they publish in regard to myself; but the course of the Washington Union + has been so extraordinary for the last two or three months, that I think + it well enough to make some allusion to it. It has read me out of the + Democratic party every other day, at least for two or three months, and + keeps reading me out, and, as if it had not succeeded, still continues to + read me out, using such terms as 'traitor,' 'renegade,' 'deserter,' and + other kind and polite epithets of that nature. Sir, I have no vindication + to make of my Democracy against the Washington Union, or any other + newspapers. I am willing to allow my history and action for the last + twenty years to speak for themselves as to my political principles and my + fidelity to political obligations. The Washington Union has a personal + grievance. When its editor was nominated for public printer, I declined to + vote for him, and stated that at some time I might give my reasons for + doing so. Since I declined to give that vote, this scurrilous abuse, these + vindictive and constant attacks have been repeated almost daily on me. + Will any friend from Michigan read the article to which I allude?" + </p> + <p> + This is a part of the speech. You must excuse me from reading the entire + article of the Washington Union, as Mr. Stuart read it for Mr. Douglas. + The Judge goes on and sums up, as I think, correctly: + </p> + <p> + "Mr. President, you here find several distinct propositions advanced + boldly by the Washington Union editorially, and apparently + authoritatively; and any man who questions any of them is denounced as an + Abolitionist, a Free-soiler, a fanatic. The propositions are, first, that + the primary object of all government at its original institution is the + protection of person and property; second, that the Constitution of the + United States declares that the citizens of each State shall be entitled + to all the privileges and immunities of citizens in the several States; + and that, therefore, thirdly, all State laws, whether organic or + otherwise, which prohibit the citizens of one State from settling in + another with their slave property, and especially declaring it forfeited, + are direct violations of the original intention of the government and + Constitution of the United States; and, fourth, that the emancipation of + the slaves of the Northern States was a gross outrage of the rights of + property, inasmuch as it was involuntarily done on the part of the owner. + </p> + <p> + "Remember that this article was published in the Union on the 17th of + November, and on the 18th appeared the first article giving the adhesion + of the Union, to the Lecompton Constitution. It was in these words: + </p> + <p> + "KANSAS AND HER CONSTITUTION.—The vexed question is settled. The + problem is saved. The dead point of danger is passed. All serious trouble + to Kansas affairs is over and gone..." + </p> + <p> + And a column nearly of the same sort. Then, when you come to look into the + Lecompton Constitution, you find the same doctrine incorporated in it + which was put forth editorially in the Union. What is it? + </p> + <p> + "ARTICLE 7, Section I. The right of property is before and higher than any + constitutional sanction; and the right of the owner of a slave to such + slave and its increase is the same and as inviolable as the right of the + owner of any property whatever." + </p> + <p> + Then in the schedule is a provision that the Constitution may be amended + after 1864 by a two-thirds vote: + </p> + <p> + "But no alteration shall be made to affect the right of property in the + ownership of slaves." + </p> + <p> + "It will be seen by these clauses in the Lecompton Constitution that they + are identical in spirit with the authoritative article in the Washington + Union of the day previous to its indorsement of this Constitution." + </p> + <p> + I pass over some portions of the speech, and I hope that any one who feels + interested in this matter will read the entire section of the speech, and + see whether I do the Judge injustice. He proceeds: + </p> + <p> + "When I saw that article in the Union of the 17th of November, followed by + the glorification of the Lecompton Constitution on the 10th of November, + and this clause in the Constitution asserting the doctrine that a State + has no right to prohibit slavery within its limits, I saw that there was a + fatal blow being struck at the sovereignty of the States of this Union." + </p> + <p> + I stop the quotation there, again requesting that it may all be read. I + have read all of the portion I desire to comment upon. What is this charge + that the Judge thinks I must have a very corrupt heart to make? It was a + purpose on the part of certain high functionaries to make it impossible + for the people of one State to prohibit the people of any other State from + entering it with their "property," so called, and making it a slave State. + In other words, it was a charge implying a design to make the institution + of slavery national. And now I ask your attention to what Judge Douglas + has himself done here. I know he made that part of the speech as a reason + why he had refused to vote for a certain man for public printer; but when + we get at it, the charge itself is the very one I made against him, that + he thinks I am so corrupt for uttering. Now, whom does he make that charge + against? Does he make it against that newspaper editor merely? No; he says + it is identical in spirit with the Lecompton Constitution, and so the + framers of that Constitution are brought in with the editor of the + newspaper in that "fatal blow being struck." He did not call it a + "conspiracy." In his language, it is a "fatal blow being struck." And if + the words carry the meaning better when changed from a "conspiracy" into a + "fatal blow being struck," I will change my expression, and call it "fatal + blow being struck." We see the charge made not merely against the editor + of the Union, but all the framers of the Lecompton Constitution; and not + only so, but the article was an authoritative article. By whose authority? + Is there any question but he means it was by the authority of the + President and his Cabinet,—the Administration? + </p> + <p> + Is there any sort of question but he means to make that charge? Then there + are the editors of the Union, the framers of the Lecompton Constitution, + the President of the United States and his Cabinet, and all the supporters + of the Lecompton Constitution, in Congress and out of Congress, who are + all involved in this "fatal blow being struck." I commend to Judge + Douglas's consideration the question of how corrupt a man's heart must be + to make such a charge! + </p> + <p> + Now, my friends, I have but one branch of the subject, in the little time + I have left, to which to call your attention; and as I shall come to a + close at the end of that branch, it is probable that I shall not occupy + quite all the time allotted to me. Although on these questions I would + like to talk twice as long as I have, I could not enter upon another head + and discuss it properly without running over my time. I ask the attention + of the people here assembled and elsewhere to the course that Judge + Douglas is pursuing every day as bearing upon this question of making + slavery national. Not going back to the records, but taking the speeches + he makes, the speeches he made yesterday and day before, and makes + constantly all over the country, I ask your attention to them. In the + first place, what is necessary to make the institution national? Not war. + There is no danger that the people of Kentucky will shoulder their + muskets, and, with a young nigger stuck on every bayonet, march into + Illinois and force them upon us. There is no danger of our going over + there and making war upon them. Then what is necessary for the + nationalization of slavery? It is simply the next Dred Scott decision. It + is merely for the Supreme Court to decide that no State under the + Constitution can exclude it, just as they have already decided that under + the Constitution neither Congress nor the Territorial Legislature can do + it. When that is decided and acquiesced in, the whole thing is done. This + being true, and this being the way, as I think, that slavery is to be made + national, let us consider what Judge Douglas is doing every day to that + end. In the first place, let us see what influence he is exerting on + public sentiment. In this and like communities, public sentiment is + everything. With public sentiment, nothing can fail; without it, nothing + can succeed. Consequently, he who moulds public sentiment goes deeper than + he who enacts statutes or pronounces decisions. He makes statutes and + decisions possible or impossible to be executed. This must be borne in + mind, as also the additional fact that Judge Douglas is a man of vast + influence, so great that it is enough for many men to profess to believe + anything when they once find out Judge Douglas professes to believe it. + Consider also the attitude he occupies at the head of a large party,—a + party which he claims has a majority of all the voters in the country. + This man sticks to a decision which forbids the people of a Territory from + excluding slavery, and he does so, not because he says it is right in + itself,—he does not give any opinion on that,—but because it + has been decided by the court; and being decided by the court, he is, and + you are, bound to take it in your political action as law, not that he + judges at all of its merits, but because a decision of the court is to him + a "Thus saith the Lord." He places it on that ground alone; and you will + bear in mind that thus committing himself unreservedly to this decision + commits him to the next one just as firmly as to this. He did not commit + himself on account of the merit or demerit of the decision, but it is a + "Thus saith the Lord." The next decision, as much as this, will be a "Thus + saith the Lord." There is nothing that can divert or turn him away from + this decision. It is nothing that I point out to him that his great + prototype, General Jackson, did not believe in the binding force of + decisions. It is nothing to him that Jefferson did not so believe. I have + said that I have often heard him approve of Jackson's course in + disregarding the decision of the Supreme Court pronouncing a National Bank + constitutional. He says I did not hear him say so. He denies the accuracy + of my recollection. I say he ought to know better than I, but I will make + no question about this thing, though it still seems to me that I heard him + say it twenty times. I will tell him, though, that he now claims to stand + on the Cincinnati platform, which affirms that Congress cannot charter a + National Bank, in the teeth of that old standing decision that Congress + can charter a bank. And I remind him of another piece of history on the + question of respect for judicial decisions, and it is a piece of Illinois + history belonging to a time when the large party to which Judge Douglas + belonged were displeased with a decision of the Supreme Court of Illinois, + because they had decided that a Governor could not remove a Secretary of + State. You will find the whole story in Ford's History of Illinois, and I + know that Judge Douglas will not deny that he was then in favor of + over-slaughing that decision by the mode of adding five new judges, so as + to vote down the four old ones. Not only so, but it ended in the Judge's + sitting down on that very bench as one of the five new judges to break + down the four old ones It was in this way precisely that he got his title + of judge. Now, when the Judge tells me that men appointed conditionally to + sit as members of a court will have to be catechized beforehand upon some + subject, I say, "You know, Judge; you have tried it." When he says a court + of this kind will lose the confidence of all men, will be prostituted and + disgraced by such a proceeding, I say, "You know best, Judge; you have + been through the mill." But I cannot shake Judge Douglas's teeth loose + from the Dred Scott decision. Like some obstinate animal (I mean no + disrespect) that will hang on when he has once got his teeth fixed, you + may cut off a leg, or you may tear away an arm, still he will not relax + his hold. And so I may point out to the Judge, and say that he is + bespattered all over, from the beginning of his political life to the + present time, with attacks upon judicial decisions; I may cut off limb + after limb of his public record, and strive to wrench him from a single + dictum of the court,—yet I cannot divert him from it. He hangs, to + the last, to the Dred Scott decision. These things show there is a purpose + strong as death and eternity for which he adheres to this decision, and + for which he will adhere to all other decisions of the same court. + </p> + <p> + [A HIBERNIAN: "Give us something besides Dred Scott."] + </p> + <p> + Yes; no doubt you want to hear something that don't hurt. Now, having + spoken of the Dred Scott decision, one more word, and I am done. Henry + Clay, my beau-ideal of a statesman, the man for whom I fought all my + humble life, Henry Clay once said of a class of men who would repress all + tendencies to liberty and ultimate emancipation that they must, if they + would do this, go back to the era of our Independence, and muzzle the + cannon which thunders its annual joyous return; they must blow out the + moral lights around us; they must penetrate the human soul, and eradicate + there the love of liberty; and then, and not till then, could they + perpetuate slavery in this country! To my thinking, Judge Douglas is, by + his example and vast influence, doing that very thing in this community, + when he says that the negro has nothing in the Declaration of + Independence. Henry Clay plainly understood the contrary. Judge Douglas is + going back to the era of our Revolution, and, to the extent of his + ability, muzzling the cannon which thunders its annual joyous return. When + he invites any people, willing to have slavery, to establish it, he is + blowing out the moral lights around us. When he says he "cares not whether + slavery is voted down or up,"—that it is a sacred right of + self-government,—he is, in my judgment, penetrating the human soul + and eradicating the light of reason and the love of liberty in this + American people. And now I will only say that when, by all these means and + appliances, Judge Douglas shall succeed in bringing public sentiment to an + exact accordance with his own views; when these vast assemblages shall + echo back all these sentiments; when they shall come to repeat his views + and to avow his principles, and to say all that he says on these mighty + questions,—then it needs only the formality of the second Dred Scott + decision, which he indorses in advance, to make slavery alike lawful in + all the States, old as well as new, North as well as South. + </p> + <p> + My friends, that ends the chapter. The Judge can take his half-hour. + </p> + <p> + <a name="link2H_4_0009" id="link2H_4_0009"> + <!-- H2 anchor --> </a> + </p> + <div style="height: 4em;"> + <br /><br /><br /><br /> + </div> + <h2> + SECOND JOINT DEBATE, AT FREEPORT, + </h2> + <h3> + AUGUST 27, 1858 + </h3> + <p> + LADIES AND GENTLEMEN:—On Saturday last, Judge Douglas and myself + first met in public discussion. He spoke one hour, I an hour and a half, + and he replied for half an hour. The order is now reversed. I am to speak + an hour, he an hour and a half, and then I am to reply for half an hour. I + propose to devote myself during the first hour to the scope of what was + brought within the range of his half-hour speech at Ottawa. Of course + there was brought within the scope in that half-hour's speech something of + his own opening speech. In the course of that opening argument Judge + Douglas proposed to me seven distinct interrogatories. In my speech of an + hour and a half, I attended to some other parts of his speech, and + incidentally, as I thought, intimated to him that I would answer the rest + of his interrogatories on condition only that he should agree to answer as + many for me. He made no intimation at the time of the proposition, nor did + he in his reply allude at all to that suggestion of mine. I do him no + injustice in saying that he occupied at least half of his reply in dealing + with me as though I had refused to answer his interrogatories. I now + propose that I will answer any of the interrogatories, upon condition that + he will answer questions from me not exceeding the same number. I give him + an opportunity to respond. + </p> + <p> + The Judge remains silent. I now say that I will answer his + interrogatories, whether he answers mine or not; and that after I have + done so, I shall propound mine to him. + </p> + <p> + I have supposed myself, since the organization of the Republican party at + Bloomington, in May, 1856, bound as a party man by the platforms of the + party, then and since. If in any interrogatories which I shall answer I go + beyond the scope of what is within these platforms, it will be perceived + that no one is responsible but myself. + </p> + <p> + Having said thus much, I will take up the Judge's interrogatories as I + find them printed in the Chicago Times, and answer them seriatim. In order + that there may be no mistake about it, I have copied the interrogatories + in writing, and also my answers to them. The first one of these + interrogatories is in these words: + </p> + <p> + Question 1.—"I desire to know whether Lincoln to-day stands, as he + did in 1854, in favor of the unconditional repeal of the Fugitive Slave + law?" Answer:—I do not now, nor ever did, stand in favor of the + unconditional repeal of the Fugitive Slave law. + </p> + <p> + Q. 2.—"I desire him to answer whether he stands pledged to-day, as + he did in 1854, against the admission of any more slave States into the + Union, even if the people want them?" Answer:—I do not now, nor ever + did, stand pledged against the admission of any more slave States into the + Union. + </p> + <p> + Q. 3.—"I want to know whether he stands pledged against the + admission of a new State into the Union with such a constitution as the + people of that State may see fit to make?" Answer:—I do not stand + pledged against the admission of a new State into the Union, with such a + constitution as the people of that State may see fit to make. + </p> + <p> + Q. 4.—"I want to know whether he stands to-day pledged to the + abolition of slavery in the District of Columbia?" Answer:—I do not + stand to-day pledged to the abolition of slavery in the District of + Columbia. + </p> + <p> + Q. 5.—"I desire him to answer whether he stands pledged to the + prohibition of the slave-trade between the different States?" Answer:—I + do not stand pledged to the prohibition of the slave-trade between the + different States. + </p> + <p> + Q. 6.—"I desire to know whether he stands pledged to prohibit + slavery in all the Territories of the United States, north as well as + south of the Missouri Compromise line?" Answer:—I am impliedly, if + not expressly, pledged to a belief in the right and duty of Congress to + prohibit slavery in all the United States 'Territories. + </p> + <p> + Q. 7.—"I desire him to answer whether he is opposed to the + acquisition of any new territory unless slavery is first prohibited + therein?" Answer:—I am not generally opposed to honest acquisition + of territory; and, in any given case, I would or would not oppose such + acquisition, accordingly as I might think such acquisition would or would + not aggravate the slavery question among ourselves. + </p> + <p> + Now, my friends, it will be perceived, upon an examination of these + questions and answers, that so far I have only answered that I was not + pledged to this, that, or the other. The Judge has not framed his + interrogatories to ask me anything more than this, and I have answered in + strict accordance with the interrogatories, and have answered truly, that + I am not pledged at all upon any of the points to which I have answered. + But I am not disposed to hang upon the exact form of his interrogatory. I + am rather disposed to take up at least some of these questions, and state + what I really think upon them. + </p> + <p> + As to the first one, in regard to the Fugitive Slave law, I have never + hesitated to say, and I do not now hesitate to say, that I think, under + the Constitution of the United States, the people of the Southern States + are entitled to a Congressional Fugitive Slave law. Having said that, I + have had nothing to say in regard to the existing Fugitive Slave law, + further than that I think it should have been framed so as to be free from + some of the objections that pertain to it, without lessening its + efficiency. And inasmuch as we are not now in an agitation in regard to an + alteration or modification of that law, I would not be the man to + introduce it as a new subject of agitation upon the general question of + slavery. + </p> + <p> + In regard to the other question, of whether I am pledged to the admission + of any more slave States into the Union, I state to you very frankly that + I would be exceedingly sorry ever to be put in a position of having to + pass upon that question. I should be exceedingly glad to know that there + would never be another slave State admitted into the Union; but I must add + that if slavery shall be kept out of the Territories during the + territorial existence of any one given Territory, and then the people + shall, having a fair chance and a clear field, when they come to adopt the + constitution, do such an extraordinary thing as to adopt a slave + constitution, uninfluenced by the actual presence of the institution among + them, I see no alternative, if we own the country, but to admit them into + the Union. + </p> + <p> + The third interrogatory is answered by the answer to the second, it being, + as I conceive, the same as the second. + </p> + <p> + The fourth one is in regard to the abolition of slavery in the District of + Columbia. In relation to that, I have my mind very distinctly made up. I + should be exceedingly glad to see slavery abolished in the District of + Columbia. I believe that Congress possesses the constitutional power to + abolish it. Yet as a member of Congress, I should not, with my present + views, be in favor of endeavoring to abolish slavery in the District of + Columbia, unless it would be upon these conditions: First, that the + abolition should be gradual; second, that it should be on a vote of the + majority of qualified voters in the District; and third, that compensation + should be made to unwilling owners. With these three conditions, I confess + I would be exceedingly glad to see Congress abolish slavery in the + District of Columbia, and, in the language of Henry Clay, "sweep from our + capital that foul blot upon our nation." + </p> + <p> + In regard to the fifth interrogatory, I must say here that, as to the + question of the abolition of the slave-trade between the different States, + I can truly answer, as I have, that I am pledged to nothing about it. It + is a subject to which I have not given that mature consideration that + would make me feel authorized to state a position so as to hold myself + entirely bound by it. In other words, that question has never been + prominently enough before me to induce me to investigate whether we really + have the constitutional power to do it. I could investigate it if I had + sufficient time to bring myself to a conclusion upon that subject; but I + have not done so, and I say so frankly to you here, and to Judge Douglas. + I must say, however, that if I should be of opinion that Congress does + possess the constitutional power to abolish the slave-trade among the + different States, I should still not be in favor of the exercise of that + power, unless upon some conservative principle as I conceive it, akin to + what I have said in relation to the abolition of slavery in the District + of Columbia. + </p> + <p> + My answer as to whether I desire that slavery should be prohibited in all + the Territories of the United States is full and explicit within itself, + and cannot be made clearer by any comments of mine. So I suppose in regard + to the question whether I am opposed to the acquisition of any more + territory unless slavery is first prohibited therein, my answer is such + that I could add nothing by way of illustration, or making myself better + understood, than the answer which I have placed in writing. + </p> + <p> + Now in all this the Judge has me, and he has me on the record. I suppose + he had flattered himself that I was really entertaining one set of + opinions for one place, and another set for another place; that I was + afraid to say at one place what I uttered at another. What I am saying + here I suppose I say to a vast audience as strongly tending to + Abolitionism as any audience in the State of Illinois, and I believe I am + saying that which, if it would be offensive to any persons and render them + enemies to myself, would be offensive to persons in this audience. + </p> + <p> + I now proceed to propound to the Judge the interrogatories, so far as I + have framed them. I will bring forward a new installment when I get them + ready. I will bring them forward now only reaching to number four. The + first one is: + </p> + <p> + Question 1.—If the people of Kansas shall, by means entirely + unobjectionable in all other respects, adopt a State constitution, and ask + admission into the Union under it, before they have the requisite number + of inhabitants according to the English bill,—some ninety-three + thousand,—will you vote to admit them? + </p> + <p> + Q. 2.—Can the people of a United States Territory, in any lawful + way, against the wish of any citizen of the United States, exclude slavery + from its limits prior to the formation of a State constitution? + </p> + <p> + Q. 3. If the Supreme Court of the United States shall decide that States + cannot exclude slavery from their limits, are you in favor of acquiescing + in, adopting, and following such decision as a rule of political action? + </p> + <p> + Q. 4. Are you in favor of acquiring additional territory, in disregard of + how such acquisition may affect the nation on the slavery question? + </p> + <p> + As introductory to these interrogatories which Judge Douglas propounded to + me at Ottawa, he read a set of resolutions which he said Judge Trumbull + and myself had participated in adopting, in the first Republican State + Convention, held at Springfield in October, 1854. He insisted that I and + Judge Trumbull, and perhaps the entire Republican party, were responsible + for the doctrines contained in the set of resolutions which he read, and I + understand that it was from that set of resolutions that he deduced the + interrogatories which he propounded to me, using these resolutions as a + sort of authority for propounding those questions to me. Now, I say here + to-day that I do not answer his interrogatories because of their springing + at all from that set of resolutions which he read. I answered them because + Judge Douglas thought fit to ask them. I do not now, nor ever did, + recognize any responsibility upon myself in that set of resolutions. When + I replied to him on that occasion, I assured him that I never had anything + to do with them. I repeat here to today that I never in any possible form + had anything to do with that set of resolutions It turns out, I believe, + that those resolutions were never passed in any convention held in + Springfield. + </p> + <p> + It turns out that they were never passed at any convention or any public + meeting that I had any part in. I believe it turns out, in addition to all + this, that there was not, in the fall of 1854, any convention holding a + session in Springfield, calling itself a Republican State Convention; yet + it is true there was a convention, or assemblage of men calling themselves + a convention, at Springfield, that did pass some resolutions. But so + little did I really know of the proceedings of that convention, or what + set of resolutions they had passed, though having a general knowledge that + there had been such an assemblage of men there, that when Judge Douglas + read the resolutions, I really did not know but they had been the + resolutions passed then and there. I did not question that they were the + resolutions adopted. For I could not bring myself to suppose that Judge + Douglas could say what he did upon this subject without knowing that it + was true. I contented myself, on that occasion, with denying, as I truly + could, all connection with them, not denying or affirming whether they + were passed at Springfield. Now, it turns out that he had got hold of some + resolutions passed at some convention or public meeting in Kane County. I + wish to say here, that I don't conceive that in any fair and just mind + this discovery relieves me at all. I had just as much to do with the + convention in Kane County as that at Springfield. I am as much responsible + for the resolutions at Kane County as those at Springfield,—the + amount of the responsibility being exactly nothing in either case; no more + than there would be in regard to a set of resolutions passed in the moon. + </p> + <p> + I allude to this extraordinary matter in this canvass for some further + purpose than anything yet advanced. Judge Douglas did not make his + statement upon that occasion as matters that he believed to be true, but + he stated them roundly as being true, in such form as to pledge his + veracity for their truth. When the whole matter turns out as it does, and + when we consider who Judge Douglas is, that he is a distinguished Senator + of the United States; that he has served nearly twelve years as such; that + his character is not at all limited as an ordinary Senator of the United + States, but that his name has become of world-wide renown,—it is + most extraordinary that he should so far forget all the suggestions of + justice to an adversary, or of prudence to himself, as to venture upon the + assertion of that which the slightest investigation would have shown him + to be wholly false. I can only account for his having done so upon the + supposition that that evil genius which has attended him through his life, + giving to him an apparent astonishing prosperity, such as to lead very + many good men to doubt there being any advantage in virtue over vice,—I + say I can only account for it on the supposition that that evil genius has + as last made up its mind to forsake him. + </p> + <p> + And I may add that another extraordinary feature of the Judge's conduct in + this canvass—made more extraordinary by this incident—is, that + he is in the habit, in almost all the speeches he makes, of charging + falsehood upon his adversaries, myself and others. I now ask whether he is + able to find in anything that Judge Trumbull, for instance, has said, or + in anything that I have said, a justification at all compared with what we + have, in this instance, for that sort of vulgarity. + </p> + <p> + I have been in the habit of charging as a matter of belief on my part + that, in the introduction of the Nebraska Bill into Congress, there was a + conspiracy to make slavery perpetual and national. I have arranged from + time to time the evidence which establishes and proves the truth of this + charge. I recurred to this charge at Ottawa. I shall not now have time to + dwell upon it at very great length; but inasmuch as Judge Douglas, in his + reply of half an hour, made some points upon me in relation to it, I + propose noticing a few of them. + </p> + <p> + The Judge insists that, in the first speech I made, in which I very + distinctly made that charge, he thought for a good while I was in fun! + that I was playful; that I was not sincere about it; and that he only grew + angry and somewhat excited when he found that I insisted upon it as a + matter of earnestness. He says he characterized it as a falsehood so far + as I implicated his moral character in that transaction. Well, I did not + know, till he presented that view, that I had implicated his moral + character. He is very much in the habit, when he argues me up into a + position I never thought of occupying, of very cosily saying he has no + doubt Lincoln is "conscientious" in saying so. He should remember that I + did not know but what he was ALTOGETHER "CONSCIENTIOUS" in that matter. I + can conceive it possible for men to conspire to do a good thing, and I + really find nothing in Judge Douglas's course of arguments that is + contrary to or inconsistent with his belief of a conspiracy to nationalize + and spread slavery as being a good and blessed thing; and so I hope he + will understand that I do not at all question but that in all this matter + he is entirely "conscientious." + </p> + <p> + But to draw your attention to one of the points I made in this case, + beginning at the beginning: When the Nebraska Bill was introduced, or a + short time afterward, by an amendment, I believe, it was provided that it + must be considered "the true intent and meaning of this Act not to + legislate slavery into any State or Territory, or to exclude it therefrom, + but to leave the people thereof perfectly free to form and regulate their + own domestic institutions in their own way, subject only to the + Constitution of the United States." I have called his attention to the + fact that when he and some others began arguing that they were giving an + increased degree of liberty to the people in the Territories over and + above what they formerly had on the question of slavery, a question was + raised whether the law was enacted to give such unconditional liberty to + the people; and to test the sincerity of this mode of argument, Mr. Chase, + of Ohio, introduced an amendment, in which he made the law—if the + amendment were adopted—expressly declare that the people of the + Territory should have the power to exclude slavery if they saw fit. I have + asked attention also to the fact that Judge Douglas and those who acted + with him voted that amendment down, notwithstanding it expressed exactly + the thing they said was the true intent and meaning of the law. I have + called attention to the fact that in subsequent times a decision of the + Supreme Court has been made, in which it has been declared that a + Territorial Legislature has no constitutional right to exclude slavery. + And I have argued and said that for men who did, intend that the people of + the Territory should have the right to exclude slavery absolutely and + unconditionally, the voting down of Chase's amendment is wholly + inexplicable. It is a puzzle, a riddle. But I have said, that with men who + did look forward to such a decision, or who had it in contemplation that + such a decision of the Supreme Court would or might be made, the voting + down of that amendment would be perfectly rational and intelligible. It + would keep Congress from coming in collision with the decision when it was + made. Anybody can conceive that if there was an intention or expectation + that such a decision was to follow, it would not be a very desirable party + attitude to get into for the Supreme Court—all or nearly all its + members belonging to the same party—to decide one way, when the + party in Congress had decided the other way. Hence it would be very + rational for men expecting such a decision to keep the niche in that law + clear for it. After pointing this out, I tell Judge Douglas that it looks + to me as though here was the reason why Chase's amendment was voted down. + I tell him that, as he did it, and knows why he did it, if it was done for + a reason different from this, he knows what that reason was and can tell + us what it was. I tell him, also, it will be vastly more satisfactory to + the country for him to give some other plausible, intelligible reason why + it was voted down than to stand upon his dignity and call people liars. + Well, on Saturday he did make his answer; and what do you think it was? He + says if I had only taken upon myself to tell the whole truth about that + amendment of Chase's, no explanation would have been necessary on his part + or words to that effect. Now, I say here that I am quite unconscious of + having suppressed anything material to the case, and I am very frank to + admit if there is any sound reason other than that which appeared to me + material, it is quite fair for him to present it. What reason does he + propose? That when Chase came forward with his amendment expressly + authorizing the people to exclude slavery from the limits of every + Territory, General Cass proposed to Chase, if he (Chase) would add to his + amendment that the people should have the power to introduce or exclude, + they would let it go. This is substantially all of his reply. And because + Chase would not do that, they voted his amendment down. Well, it turns + out, I believe, upon examination, that General Cass took some part in the + little running debate upon that amendment, and then ran away and did not + vote on it at all. Is not that the fact? So confident, as I think, was + General Cass that there was a snake somewhere about, he chose to run away + from the whole thing. This is an inference I draw from the fact that, + though he took part in the debate, his name does not appear in the ayes + and noes. But does Judge Douglas's reply amount to a satisfactory answer? + </p> + <p> + [Cries of "Yes," "Yes," and "No," "No."] + </p> + <p> + There is some little difference of opinion here. But I ask attention to a + few more views bearing on the question of whether it amounts to a + satisfactory answer. The men who were determined that that amendment + should not get into the bill, and spoil the place where the Dred Scott + decision was to come in, sought an excuse to get rid of it somewhere. One + of these ways—one of these excuses—was to ask Chase to add to + his proposed amendment a provision that the people might introduce slavery + if they wanted to. They very well knew Chase would do no such thing, that + Mr. Chase was one of the men differing from them on the broad principle of + his insisting that freedom was better than slavery,—a man who would + not consent to enact a law, penned with his own hand, by which he was made + to recognize slavery on the one hand, and liberty on the other, as + precisely equal; and when they insisted on his doing this, they very well + knew they insisted on that which he would not for a moment think of doing, + and that they were only bluffing him. I believe (I have not, since he made + his answer, had a chance to examine the journals or Congressional Globe + and therefore speak from memory)—I believe the state of the bill at + that time, according to parliamentary rules, was such that no member could + propose an additional amendment to Chase's amendment. I rather think this + is the truth,—the Judge shakes his head. Very well. I would like to + know, then, if they wanted Chase's amendment fixed over, why somebody else + could not have offered to do it? If they wanted it amended, why did they + not offer the amendment? Why did they not put it in themselves? But to put + it on the other ground: suppose that there was such an amendment offered, + and Chase's was an amendment to an amendment; until one is disposed of by + parliamentary law, you cannot pile another on. Then all these gentlemen + had to do was to vote Chase's on, and then, in the amended form in which + the whole stood, add their own amendment to it, if they wanted to put it + in that shape. This was all they were obliged to do, and the ayes and noes + show that there were thirty-six who voted it down, against ten who voted + in favor of it. The thirty-six held entire sway and control. They could in + some form or other have put that bill in the exact shape they wanted. If + there was a rule preventing their amending it at the time, they could pass + that, and then, Chase's amendment being merged, put it in the shape they + wanted. They did not choose to do so, but they went into a quibble with + Chase to get him to add what they knew he would not add, and because he + would not, they stand upon the flimsy pretext for voting down what they + argued was the meaning and intent of their own bill. They left room + thereby for this Dred Scott decision, which goes very far to make slavery + national throughout the United States. + </p> + <p> + I pass one or two points I have, because my time will very soon expire; + but I must be allowed to say that Judge Douglas recurs again, as he did + upon one or two other occasions, to the enormity of Lincoln, an + insignificant individual like Lincoln,—upon his ipse dixit charging + a conspiracy upon a large number of members of Congress, the Supreme + Court, and two Presidents, to nationalize slavery. I want to say that, in + the first place, I have made no charge of this sort upon my ipse dixit. I + have only arrayed the evidence tending to prove it, and presented it to + the understanding of others, saying what I think it proves, but giving you + the means of judging whether it proves it or not. This is precisely what I + have done. I have not placed it upon my ipse dixit at all. On this + occasion, I wish to recall his attention to a piece of evidence which I + brought forward at Ottawa on Saturday, showing that he had made + substantially the same charge against substantially the same persons, + excluding his dear self from the category. I ask him to give some + attention to the evidence which I brought forward that he himself had + discovered a "fatal blow being struck" against the right of the people to + exclude slavery from their limits, which fatal blow he assumed as in + evidence in an article in the Washington Union, published "by authority." + I ask by whose authority? He discovers a similar or identical provision in + the Lecompton Constitution. Made by whom? The framers of that + Constitution. Advocated by whom? By all the members of the party in the + nation, who advocated the introduction of Kansas into the Union under the + Lecompton Constitution. I have asked his attention to the evidence that he + arrayed to prove that such a fatal blow was being struck, and to the facts + which he brought forward in support of that charge,—being identical + with the one which he thinks so villainous in me. He pointed it, not at a + newspaper editor merely, but at the President and his Cabinet and the + members of Congress advocating the Lecompton Constitution and those + framing that instrument. I must again be permitted to remind him that + although my ipse dixit may not be as great as his, yet it somewhat reduces + the force of his calling my attention to the enormity of my making a like + charge against him. + </p> + <p> + Go on, Judge Douglas. + </p> + <p> + <a name="link2H_4_0010" id="link2H_4_0010"> + <!-- H2 anchor --> </a> + </p> + <div style="height: 4em;"> + <br /><br /><br /><br /> + </div> + <h2> + Mr. LINCOLN'S REJOINDER. + </h2> + <p> + MY FRIENDS:—It will readily occur to you that I cannot, in half an + hour, notice all the things that so able a man as Judge Douglas can say in + an hour and a half; and I hope, therefore, if there be anything that he + has said upon which you would like to hear something from me, but which I + omit to comment upon, you will bear in mind that it would be expecting an + impossibility for me to go over his whole ground. I can but take up some + of the points that he has dwelt upon, and employ my half-hour specially on + them. + </p> + <p> + The first thing I have to say to you is a word in regard to Judge + Douglas's declaration about the "vulgarity and blackguardism" in the + audience, that no such thing, as he says, was shown by any Democrat while + I was speaking. Now, I only wish, by way of reply on this subject, to say + that while I was speaking, I used no "vulgarity or blackguardism" toward + any Democrat. + </p> + <p> + Now, my friends, I come to all this long portion of the Judge's speech,—perhaps + half of it,—which he has devoted to the various resolutions and + platforms that have been adopted in the different counties in the + different Congressional districts, and in the Illinois legislature, which + he supposes are at variance with the positions I have assumed before you + to-day. It is true that many of these resolutions are at variance with the + positions I have here assumed. All I have to ask is that we talk + reasonably and rationally about it. I happen to know, the Judge's opinion + to the contrary notwithstanding, that I have never tried to conceal my + opinions, nor tried to deceive any one in reference to them. He may go and + examine all the members who voted for me for United States Senator in + 1855, after the election of 1854. They were pledged to certain things here + at home, and were determined to have pledges from me; and if he will find + any of these persons who will tell him anything inconsistent with what I + say now, I will resign, or rather retire from the race, and give him no + more trouble. The plain truth is this: At the introduction of the Nebraska + policy, we believed there was a new era being introduced in the history of + the Republic, which tended to the spread and perpetuation of slavery. But + in our opposition to that measure we did not agree with one another in + everything. The people in the north end of the State were for stronger + measures of opposition than we of the central and southern portions of the + State, but we were all opposed to the Nebraska doctrine. We had that one + feeling and that one sentiment in common. You at the north end met in your + conventions and passed your resolutions. We in the middle of the State and + farther south did not hold such conventions and pass the same resolutions, + although we had in general a common view and a common sentiment. So that + these meetings which the Judge has alluded to, and the resolutions he has + read from, were local, and did not spread over the whole State. We at last + met together in 1886, from all parts of the State, and we agreed upon a + common platform. You, who held more extreme notions, either yielded those + notions, or, if not wholly yielding them, agreed to yield them + practically, for the sake of embodying the opposition to the measures + which the opposite party were pushing forward at that time. We met you + then, and if there was anything yielded, it was for practical purposes. We + agreed then upon a platform for the party throughout the entire State of + Illinois, and now we are all bound, as a party, to that platform. + </p> + <p> + And I say here to you, if any one expects of me—in case of my + election—that I will do anything not signified by our Republican + platform and my answers here to-day, I tell you very frankly that person + will be deceived. I do not ask for the vote of any one who supposes that I + have secret purposes or pledges that I dare not speak out. Cannot the + Judge be satisfied? If he fears, in the unfortunate case of my election, + that my going to Washington will enable me to advocate sentiments contrary + to those which I expressed when you voted for and elected me, I assure him + that his fears are wholly needless and groundless. Is the Judge really + afraid of any such thing? I'll tell you what he is afraid of. He is afraid + we'll all pull together. This is what alarms him more than anything else. + For my part, I do hope that all of us, entertaining a common sentiment in + opposition to what appears to us a design to nationalize and perpetuate + slavery, will waive minor differences on questions which either belong to + the dead past or the distant future, and all pull together in this + struggle. What are your sentiments? If it be true that on the ground which + I occupy—ground which I occupy as frankly and boldly as Judge + Douglas does his,—my views, though partly coinciding with yours, are + not as perfectly in accordance with your feelings as his are, I do say to + you in all candor, go for him, and not for me. I hope to deal in all + things fairly with Judge Douglas, and with the people of the State, in + this contest. And if I should never be elected to any office, I trust I + may go down with no stain of falsehood upon my reputation, notwithstanding + the hard opinions Judge Douglas chooses to entertain of me. + </p> + <p> + The Judge has again addressed himself to the Abolition tendencies of a + speech of mine made at Springfield in June last. I have so often tried to + answer what he is always saying on that melancholy theme that I almost + turn with disgust from the discussion,—from the repetition of an + answer to it. I trust that nearly all of this intelligent audience have + read that speech. If you have, I may venture to leave it to you to inspect + it closely, and see whether it contains any of those "bugaboos" which + frighten Judge Douglas. + </p> + <p> + The Judge complains that I did not fully answer his questions. If I have + the sense to comprehend and answer those questions, I have done so fairly. + If it can be pointed out to me how I can more fully and fairly answer him, + I aver I have not the sense to see how it is to be done. He says I do not + declare I would in any event vote for the admission of a slave State into + the Union. If I have been fairly reported, he will see that I did give an + explicit answer to his interrogatories; I did not merely say that I would + dislike to be put to the test, but I said clearly, if I were put to the + test, and a Territory from which slavery had been excluded should present + herself with a State constitution sanctioning slavery,—a most + extraordinary thing, and wholly unlikely to happen,—I did not see + how I could avoid voting for her admission. But he refuses to understand + that I said so, and he wants this audience to understand that I did not + say so. Yet it will be so reported in the printed speech that he cannot + help seeing it. + </p> + <p> + He says if I should vote for the admission of a slave State I would be + voting for a dissolution of the Union, because I hold that the Union + cannot permanently exist half slave and half free. I repeat that I do not + believe this government can endure permanently half slave and half free; + yet I do not admit, nor does it at all follow, that the admission of a + single slave State will permanently fix the character and establish this + as a universal slave nation. The Judge is very happy indeed at working up + these quibbles. Before leaving the subject of answering questions, I aver + as my confident belief, when you come to see our speeches in print, that + you will find every question which he has asked me more fairly and boldly + and fully answered than he has answered those which I put to him. Is not + that so? The two speeches may be placed side by side, and I will venture + to leave it to impartial judges whether his questions have not been more + directly and circumstantially answered than mine. + </p> + <p> + Judge Douglas says he made a charge upon the editor of the Washington + Union, alone, of entertaining a purpose to rob the States of their power + to exclude slavery from their limits. I undertake to say, and I make the + direct issue, that he did not make his charge against the editor of the + Union alone. I will undertake to prove by the record here that he made + that charge against more and higher dignitaries than the editor of the + Washington Union. I am quite aware that he was shirking and dodging around + the form in which he put it, but I can make it manifest that he leveled + his "fatal blow" against more persons than this Washington editor. Will he + dodge it now by alleging that I am trying to defend Mr. Buchanan against + the charge? Not at all. Am I not making the same charge myself? I am + trying to show that you, Judge Douglas, are a witness on my side. I am not + defending Buchanan, and I will tell Judge Douglas that in my opinion, when + he made that charge, he had an eye farther north than he has to-day. He + was then fighting against people who called him a Black Republican and an + Abolitionist. It is mixed all through his speech, and it is tolerably + manifest that his eye was a great deal farther north than it is to-day. + The Judge says that though he made this charge, Toombs got up and declared + there was not a man in the United States, except the editor of the Union, + who was in favor of the doctrines put forth in that article. And thereupon + I understand that the Judge withdrew the charge. Although he had taken + extracts from the newspaper, and then from the Lecompton Constitution, to + show the existence of a conspiracy to bring about a "fatal blow," by which + the States were to be deprived of the right of excluding slavery, it all + went to pot as soon as Toombs got up and told him it was not true. It + reminds me of the story that John Phoenix, the California railroad + surveyor, tells. He says they started out from the Plaza to the Mission of + Dolores. They had two ways of determining distances. One was by a chain + and pins taken over the ground. The other was by a "go-it-ometer,"—an + invention of his own,—a three-legged instrument, with which he + computed a series of triangles between the points. At night he turned to + the chain-man to ascertain what distance they had come, and found that by + some mistake he had merely dragged the chain over the ground, without + keeping any record. By the "go-it-ometer," he found he had made ten miles. + Being skeptical about this, he asked a drayman who was passing how far it + was to the Plaza. The drayman replied it was just half a mile; and the + surveyor put it down in his book,—just as Judge Douglas says, after + he had made his calculations and computations, he took Toombs's statement. + I have no doubt that after Judge Douglas had made his charge, he was as + easily satisfied about its truth as the surveyor was of the drayman's + statement of the distance to the Plaza. Yet it is a fact that the man who + put forth all that matter which Douglas deemed a "fatal blow" at State + sovereignty was elected by the Democrats as public printer. + </p> + <p> + Now, gentlemen, you may take Judge Douglas's speech of March 22, 1858, + beginning about the middle of page 21, and reading to the bottom of page + 24, and you will find the evidence on which I say that he did not make his + charge against the editor of the Union alone. I cannot stop to read it, + but I will give it to the reporters. Judge Douglas said: + </p> + <p> + "Mr. President, you here find several distinct propositions advanced + boldly by the Washington Union editorially, and apparently + authoritatively, and every man who questions any of them is denounced as + an Abolitionist, a Free-soiler, a fanatic. The propositions are, first, + that the primary object of all government at its original institution is + the protection of persons and property; second, that the Constitution of + the United States declares that the citizens of each State shall be + entitled to all the privileges and immunities of citizens in the several + States; and that, therefore, thirdly, all State laws, whether organic or + otherwise, which prohibit the citizens of one State from settling in + another with their slave property, and especially declaring it forfeited, + are direct violations of the original intention of the Government and + Constitution of the United States; and, fourth, that the emancipation of + the slaves of the Northern States was a gross outrage on the rights of + property, in as much as it was involuntarily done on the part of the + owner. + </p> + <p> + "Remember that this article was published in the Union on the 17th of + November, and on the 18th appeared the first article giving the adhesion + of the Union to the Lecompton Constitution. It was in these words: + </p> + <p> + "'KANSAS AND HER CONSTITUTION.—The vexed question is settled. The + problem is solved. The dead point of danger is passed. All serious trouble + to Kansas affairs is over and gone...." + </p> + <p> + "And a column, nearly, of the same sort. Then, when you come to look into + the Lecompton Constitution, you find the same doctrine incorporated in it + which was put forth editorially in the Union. What is it? + </p> + <p> + "'ARTICLE 7, Section i. The right of property is before and higher than + any constitutional sanction; and the right of the owner of a slave to such + slave and its increase is the same and as invariable as the right of the + owner of any property whatever.' + </p> + <p> + "Then in the schedule is a provision that the Constitution may be amended + after 1864 by a two-thirds vote. + </p> + <p> + "'But no alteration shall be made to affect the right of property in the + ownership of slaves.' + </p> + <p> + "It will be seen by these clauses in the Lecompton Constitution that they + are identical in spirit with this authoritative article in the Washington + Union of the day previous to its indorsement of this Constitution. + </p> + <p> + "When I saw that article in the Union of the 17th of November, followed by + the glorification of the Lecompton Constitution on the 18th of November, + and this clause in the Constitution asserting the doctrine that a State + has no right to prohibit slavery within its limits, I saw that there was a + fatal blow being struck at the sovereignty of the States of this Union." + </p> + <p> + Here he says, "Mr. President, you here find several distinct propositions + advanced boldly, and apparently authoritatively." By whose authority, + Judge Douglas? Again, he says in another place, "It will be seen by these + clauses in the Lecompton Constitution that they are identical in spirit + with this authoritative article." By whose authority,—who do you + mean to say authorized the publication of these articles? He knows that + the Washington Union is considered the organ of the Administration. I + demand of Judge Douglas by whose authority he meant to say those articles + were published, if not by the authority of the President of the United + States and his Cabinet? I defy him to show whom he referred to, if not to + these high functionaries in the Federal Government. More than this, he + says the articles in that paper and the provisions of the Lecompton + Constitution are "identical," and, being identical, he argues that the + authors are co-operating and conspiring together. He does not use the word + "conspiring," but what other construction can you put upon it? He winds + up: + </p> + <p> + "When I saw that article in the Union of the 17th of November, followed by + the glorification of the Lecompton Constitution on the 18th of November, + and this clause in the Constitution asserting the doctrine that a State + has no right to prohibit slavery within its limits, I saw that there was a + fatal blow being struck at the sovereignty of the States of this Union." + </p> + <p> + I ask him if all this fuss was made over the editor of this newspaper. It + would be a terribly "fatal blow" indeed which a single man could strike, + when no President, no Cabinet officer, no member of Congress, was giving + strength and efficiency to the movement. Out of respect to Judge Douglas's + good sense I must believe he did n't manufacture his idea of the "fatal" + character of that blow out of such a miserable scapegrace as he represents + that editor to be. But the Judge's eye is farther south now. Then, it was + very peculiarly and decidedly north. His hope rested on the idea of + visiting the great "Black Republican" party, and making it the tail of his + new kite. He knows he was then expecting from day to day to turn + Republican, and place himself at the head of our organization. He has + found that these despised "Black Republicans" estimate him by a standard + which he has taught them none too well. Hence he is crawling back into his + old camp, and you will find him eventually installed in full fellowship + among those whom he was then battling, and with whom he now pretends to be + at such fearful variance. + </p> + <p> + <a name="link2H_4_0011" id="link2H_4_0011"> + <!-- H2 anchor --> </a> + </p> + <div style="height: 4em;"> + <br /><br /><br /><br /> + </div> + <h2> + THIRD JOINT DEBATE, AT JONESBORO, + </h2> + <h3> + SEPTEMBER 15, 1858 + </h3> + <p> + Mr. LINCOLN'S REPLY. + </p> + <p> + LADIES AND GENTLEMEN:—There is very much in the principles that + Judge Douglas has here enunciated that I most cordially approve, and over + which I shall have no controversy with him. In so far as he has insisted + that all the States have the right to do exactly as they please about all + their domestic relations, including that of slavery, I agree entirely with + him. He places me wrong in spite of all I can tell him, though I repeat it + again and again, insisting that I have no difference with him upon this + subject. I have made a great many speeches, some of which have been + printed, and it will be utterly impossible for him to find anything that I + have ever put in print contrary to what I now say upon this subject. I + hold myself under constitutional obligations to allow the people in all + the States, without interference, direct or indirect, to do exactly as + they please; and I deny that I have any inclination to interfere with + them, even if there were no such constitutional obligation. I can only say + again that I am placed improperly—altogether improperly, in spite of + all I can say—when it is insisted that I entertain any other view or + purposes in regard to that matter. + </p> + <p> + While I am upon this subject, I will make some answers briefly to certain + propositions that Judge Douglas has put. He says, "Why can't this Union + endure permanently half slave and half free?" I have said that I supposed + it could not, and I will try, before this new audience, to give briefly + some of the reasons for entertaining that opinion. Another form of his + question is, "Why can't we let it stand as our fathers placed it?" That is + the exact difficulty between us. I say that Judge Douglas and his friends + have changed it from the position in which our fathers originally placed + it. I say, in the way our father's originally left the slavery question, + the institution was in the course of ultimate extinction, and the public + mind rested in the belief that it was in the course of ultimate + extinction. I say when this government was first established it was the + policy of its founders to prohibit the spread of slavery into the new + Territories of the United States, where it had not existed. But Judge + Douglas and his friends have broken up that policy, and placed it upon a + new basis, by which it is to become national and perpetual. All I have + asked or desired anywhere is that it should be placed back again upon the + basis that the fathers of our government originally placed it upon. I have + no doubt that it would become extinct, for all time to come, if we but + readopted the policy of the fathers, by restricting it to the limits it + has already covered, restricting it from the new Territories. + </p> + <p> + I do not wish to dwell at great length on this branch of the subject at + this time, but allow me to repeat one thing that I have stated before. + Brooks—the man who assaulted Senator Sumner on the floor of the + Senate, and who was complimented with dinners, and silver pitchers, and + gold-headed canes, and a good many other things for that feat—in one + of his speeches declared that when this government was originally + established, nobody expected that the institution of slavery would last + until this day. That was but the opinion of one man, but it was such an + opinion as we can never get from Judge Douglas or anybody in favor of + slavery, in the North, at all. You can sometimes get it from a Southern + man. He said at the same time that the framers of our government did not + have the knowledge that experience has taught us; that experience and the + invention of the cotton-gin have taught us that the perpetuation of + slavery is a necessity. He insisted, therefore, upon its being changed + from the basis upon which the fathers of the government left it to the + basis of its perpetuation and nationalization. + </p> + <p> + I insist that this is the difference between Judge Douglas and myself,—that + Judge Douglas is helping that change along. I insist upon this government + being placed where our fathers originally placed it. + </p> + <p> + I remember Judge Douglas once said that he saw the evidences on the + statute books of Congress of a policy in the origin of government to + divide slavery and freedom by a geographical line; that he saw an + indisposition to maintain that policy, and therefore he set about studying + up a way to settle the institution on the right basis,—the basis + which he thought it ought to have been placed upon at first; and in that + speech he confesses that he seeks to place it, not upon the basis that the + fathers placed it upon, but upon one gotten up on "original principles." + When he asks me why we cannot get along with it in the attitude where our + fathers placed it, he had better clear up the evidences that he has + himself changed it from that basis, that he has himself been chiefly + instrumental in changing the policy of the fathers. Any one who will read + his speech of the 22d of last March will see that he there makes an open + confession, showing that he set about fixing the institution upon an + altogether different set of principles. I think I have fully answered him + when he asks me why we cannot let it alone upon the basis where our + fathers left it, by showing that he has himself changed the whole policy + of the government in that regard. + </p> + <p> + Now, fellow-citizens, in regard to this matter about a contract that was + made between Judge Trumbull and myself, and all that long portion of Judge + Douglas's speech on this subject,—I wish simply to say what I have + said to him before, that he cannot know whether it is true or not, and I + do know that there is not a word of truth in it. And I have told him so + before. I don't want any harsh language indulged in, but I do not know how + to deal with this persistent insisting on a story that I know to be + utterly without truth. It used to be a fashion amongst men that when a + charge was made, some sort of proof was brought forward to establish it, + and if no proof was found to exist, the charge was dropped. I don't know + how to meet this kind of an argument. I don't want to have a fight with + Judge Douglas, and I have no way of making an argument up into the + consistency of a corn-cob and stopping his mouth with it. All I can do is—good-humoredly—to + say that, from the beginning to the end of all that story about a bargain + between Judge Trumbull and myself, there is not a word of truth in it. I + can only ask him to show some sort of evidence of the truth of his story. + He brings forward here and reads from what he contends is a speech by + James H. Matheny, charging such a bargain between Trumbull and myself. My + own opinion is that Matheny did do some such immoral thing as to tell a + story that he knew nothing about. I believe he did. I contradicted it + instantly, and it has been contradicted by Judge Trumbull, while nobody + has produced any proof, because there is none. Now, whether the speech + which the Judge brings forward here is really the one Matheny made, I do + not know, and I hope the Judge will pardon me for doubting the genuineness + of this document, since his production of those Springfield resolutions at + Ottawa. I do not wish to dwell at any great length upon this matter. I can + say nothing when a long story like this is told, except it is not true, + and demand that he who insists upon it shall produce some proof. That is + all any man can do, and I leave it in that way, for I know of no other way + of dealing with it. + </p> + <p> + [In an argument on the lines of: "Yes, you did.—No, I did not." It + bears on the former to prove his point, not on the negative to "prove" + that he did not—even if he easily can do so.] + </p> + <p> + The Judge has gone over a long account of the old Whig and Democratic + parties, and it connects itself with this charge against Trumbull and + myself. He says that they agreed upon a compromise in regard to the + slavery question in 1850; that in a National Democratic Convention + resolutions were passed to abide by that compromise as a finality upon the + slavery question. He also says that the Whig party in National Convention + agreed to abide by and regard as a finality the Compromise of 1850. I + understand the Judge to be altogether right about that; I understand that + part of the history of the country as stated by him to be correct I + recollect that I, as a member of that party, acquiesced in that + compromise. I recollect in the Presidential election which followed, when + we had General Scott up for the presidency, Judge Douglas was around + berating us Whigs as Abolitionists, precisely as he does to-day,—not + a bit of difference. I have often heard him. We could do nothing when the + old Whig party was alive that was not Abolitionism, but it has got an + extremely good name since it has passed away. + </p> + <p> + [It almost a natural law that, when dead—no matter how bad we were—we + are automatically beatified.] + </p> + <p> + When that Compromise was made it did not repeal the old Missouri + Compromise. It left a region of United States territory half as large as + the present territory of the United States, north of the line of 36 + degrees 30 minutes, in which slavery was prohibited by Act of Congress. + This Compromise did not repeal that one. It did not affect or propose to + repeal it. But at last it became Judge Douglas's duty, as he thought (and + I find no fault with him), as Chairman of the Committee on Territories, to + bring in a bill for the organization of a territorial government,—first + of one, then of two Territories north of that line. When he did so, it + ended in his inserting a provision substantially repealing the Missouri + Compromise. That was because the Compromise of 1850 had not repealed it. + And now I ask why he could not have let that Compromise alone? We were + quiet from the agitation of the slavery question. We were making no fuss + about it. All had acquiesced in the Compromise measures of 1850. We never + had been seriously disturbed by any Abolition agitation before that + period. When he came to form governments for the Territories north of the + line of 36 degrees 30 minutes, why could he not have let that matter stand + as it was standing? Was it necessary to the organization of a Territory? + Not at all. Iowa lay north of the line, and had been organized as a + Territory and come into the Union as a State without disturbing that + Compromise. There was no sort of necessity for destroying it to organize + these Territories. But, gentlemen, it would take up all my time to meet + all the little quibbling arguments of Judge Douglas to show that the + Missouri Compromise was repealed by the Compromise of 1850. My own opinion + is, that a careful investigation of all the arguments to sustain the + position that that Compromise was virtually repealed by the Compromise of + 1850 would show that they are the merest fallacies. I have the report that + Judge Douglas first brought into Congress at the time of the introduction + of the Nebraska Bill, which in its original form did not repeal the + Missouri Compromise, and he there expressly stated that he had forborne to + do so because it had not been done by the Compromise of 1850. I close this + part of the discussion on my part by asking him the question again, "Why, + when we had peace under the Missouri Compromise, could you not have let it + alone?" + </p> + <p> + In complaining of what I said in my speech at Springfield, in which he + says I accepted my nomination for the senatorship (where, by the way, he + is at fault, for if he will examine it, he will find no acceptance in it), + he again quotes that portion in which I said that "a house divided against + itself cannot stand." Let me say a word in regard to that matter. + </p> + <p> + He tries to persuade us that there must be a variety in the different + institutions of the States of the Union; that that variety necessarily + proceeds from the variety of soil, climate, of the face of the country, + and the difference in the natural features of the States. I agree to all + that. Have these very matters ever produced any difficulty amongst us? Not + at all. Have we ever had any quarrel over the fact that they have laws in + Louisiana designed to regulate the commerce that springs from the + production of sugar? Or because we have a different class relative to the + production of flour in this State? Have they produced any differences? Not + at all. They are the very cements of this Union. They don't make the house + a house divided against itself. They are the props that hold up the house + and sustain the Union. + </p> + <p> + But has it been so with this element of slavery? Have we not always had + quarrels and difficulties over it? And when will we cease to have quarrels + over it? Like causes produce like effects. It is worth while to observe + that we have generally had comparative peace upon the slavery question, + and that there has been no cause for alarm until it was excited by the + effort to spread it into new territory. Whenever it has been limited to + its present bounds, and there has been no effort to spread it, there has + been peace. All the trouble and convulsion has proceeded from efforts to + spread it over more territory. It was thus at the date of the Missouri + Compromise. It was so again with the annexation of Texas; so with the + territory acquired by the Mexican war; and it is so now. Whenever there + has been an effort to spread it, there has been agitation and resistance. + Now, I appeal to this audience (very few of whom are my political + friends), as national men, whether we have reason to expect that the + agitation in regard to this subject will cease while the causes that tend + to reproduce agitation are actively at work? Will not the same cause that + produced agitation in 1820, when the Missouri Compromise was formed, that + which produced the agitation upon the annexation of Texas, and at other + times, work out the same results always? Do you think that the nature of + man will be changed, that the same causes that produced agitation at one + time will not have the same effect at another? + </p> + <p> + This has been the result so far as my observation of the slavery question + and my reading in history extends. What right have we then to hope that + the trouble will cease,—that the agitation will come to an end,—until + it shall either be placed back where it originally stood, and where the + fathers originally placed it, or, on the other hand, until it shall + entirely master all opposition? This is the view I entertain, and this is + the reason why I entertained it, as Judge Douglas has read from my + Springfield speech. + </p> + <p> + Now, my friends, there is one other thing that I feel myself under some + sort of obligation to mention. Judge Douglas has here to-day—in a + very rambling way, I was about saying—spoken of the platforms for + which he seeks to hold me responsible. He says, "Why can't you come out + and make an open avowal of principles in all places alike?" and he reads + from an advertisement that he says was used to notify the people of a + speech to be made by Judge Trumbull at Waterloo. In commenting on it he + desires to know whether we cannot speak frankly and manfully, as he and + his friends do. How, I ask, do his friends speak out their own sentiments? + A Convention of his party in this State met on the 21st of April at + Springfield, and passed a set of resolutions which they proclaim to the + country as their platform. This does constitute their platform, and it is + because Judge Douglas claims it is his platform—that these are his + principles and purposes—that he has a right to declare he speaks his + sentiments "frankly and manfully." On the 9th of June Colonel John + Dougherty, Governor Reynolds, and others, calling themselves National + Democrats, met in Springfield and adopted a set of resolutions which are + as easily understood, as plain and as definite in stating to the country + and to the world what they believed in and would stand upon, as Judge + Douglas's platform Now, what is the reason that Judge Douglas is not + willing that Colonel Dougherty and Governor Reynolds should stand upon + their own written and printed platform as well as he upon his? Why must he + look farther than their platform when he claims himself to stand by his + platform? + </p> + <p> + Again, in reference to our platform: On the 16th of June the Republicans + had their Convention and published their platform, which is as clear and + distinct as Judge Douglas's. In it they spoke their principles as plainly + and as definitely to the world. What is the reason that Judge Douglas is + not willing I should stand upon that platform? Why must he go around + hunting for some one who is supporting me or has supported me at some time + in his life, and who has said something at some time contrary to that + platform? Does the Judge regard that rule as a good one? If it turn out + that the rule is a good one for me—that I am responsible for any and + every opinion that any man has expressed who is my friend,—then it + is a good rule for him. I ask, is it not as good a rule for him as it is + for me? In my opinion, it is not a good rule for either of us. Do you + think differently, Judge? + </p> + <p> + [Mr. DOUGLAS: I do not.] + </p> + <p> + Judge Douglas says he does not think differently. I am glad of it. Then + can he tell me why he is looking up resolutions of five or six years ago, + and insisting that they were my platform, notwithstanding my protest that + they are not, and never were my platform, and my pointing out the platform + of the State Convention which he delights to say nominated me for the + Senate? I cannot see what he means by parading these resolutions, if it is + not to hold me responsible for them in some way. If he says to me here + that he does not hold the rule to be good, one way or the other, I do not + comprehend how he could answer me more fully if he answered me at greater + length. I will therefore put in as my answer to the resolutions that he + has hunted up against me, what I, as a lawyer, would call a good plea to a + bad declaration. I understand that it is an axiom of law that a poor plea + may be a good plea to a bad declaration. I think that the opinions the + Judge brings from those who support me, yet differ from me, is a bad + declaration against me; but if I can bring the same things against him, I + am putting in a good plea to that kind of declaration, and now I propose + to try it. + </p> + <p> + At Freeport, Judge Douglas occupied a large part of his time in producing + resolutions and documents of various sorts, as I understood, to make me + somehow responsible for them; and I propose now doing a little of the same + sort of thing for him. In 1850 a very clever gentleman by the name of + Thompson Campbell, a personal friend of Judge Douglas and myself, a + political friend of Judge Douglas and opponent of mine, was a candidate + for Congress in the Galena District. He was interrogated as to his views + on this same slavery question. I have here before me the interrogatories, + and Campbell's answers to them—I will read them: + </p> + <p> + <a name="link2H_4_0012" id="link2H_4_0012"> + <!-- H2 anchor --> </a> + </p> + <div style="height: 4em;"> + <br /><br /><br /><br /> + </div> + <h2> + INTERROGATORIES: + </h2> + <p> + "1st. Will you, if elected, vote for and cordially support a bill + prohibiting slavery in the Territories of the United States? + </p> + <p> + "2d. Will you vote for and support a bill abolishing slavery in the + District of Columbia? + </p> + <p> + "3d. Will you oppose the admission of any Slave States which may be formed + out of Texas or the Territories? + </p> + <p> + "4th. Will you vote for and advocate the repeal of the Fugitive Slave law + passed at the recent session of Congress? + </p> + <p> + "5th. Will you advocate and vote for the election of a Speaker of the + House of Representatives who shall be willing to organize the committees + of that House so as to give the Free States their just influence in the + business of legislation? + </p> + <p> + "6th. What are your views, not only as to the constitutional right of + Congress to prohibit the slave-trade between the States, but also as to + the expediency of exercising that right immediately?" + </p> + <p> + <a name="link2H_4_0013" id="link2H_4_0013"> + <!-- H2 anchor --> </a> + </p> + <div style="height: 4em;"> + <br /><br /><br /><br /> + </div> + <h2> + CAMPBELL'S REPLY. + </h2> + <p> + "To the first and second interrogatories, I answer unequivocally in the + affirmative. + </p> + <p> + "To the third interrogatory I reply, that I am opposed to the admission of + any more Slave States into the Union, that may be formed out of Texas or + any other Territory. + </p> + <p> + "To the fourth and fifth interrogatories I unhesitatingly answer in the + affirmative. + </p> + <p> + "To the sixth interrogatory I reply, that so long as the Slave States + continue to treat slaves as articles of commerce, the Constitution confers + power on Congress to pass laws regulating that peculiar COMMERCE, and that + the protection of Human Rights imperatively demands the interposition of + every constitutional means to prevent this most inhuman and iniquitous + traffic. + </p> + <p> + "T. CAMPBELL." + </p> + <p> + I want to say here that Thompson Campbell was elected to Congress on that + platform, as the Democratic candidate in the Galena District, against + Martin P. Sweet. + </p> + <p> + [Judge DOUGLAS: Give me the date of the letter.] + </p> + <p> + The time Campbell ran was in 1850. I have not the exact date here. It was + some time in 1850 that these interrogatories were put and the answer + given. Campbell was elected to Congress, and served out his term. I think + a second election came up before he served out his term, and he was not + re-elected. Whether defeated or not nominated, I do not know. [Mr. + Campbell was nominated for re-election by the Democratic party, by + acclamation.] At the end of his term his very good friend Judge Douglas + got him a high office from President Pierce, and sent him off to + California. Is not that the fact? Just at the end of his term in Congress + it appears that our mutual friend Judge Douglas got our mutual friend + Campbell a good office, and sent him to California upon it. And not only + so, but on the 27th of last month, when Judge Douglas and myself spoke at + Freeport in joint discussion, there was his same friend Campbell, come all + the way from California, to help the Judge beat me; and there was poor + Martin P. Sweet standing on the platform, trying to help poor me to be + elected. That is true of one of Judge Douglas's friends. + </p> + <p> + So again, in that same race of 1850, there was a Congressional Convention + assembled at Joliet, and it nominated R. S. Molony for Congress, and + unanimously adopted the following resolution: + </p> + <p> + "Resolved, That we are uncompromisingly opposed to the extension of + slavery; and while we would not make such opposition a ground of + interference with the interests of the States where it exists, yet we + moderately but firmly insist that it is the duty of Congress to oppose its + extension into Territory now free, by all means compatible with the + obligations of the Constitution, and with good faith to our sister States; + that these principles were recognized by the Ordinance of 1787, which + received the sanction of Thomas Jefferson, who is acknowledged by all to + be the great oracle and expounder of our faith." + </p> + <p> + Subsequently the same interrogatories were propounded to Dr. Molony which + had been addressed to Campbell as above, with the exception of the 6th, + respecting the interstate slave trade, to which Dr. Molony, the Democratic + nominee for Congress, replied as follows: + </p> + <p> + "I received the written interrogatories this day, and, as you will see by + the La Salle Democrat and Ottawa Free Trader, I took at Peru on the 5th, + and at Ottawa on the 7th, the affirmative side of interrogatories 1st and + 2d; and in relation to the admission of any more Slave States from Free + Territory, my position taken at these meetings, as correctly reported in + said papers, was emphatically and distinctly opposed to it. In relation to + the admission of any more Slave States from Texas, whether I shall go + against it or not will depend upon the opinion that I may hereafter form + of the true meaning and nature of the resolutions of annexation. If, by + said resolutions, the honor and good faith of the nation is pledged to + admit more Slave States from Texas when she (Texas) may apply for the + admission of such State, then I should, if in Congress, vote for their + admission. But if not so PLEDGED and bound by sacred contract, then a bill + for the admission of more Slave States from Texas would never receive my + vote. + </p> + <p> + "To your fourth interrogatory I answer most decidedly in the affirmative, + and for reasons set forth in my reported remarks at Ottawa last Monday. + </p> + <p> + "To your fifth interrogatory I also reply in the affirmative most + cordially, and that I will use my utmost exertions to secure the + nomination and election of a man who will accomplish the objects of said + interrogatories. I most cordially approve of the resolutions adopted at + the Union meeting held at Princeton on the 27th September ult. + </p> + <p> + "Yours, etc., R. S. MOLONY." + </p> + <p> + All I have to say in regard to Dr. Molony is that he was the regularly + nominated Democratic candidate for Congress in his district; was elected + at that time; at the end of his term was appointed to a land-office at + Danville. (I never heard anything of Judge Douglas's instrumentality in + this.) He held this office a considerable time, and when we were at + Freeport the other day there were handbills scattered about notifying the + public that after our debate was over R. S. Molony would make a Democratic + speech in favor of Judge Douglas. That is all I know of my own personal + knowledge. It is added here to this resolution, and truly I believe, that + among those who participated in the Joliet Convention, and who supported + its nominee, with his platform as laid down in the resolution of the + Convention and in his reply as above given, we call at random the + following names, all of which are recognized at this day as leading + Democrats: + </p> + <p> + "Cook County,—E. B. Williams, Charles McDonell, Arno Voss, Thomas + Hoyne, Isaac Cook." + </p> + <p> + I reckon we ought to except Cook. + </p> +<pre xml:space="preserve"> + "F. C. Sherman. + "Will,—Joel A. Matteson, S. W. Bowen. + "Kane,—B. F. Hall, G. W. Renwick, A. M. Herrington, Elijah Wilcox. + "McHenry,—W. M. Jackson, Enos W. Smith, Neil Donnelly. + La Salle,—John Hise, William Reddick." +</pre> + <p> + William Reddick! another one of Judge Douglas's friends that stood on the + stand with him at Ottawa, at the time the Judge says my knees trembled so + that I had to be carried away. The names are all here: + </p> +<pre xml:space="preserve"> + "Du Page,—Nathan Allen. + "De Kalb,—Z. B. Mayo." +</pre> + <p> + Here is another set of resolutions which I think are apposite to the + matter in hand. + </p> + <p> + On the 28th of February of the same year a Democratic District Convention + was held at Naperville to nominate a candidate for Circuit Judge. Among + the delegates were Bowen and Kelly of Will; Captain Naper, H. H. Cody, + Nathan Allen, of Du Page; W. M. Jackson, J. M. Strode, P. W. Platt, and + Enos W. Smith of McHenry; J. Horssnan and others of Winnebago. Colonel + Strode presided over the Convention. The following resolutions were + unanimously adopted,—the first on motion of P. W. Platt, the second + on motion of William M. Jackson: + </p> + <p> + "Resolved, That this Convention is in favor of the Wilmot Proviso, both in + Principle and Practice, and that we know of no good reason why any person + should oppose the largest latitude in Free Soil, Free Territory and Free + speech. + </p> + <p> + "Resolved, That in the opinion of this Convention, the time has arrived + when all men should be free, whites as well as others." + </p> + <p> + [Judge DOUGLAS: What is the date of those resolutions?] + </p> + <p> + I understand it was in 1850, but I do not know it. I do not state a thing + and say I know it, when I do not. But I have the highest belief that this + is so. I know of no way to arrive at the conclusion that there is an error + in it. I mean to put a case no stronger than the truth will allow. But + what I was going to comment upon is an extract from a newspaper in De Kalb + County; and it strikes me as being rather singular, I confess, under the + circumstances. There is a Judge Mayo in that county, who is a candidate + for the Legislature, for the purpose, if he secures his election, of + helping to re-elect Judge Douglas. He is the editor of a newspaper [De + Kalb County Sentinel], and in that paper I find the extract I am going to + read. It is part of an editorial article in which he was electioneering as + fiercely as he could for Judge Douglas and against me. It was a curious + thing, I think, to be in such a paper. I will agree to that, and the Judge + may make the most of it: + </p> + <p> + "Our education has been such that we have been rather in favor of the + equality of the blacks; that is, that they should enjoy all the privileges + of the whites where they reside. We are aware that this is not a very + popular doctrine. We have had many a confab with some who are now strong + 'Republicans' we taking the broad ground of equality, and they the + opposite ground. + </p> + <p> + "We were brought up in a State where blacks were voters, and we do not + know of any inconvenience resulting from it, though perhaps it would not + work as well where the blacks are more numerous. We have no doubt of the + right of the whites to guard against such an evil, if it is one. Our + opinion is that it would be best for all concerned to have the colored + population in a State by themselves [in this I agree with him]; but if + within the jurisdiction of the United States, we say by all means they + should have the right to have their Senators and Representatives in + Congress, and to vote for President. With us 'worth makes the man, and + want of it the fellow.' We have seen many a 'nigger' that we thought more + of than some white men." + </p> + <p> + That is one of Judge Douglas's friends. Now, I do not want to leave myself + in an attitude where I can be misrepresented, so I will say I do not think + the Judge is responsible for this article; but he is quite as responsible + for it as I would be if one of my friends had said it. I think that is + fair enough. + </p> + <p> + I have here also a set of resolutions passed by a Democratic State + Convention in Judge Douglas's own good State of Vermont, that I think + ought to be good for him too: + </p> + <p> + "Resolved, That liberty is a right inherent and inalienable in man, and + that herein all men are equal. + </p> + <p> + "Resolved, That we claim no authority in the Federal Government to abolish + slavery in the several States, but we do claim for it Constitutional power + perpetually to prohibit the introduction of slavery into territory now + free, and abolish it wherever, under the jurisdiction of Congress, it + exists. + </p> + <p> + "Resolved, That this power ought immediately to be exercised in + prohibiting the introduction and existence of slavery in New Mexico and + California, in abolishing slavery and the slave-trade in the District of + Columbia, on the high seas, and wherever else, under the Constitution, it + can be reached. + </p> + <p> + "Resolved, That no more Slave States should be admitted into the Federal + Union. + </p> + <p> + "Resolved, That the Government ought to return to its ancient policy, not + to extend, nationalize, or encourage, but to limit, localize, and + discourage slavery." + </p> + <p> + At Freeport I answered several interrogatories that had been propounded to + me by Judge Douglas at the Ottawa meeting. The Judge has not yet seen fit + to find any fault with the position that I took in regard to those seven + interrogatories, which were certainly broad enough, in all conscience, to + cover the entire ground. In my answers, which have been printed, and all + have had the opportunity of seeing, I take the ground that those who elect + me must expect that I will do nothing which will not be in accordance with + those answers. I have some right to assert that Judge Douglas has no fault + to find with them. But he chooses to still try to thrust me upon different + ground, without paying any attention to my answers, the obtaining of which + from me cost him so much trouble and concern. At the same time I + propounded four interrogatories to him, claiming it as a right that he + should answer as many interrogatories for me as I did for him, and I would + reserve myself for a future instalment when I got them ready. The Judge, + in answering me upon that occasion, put in what I suppose he intends as + answers to all four of my interrogatories. The first one of these + interrogatories I have before me, and it is in these words: + </p> + <p> + "Question 1.—If the people of Kansas shall, by means entirely + unobjectionable in all other respects, adopt a State constitution, and ask + admission into the Union under it, before they have the requisite number + of inhabitants according to the English bill,"—some ninety-three + thousand,—"will you vote to admit them?" + </p> + <p> + As I read the Judge's answer in the newspaper, and as I remember it as + pronounced at the time, he does not give any answer which is equivalent to + yes or no,—I will or I won't. He answers at very considerable + length, rather quarreling with me for asking the question, and insisting + that Judge Trumbull had done something that I ought to say something + about, and finally getting out such statements as induce me to infer that + he means to be understood he will, in that supposed case, vote for the + admission of Kansas. I only bring this forward now for the purpose of + saying that if he chooses to put a different construction upon his answer, + he may do it. But if he does not, I shall from this time forward assume + that he will vote for the admission of Kansas in disregard of the English + bill. He has the right to remove any misunderstanding I may have. I only + mention it now, that I may hereafter assume this to be the true + construction of his answer, if he does not now choose to correct me. + </p> + <p> + The second interrogatory that I propounded to him was this: + </p> + <p> + "Question 2.—Can the people of a United States Territory, in any + lawful way, against the wish of any citizen of the United States, exclude + slavery from its limits prior to the formation of a State Constitution?" + </p> + <p> + To this Judge Douglas answered that they can lawfully exclude slavery from + the Territory prior to the formation of a constitution. He goes on to tell + us how it can be done. As I understand him, he holds that it can be done + by the Territorial Legislature refusing to make any enactments for the + protection of slavery in the Territory, and especially by adopting + unfriendly legislation to it. For the sake of clearness, I state it again: + that they can exclude slavery from the Territory, 1st, by withholding what + he assumes to be an indispensable assistance to it in the way of + legislation; and, 2d, by unfriendly legislation. If I rightly understand + him, I wish to ask your attention for a while to his position. + </p> + <p> + In the first place, the Supreme Court of the United States has decided + that any Congressional prohibition of slavery in the Territories is + unconstitutional; that they have reached this proposition as a conclusion + from their former proposition, that the Constitution of the United States + expressly recognizes property in slaves, and from that other + Constitutional provision, that no person shall be deprived of property + without due process of law. Hence they reach the conclusion that as the + Constitution of the United States expressly recognizes property in slaves, + and prohibits any person from being deprived of property without due + process of law, to pass an Act of Congress by which a man who owned a + slave on one side of a line would be deprived of him if he took him on the + other side, is depriving him of that property without due process of law. + That I understand to be the decision of the Supreme Court. I understand + also that Judge Douglas adheres most firmly to that decision; and the + difficulty is, how is it possible for any power to exclude slavery from + the Territory, unless in violation of that decision? That is the + difficulty. + </p> + <p> + In the Senate of the United States, in 1850, Judge Trumbull, in a speech + substantially, if not directly, put the same interrogatory to Judge + Douglas, as to whether the people of a Territory had the lawful power to + exclude slavery prior to the formation of a constitution. Judge Douglas + then answered at considerable length, and his answer will be found in the + Congressional Globe, under date of June 9th, 1856. The Judge said that + whether the people could exclude slavery prior to the formation of a + constitution or not was a question to be decided by the Supreme Court. He + put that proposition, as will be seen by the Congressional Globe, in a + variety of forms, all running to the same thing in substance,—that + it was a question for the Supreme Court. I maintain that when he says, + after the Supreme Court have decided the question, that the people may yet + exclude slavery by any means whatever, he does virtually say that it is + not a question for the Supreme Court. He shifts his ground. I appeal to + you whether he did not say it was a question for the Supreme Court? Has + not the Supreme Court decided that question? when he now says the people + may exclude slavery, does he not make it a question for the people? Does + he not virtually shift his ground and say that it is not a question for + the Court, but for the people? This is a very simple proposition,—a + very plain and naked one. It seems to me that there is no difficulty in + deciding it. In a variety of ways he said that it was a question for the + Supreme Court. He did not stop then to tell us that, whatever the Supreme + Court decides, the people can by withholding necessary "police + regulations" keep slavery out. He did not make any such answer I submit to + you now whether the new state of the case has not induced the Judge to + sheer away from his original ground. Would not this be the impression of + every fair-minded man? + </p> + <p> + I hold that the proposition that slavery cannot enter a new country + without police regulations is historically false. It is not true at all. I + hold that the history of this country shows that the institution of + slavery was originally planted upon this continent without these "police + regulations," which the Judge now thinks necessary for the actual + establishment of it. Not only so, but is there not another fact: how came + this Dred Scott decision to be made? It was made upon the case of a negro + being taken and actually held in slavery in Minnesota Territory, claiming + his freedom because the Act of Congress prohibited his being so held + there. Will the Judge pretend that Dred Scott was not held there without + police regulations? There is at least one matter of record as to his + having been held in slavery in the Territory, not only without police + regulations, but in the teeth of Congressional legislation supposed to be + valid at the time. This shows that there is vigor enough in slavery to + plant itself in a new country even against unfriendly legislation. It + takes not only law, but the enforcement of law to keep it out. That is the + history of this country upon the subject. + </p> + <p> + I wish to ask one other question. It being understood that the + Constitution of the United States guarantees property in slaves in the + Territories, if there is any infringement of the right of that property, + would not the United States courts, organized for the government of the + Territory, apply such remedy as might be necessary in that case? It is a + maxim held by the courts that there is no wrong without its remedy; and + the courts have a remedy for whatever is acknowledged and treated as a + wrong. + </p> + <p> + Again: I will ask you, my friends, if you were elected members of the + Legislature, what would be the first thing you would have to do before + entering upon your duties? Swear to support the Constitution of the United + States. Suppose you believe, as Judge Douglas does, that the Constitution + of the United States guarantees to your neighbor the right to hold slaves + in that Territory; that they are his property: how can you clear your + oaths unless you give him such legislation as is necessary to enable him + to enjoy that property? What do you understand by supporting the + Constitution of a State, or of the United States? Is it not to give such + constitutional helps to the rights established by that Constitution as may + be practically needed? Can you, if you swear to support the Constitution, + and believe that the Constitution establishes a right, clear your oath, + without giving it support? Do you support the Constitution if, knowing or + believing there is a right established under it which needs specific + legislation, you withhold that legislation? Do you not violate and + disregard your oath? I can conceive of nothing plainer in the world. There + can be nothing in the words "support the Constitution," if you may run + counter to it by refusing support to any right established under the + Constitution. And what I say here will hold with still more force against + the Judge's doctrine of "unfriendly legislation." How could you, having + sworn to support the Constitution, and believing it guaranteed the right + to hold slaves in the Territories, assist in legislation intended to + defeat that right? That would be violating your own view of the + Constitution. Not only so, but if you were to do so, how long would it + take the courts to hold your votes unconstitutional and void? Not a + moment. + </p> + <p> + Lastly, I would ask: Is not Congress itself under obligation to give + legislative support to any right that is established under the United + States Constitution? I repeat the question: Is not Congress itself bound + to give legislative support to any right that is established in the United + States Constitution? A member of Congress swears to support the + Constitution of the United States: and if he sees a right established by + that Constitution which needs specific legislative protection, can he + clear his oath without giving that protection? Let me ask you why many of + us who are opposed to slavery upon principle give our acquiescence to a + Fugitive Slave law? Why do we hold ourselves under obligations to pass + such a law, and abide by it when it is passed? Because the Constitution + makes provision that the owners of slaves shall have the right to reclaim + them. It gives the right to reclaim slaves; and that right is, as Judge + Douglas says, a barren right, unless there is legislation that will + enforce it. + </p> + <p> + The mere declaration, "No person held to service or labor in one State + under the laws thereof, escaping into another, shall in consequence of any + law or regulation therein be discharged from such service or labor, but + shall be delivered up on claim of the party to whom such service or labor + may be due," is powerless without specific legislation to enforce it. Now, + on what ground would a member of Congress, who is opposed to slavery in + the abstract, vote for a Fugitive law, as I would deem it my duty to do? + Because there is a constitutional right which needs legislation to enforce + it. And although it is distasteful to me, I have sworn to support the + Constitution; and having so sworn, I cannot conceive that I do support it + if I withhold from that right any necessary legislation to make it + practical. And if that is true in regard to a Fugitive Slave law, is the + right to have fugitive slaves reclaimed any better fixed in the + Constitution than the right to hold slaves in the Territories? For this + decision is a just exposition of the Constitution, as Judge Douglas + thinks. Is the one right any better than the other? Is there any man who, + while a member of Congress, would give support to the one any more than + the other? If I wished to refuse to give legislative support to slave + property in the Territories, if a member of Congress, I could not do it, + holding the view that the Constitution establishes that right. If I did it + at all, it would be because I deny that this decision properly construes + the Constitution. But if I acknowledge, with Judge Douglas, that this + decision properly construes the Constitution, I cannot conceive that I + would be less than a perjured man if I should refuse in Congress to give + such protection to that property as in its nature it needed. + </p> + <p> + At the end of what I have said here I propose to give the Judge my fifth + interrogatory, which he may take and answer at his leisure. My fifth + interrogatory is this: + </p> + <p> + If the slaveholding citizens of a United States Territory should need and + demand Congressional legislation for the protection of their slave + property in such Territory, would you, as a member of Congress, vote for + or against such legislation? + </p> + <p> + [Judge DOUGLAS: Will you repeat that? I want to answer that question.] + </p> + <p> + If the slaveholding citizens of a United States Territory should need and + demand Congressional legislation for the protection of their slave + property in such Territory, would you, as a member of Congress, vote for + or against such legislation? + </p> + <p> + I am aware that in some of the speeches Judge Douglas has made, he has + spoken as if he did not know or think that the Supreme Court had decided + that a Territorial Legislature cannot exclude slavery. Precisely what the + Judge would say upon the subject—whether he would say definitely + that he does not understand they have so decided, or whether he would say + he does understand that the court have so decided,—I do not know; + but I know that in his speech at Springfield he spoke of it as a thing + they had not decided yet; and in his answer to me at Freeport, he spoke of + it, so far, again, as I can comprehend it, as a thing that had not yet + been decided. Now, I hold that if the Judge does entertain that view, I + think that he is not mistaken in so far as it can be said that the court + has not decided anything save the mere question of jurisdiction. I know + the legal arguments that can be made,—that after a court has decided + that it cannot take jurisdiction in a case, it then has decided all that + is before it, and that is the end of it. A plausible argument can be made + in favor of that proposition; but I know that Judge Douglas has said in + one of his speeches that the court went forward, like honest men as they + were, and decided all the points in the case. If any points are really + extra-judicially decided, because not necessarily before them, then this + one as to the power of the Territorial Legislature, to exclude slavery is + one of them, as also the one that the Missouri Compromise was null and + void. They are both extra-judicial, or neither is, according as the court + held that they had no jurisdiction in the case between the parties, + because of want of capacity of one party to maintain a suit in that court. + I want, if I have sufficient time, to show that the court did pass its + opinion; but that is the only thing actually done in the case. If they did + not decide, they showed what they were ready to decide whenever the matter + was before them. What is that opinion? After having argued that Congress + had no power to pass a law excluding slavery from a United States + Territory, they then used language to this effect: That inasmuch as + Congress itself could not exercise such a power, it followed as a matter + of course that it could not authorize a Territorial government to exercise + it; for the Territorial Legislature can do no more than Congress could do. + Thus it expressed its opinion emphatically against the power of a + Territorial Legislature to exclude slavery, leaving us in just as little + doubt on that point as upon any other point they really decided. + </p> + <p> + Now, my fellow-citizens, I will detain you only a little while longer; my + time is nearly out. I find a report of a speech made by Judge Douglas at + Joliet, since we last met at Freeport,—published, I believe, in the + Missouri Republican, on the 9th of this month, in which Judge Douglas + says: + </p> + <p> + "You know at Ottawa I read this platform, and asked him if he concurred in + each and all of the principles set forth in it. He would not answer these + questions. At last I said frankly, I wish you to answer them, because when + I get them up here where the color of your principles are a little darker + than in Egypt, I intend to trot you down to Jonesboro. The very notice + that I was going to take him down to Egypt made him tremble in his knees + so that he had to be carried from the platform. He laid up seven days, and + in the meantime held a consultation with his political physicians; they + had Lovejoy and Farnsworth and all the leaders of the Abolition party, + they consulted it all over, and at last Lincoln came to the conclusion + that he would answer, so he came up to Freeport last Friday." + </p> + <p> + Now, that statement altogether furnishes a subject for philosophical + contemplation. I have been treating it in that way, and I have really come + to the conclusion that I can explain it in no other way than by believing + the Judge is crazy. If he was in his right mind I cannot conceive how he + would have risked disgusting the four or five thousand of his own friends + who stood there and knew, as to my having been carried from the platform, + that there was not a word of truth in it. + </p> + <p> + [Judge DOUGLAS: Did n't they carry you off?] + </p> + <p> + There that question illustrates the character of this man Douglas exactly. + He smiles now, and says, "Did n't they carry you off?" but he said then + "he had to be carried off"; and he said it to convince the country that he + had so completely broken me down by his speech that I had to be carried + away. Now he seeks to dodge it, and asks, "Did n't they carry you off?" + Yes, they did. But, Judge Douglas, why didn't you tell the truth? I would + like to know why you did n't tell the truth about it. And then again "He + laid up seven days." He put this in print for the people of the country to + read as a serious document. I think if he had been in his sober senses he + would not have risked that barefacedness in the presence of thousands of + his own friends who knew that I made speeches within six of the seven days + at Henry, Marshall County, Augusta, Hancock County, and Macomb, McDonough + County, including all the necessary travel to meet him again at Freeport + at the end of the six days. Now I say there is no charitable way to look + at that statement, except to conclude that he is actually crazy. There is + another thing in that statement that alarmed me very greatly as he states + it, that he was going to "trot me down to Egypt." Thereby he would have + you infer that I would not come to Egypt unless he forced me—that I + could not be got here unless he, giant-like, had hauled me down here. That + statement he makes, too, in the teeth of the knowledge that I had made the + stipulation to come down here and that he himself had been very reluctant + to enter into the stipulation. More than all this: Judge Douglas, when he + made that statement, must have been crazy and wholly out of his sober + senses, or else he would have known that when he got me down here, that + promise—that windy promise—of his powers to annihilate me, + would n't amount to anything. Now, how little do I look like being carried + away trembling? Let the Judge go on; and after he is done with his + half-hour, I want you all, if I can't go home myself, to let me stay and + rot here; and if anything happens to the Judge, if I cannot carry him to + the hotel and put him to bed, let me stay here and rot. I say, then, here + is something extraordinary in this statement. I ask you if you know any + other living man who would make such a statement? I will ask my friend + Casey, over there, if he would do such a thing? Would he send that out and + have his men take it as the truth? Did the Judge talk of trotting me down + to Egypt to scare me to death? Why, I know this people better than he + does. I was raised just a little east of here. I am a part of this people. + But the Judge was raised farther north, and perhaps he has some horrid + idea of what this people might be induced to do. But really I have talked + about this matter perhaps longer than I ought, for it is no great thing; + and yet the smallest are often the most difficult things to deal with. The + Judge has set about seriously trying to make the impression that when we + meet at different places I am literally in his clutches—that I am a + poor, helpless, decrepit mouse, and that I can do nothing at all. This is + one of the ways he has taken to create that impression. I don't know any + other way to meet it except this. I don't want to quarrel with him—to + call him a liar; but when I come square up to him I don't know what else + to call him if I must tell the truth out. I want to be at peace, and + reserve all my fighting powers for necessary occasions. My time now is + very nearly out, and I give up the trifle that is left to the Judge, to + let him set my knees trembling again, if he can. + </p> + <p> + <br /> <br /> + </p> + <hr /> + <p> + <br /> <br /> + </p> +<pre xml:space="preserve"> + + + + + +End of the Project Gutenberg EBook of The Papers And Writings Of Abraham +Lincoln, Volume Three, by Abraham Lincoln + +*** END OF THIS PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK LINCOLN'S PAPERS *** + +***** This file should be named 2655-h.htm or 2655-h.zip ***** +This and all associated files of various formats will be found in: + http://www.gutenberg.org/2/6/5/2655/ + +Produced by David Widger + +Updated editions will replace the previous one--the old editions +will be renamed. + +Creating the works from public domain print editions means that no +one owns a United States copyright in these works, so the Foundation +(and you!) can copy and distribute it in the United States without +permission and without paying copyright royalties. Special rules, +set forth in the General Terms of Use part of this license, apply to +copying and distributing Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works to +protect the PROJECT GUTENBERG-tm concept and trademark. Project +Gutenberg is a registered trademark, and may not be used if you +charge for the eBooks, unless you receive specific permission. If you +do not charge anything for copies of this eBook, complying with the +rules is very easy. You may use this eBook for nearly any purpose +such as creation of derivative works, reports, performances and +research. They may be modified and printed and given away--you may do +practically ANYTHING with public domain eBooks. Redistribution is +subject to the trademark license, especially commercial +redistribution. + + + +*** START: FULL LICENSE *** + +THE FULL PROJECT GUTENBERG LICENSE +PLEASE READ THIS BEFORE YOU DISTRIBUTE OR USE THIS WORK + +To protect the Project Gutenberg-tm mission of promoting the free +distribution of electronic works, by using or distributing this work +(or any other work associated in any way with the phrase "Project +Gutenberg"), you agree to comply with all the terms of the Full Project +Gutenberg-tm License (available with this file or online at +http://gutenberg.org/license). + + +Section 1. General Terms of Use and Redistributing Project Gutenberg-tm +electronic works + +1.A. By reading or using any part of this Project Gutenberg-tm +electronic work, you indicate that you have read, understand, agree to +and accept all the terms of this license and intellectual property +(trademark/copyright) agreement. If you do not agree to abide by all +the terms of this agreement, you must cease using and return or destroy +all copies of Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works in your possession. +If you paid a fee for obtaining a copy of or access to a Project +Gutenberg-tm electronic work and you do not agree to be bound by the +terms of this agreement, you may obtain a refund from the person or +entity to whom you paid the fee as set forth in paragraph 1.E.8. + +1.B. "Project Gutenberg" is a registered trademark. It may only be +used on or associated in any way with an electronic work by people who +agree to be bound by the terms of this agreement. There are a few +things that you can do with most Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works +even without complying with the full terms of this agreement. See +paragraph 1.C below. There are a lot of things you can do with Project +Gutenberg-tm electronic works if you follow the terms of this agreement +and help preserve free future access to Project Gutenberg-tm electronic +works. See paragraph 1.E below. + +1.C. The Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation ("the Foundation" +or PGLAF), owns a compilation copyright in the collection of Project +Gutenberg-tm electronic works. Nearly all the individual works in the +collection are in the public domain in the United States. If an +individual work is in the public domain in the United States and you are +located in the United States, we do not claim a right to prevent you from +copying, distributing, performing, displaying or creating derivative +works based on the work as long as all references to Project Gutenberg +are removed. Of course, we hope that you will support the Project +Gutenberg-tm mission of promoting free access to electronic works by +freely sharing Project Gutenberg-tm works in compliance with the terms of +this agreement for keeping the Project Gutenberg-tm name associated with +the work. You can easily comply with the terms of this agreement by +keeping this work in the same format with its attached full Project +Gutenberg-tm License when you share it without charge with others. + +1.D. The copyright laws of the place where you are located also govern +what you can do with this work. Copyright laws in most countries are in +a constant state of change. If you are outside the United States, check +the laws of your country in addition to the terms of this agreement +before downloading, copying, displaying, performing, distributing or +creating derivative works based on this work or any other Project +Gutenberg-tm work. The Foundation makes no representations concerning +the copyright status of any work in any country outside the United +States. + +1.E. Unless you have removed all references to Project Gutenberg: + +1.E.1. The following sentence, with active links to, or other immediate +access to, the full Project Gutenberg-tm License must appear prominently +whenever any copy of a Project Gutenberg-tm work (any work on which the +phrase "Project Gutenberg" appears, or with which the phrase "Project +Gutenberg" is associated) is accessed, displayed, performed, viewed, +copied or distributed: + +This eBook is for the use of anyone anywhere at no cost and with +almost no restrictions whatsoever. You may copy it, give it away or +re-use it under the terms of the Project Gutenberg License included +with this eBook or online at www.gutenberg.org + +1.E.2. If an individual Project Gutenberg-tm electronic work is derived +from the public domain (does not contain a notice indicating that it is +posted with permission of the copyright holder), the work can be copied +and distributed to anyone in the United States without paying any fees +or charges. If you are redistributing or providing access to a work +with the phrase "Project Gutenberg" associated with or appearing on the +work, you must comply either with the requirements of paragraphs 1.E.1 +through 1.E.7 or obtain permission for the use of the work and the +Project Gutenberg-tm trademark as set forth in paragraphs 1.E.8 or +1.E.9. + +1.E.3. If an individual Project Gutenberg-tm electronic work is posted +with the permission of the copyright holder, your use and distribution +must comply with both paragraphs 1.E.1 through 1.E.7 and any additional +terms imposed by the copyright holder. Additional terms will be linked +to the Project Gutenberg-tm License for all works posted with the +permission of the copyright holder found at the beginning of this work. + +1.E.4. Do not unlink or detach or remove the full Project Gutenberg-tm +License terms from this work, or any files containing a part of this +work or any other work associated with Project Gutenberg-tm. + +1.E.5. Do not copy, display, perform, distribute or redistribute this +electronic work, or any part of this electronic work, without +prominently displaying the sentence set forth in paragraph 1.E.1 with +active links or immediate access to the full terms of the Project +Gutenberg-tm License. + +1.E.6. You may convert to and distribute this work in any binary, +compressed, marked up, nonproprietary or proprietary form, including any +word processing or hypertext form. However, if you provide access to or +distribute copies of a Project Gutenberg-tm work in a format other than +"Plain Vanilla ASCII" or other format used in the official version +posted on the official Project Gutenberg-tm web site (www.gutenberg.org), +you must, at no additional cost, fee or expense to the user, provide a +copy, a means of exporting a copy, or a means of obtaining a copy upon +request, of the work in its original "Plain Vanilla ASCII" or other +form. Any alternate format must include the full Project Gutenberg-tm +License as specified in paragraph 1.E.1. + +1.E.7. Do not charge a fee for access to, viewing, displaying, +performing, copying or distributing any Project Gutenberg-tm works +unless you comply with paragraph 1.E.8 or 1.E.9. + +1.E.8. You may charge a reasonable fee for copies of or providing +access to or distributing Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works provided +that + +- You pay a royalty fee of 20% of the gross profits you derive from + the use of Project Gutenberg-tm works calculated using the method + you already use to calculate your applicable taxes. The fee is + owed to the owner of the Project Gutenberg-tm trademark, but he + has agreed to donate royalties under this paragraph to the + Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation. Royalty payments + must be paid within 60 days following each date on which you + prepare (or are legally required to prepare) your periodic tax + returns. Royalty payments should be clearly marked as such and + sent to the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation at the + address specified in Section 4, "Information about donations to + the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation." + +- You provide a full refund of any money paid by a user who notifies + you in writing (or by e-mail) within 30 days of receipt that s/he + does not agree to the terms of the full Project Gutenberg-tm + License. You must require such a user to return or + destroy all copies of the works possessed in a physical medium + and discontinue all use of and all access to other copies of + Project Gutenberg-tm works. + +- You provide, in accordance with paragraph 1.F.3, a full refund of any + money paid for a work or a replacement copy, if a defect in the + electronic work is discovered and reported to you within 90 days + of receipt of the work. + +- You comply with all other terms of this agreement for free + distribution of Project Gutenberg-tm works. + +1.E.9. If you wish to charge a fee or distribute a Project Gutenberg-tm +electronic work or group of works on different terms than are set +forth in this agreement, you must obtain permission in writing from +both the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation and Michael +Hart, the owner of the Project Gutenberg-tm trademark. Contact the +Foundation as set forth in Section 3 below. + +1.F. + +1.F.1. Project Gutenberg volunteers and employees expend considerable +effort to identify, do copyright research on, transcribe and proofread +public domain works in creating the Project Gutenberg-tm +collection. Despite these efforts, Project Gutenberg-tm electronic +works, and the medium on which they may be stored, may contain +"Defects," such as, but not limited to, incomplete, inaccurate or +corrupt data, transcription errors, a copyright or other intellectual +property infringement, a defective or damaged disk or other medium, a +computer virus, or computer codes that damage or cannot be read by +your equipment. + +1.F.2. LIMITED WARRANTY, DISCLAIMER OF DAMAGES - Except for the "Right +of Replacement or Refund" described in paragraph 1.F.3, the Project +Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation, the owner of the Project +Gutenberg-tm trademark, and any other party distributing a Project +Gutenberg-tm electronic work under this agreement, disclaim all +liability to you for damages, costs and expenses, including legal +fees. YOU AGREE THAT YOU HAVE NO REMEDIES FOR NEGLIGENCE, STRICT +LIABILITY, BREACH OF WARRANTY OR BREACH OF CONTRACT EXCEPT THOSE +PROVIDED IN PARAGRAPH F3. YOU AGREE THAT THE FOUNDATION, THE +TRADEMARK OWNER, AND ANY DISTRIBUTOR UNDER THIS AGREEMENT WILL NOT BE +LIABLE TO YOU FOR ACTUAL, DIRECT, INDIRECT, CONSEQUENTIAL, PUNITIVE OR +INCIDENTAL DAMAGES EVEN IF YOU GIVE NOTICE OF THE POSSIBILITY OF SUCH +DAMAGE. + +1.F.3. LIMITED RIGHT OF REPLACEMENT OR REFUND - If you discover a +defect in this electronic work within 90 days of receiving it, you can +receive a refund of the money (if any) you paid for it by sending a +written explanation to the person you received the work from. If you +received the work on a physical medium, you must return the medium with +your written explanation. The person or entity that provided you with +the defective work may elect to provide a replacement copy in lieu of a +refund. If you received the work electronically, the person or entity +providing it to you may choose to give you a second opportunity to +receive the work electronically in lieu of a refund. If the second copy +is also defective, you may demand a refund in writing without further +opportunities to fix the problem. + +1.F.4. Except for the limited right of replacement or refund set forth +in paragraph 1.F.3, this work is provided to you 'AS-IS' WITH NO OTHER +WARRANTIES OF ANY KIND, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO +WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTIBILITY OR FITNESS FOR ANY PURPOSE. + +1.F.5. Some states do not allow disclaimers of certain implied +warranties or the exclusion or limitation of certain types of damages. +If any disclaimer or limitation set forth in this agreement violates the +law of the state applicable to this agreement, the agreement shall be +interpreted to make the maximum disclaimer or limitation permitted by +the applicable state law. The invalidity or unenforceability of any +provision of this agreement shall not void the remaining provisions. + +1.F.6. INDEMNITY - You agree to indemnify and hold the Foundation, the +trademark owner, any agent or employee of the Foundation, anyone +providing copies of Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works in accordance +with this agreement, and any volunteers associated with the production, +promotion and distribution of Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works, +harmless from all liability, costs and expenses, including legal fees, +that arise directly or indirectly from any of the following which you do +or cause to occur: (a) distribution of this or any Project Gutenberg-tm +work, (b) alteration, modification, or additions or deletions to any +Project Gutenberg-tm work, and (c) any Defect you cause. + + +Section 2. Information about the Mission of Project Gutenberg-tm + +Project Gutenberg-tm is synonymous with the free distribution of +electronic works in formats readable by the widest variety of computers +including obsolete, old, middle-aged and new computers. It exists +because of the efforts of hundreds of volunteers and donations from +people in all walks of life. + +Volunteers and financial support to provide volunteers with the +assistance they need, are critical to reaching Project Gutenberg-tm's +goals and ensuring that the Project Gutenberg-tm collection will +remain freely available for generations to come. In 2001, the Project +Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation was created to provide a secure +and permanent future for Project Gutenberg-tm and future generations. +To learn more about the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation +and how your efforts and donations can help, see Sections 3 and 4 +and the Foundation web page at http://www.pglaf.org. + + +Section 3. Information about the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive +Foundation + +The Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation is a non profit +501(c)(3) educational corporation organized under the laws of the +state of Mississippi and granted tax exempt status by the Internal +Revenue Service. The Foundation's EIN or federal tax identification +number is 64-6221541. Its 501(c)(3) letter is posted at +http://pglaf.org/fundraising. Contributions to the Project Gutenberg +Literary Archive Foundation are tax deductible to the full extent +permitted by U.S. federal laws and your state's laws. + +The Foundation's principal office is located at 4557 Melan Dr. S. +Fairbanks, AK, 99712., but its volunteers and employees are scattered +throughout numerous locations. Its business office is located at +809 North 1500 West, Salt Lake City, UT 84116, (801) 596-1887, email +business@pglaf.org. Email contact links and up to date contact +information can be found at the Foundation's web site and official +page at http://pglaf.org + +For additional contact information: + Dr. Gregory B. Newby + Chief Executive and Director + gbnewby@pglaf.org + + +Section 4. Information about Donations to the Project Gutenberg +Literary Archive Foundation + +Project Gutenberg-tm depends upon and cannot survive without wide +spread public support and donations to carry out its mission of +increasing the number of public domain and licensed works that can be +freely distributed in machine readable form accessible by the widest +array of equipment including outdated equipment. Many small donations +($1 to $5,000) are particularly important to maintaining tax exempt +status with the IRS. + +The Foundation is committed to complying with the laws regulating +charities and charitable donations in all 50 states of the United +States. Compliance requirements are not uniform and it takes a +considerable effort, much paperwork and many fees to meet and keep up +with these requirements. We do not solicit donations in locations +where we have not received written confirmation of compliance. To +SEND DONATIONS or determine the status of compliance for any +particular state visit http://pglaf.org + +While we cannot and do not solicit contributions from states where we +have not met the solicitation requirements, we know of no prohibition +against accepting unsolicited donations from donors in such states who +approach us with offers to donate. + +International donations are gratefully accepted, but we cannot make +any statements concerning tax treatment of donations received from +outside the United States. U.S. laws alone swamp our small staff. + +Please check the Project Gutenberg Web pages for current donation +methods and addresses. Donations are accepted in a number of other +ways including checks, online payments and credit card donations. +To donate, please visit: http://pglaf.org/donate + + +Section 5. General Information About Project Gutenberg-tm electronic +works. + +Professor Michael S. Hart is the originator of the Project Gutenberg-tm +concept of a library of electronic works that could be freely shared +with anyone. For thirty years, he produced and distributed Project +Gutenberg-tm eBooks with only a loose network of volunteer support. + + +Project Gutenberg-tm eBooks are often created from several printed +editions, all of which are confirmed as Public Domain in the U.S. +unless a copyright notice is included. Thus, we do not necessarily +keep eBooks in compliance with any particular paper edition. + + +Most people start at our Web site which has the main PG search facility: + + http://www.gutenberg.org + +This Web site includes information about Project Gutenberg-tm, +including how to make donations to the Project Gutenberg Literary +Archive Foundation, how to help produce our new eBooks, and how to +subscribe to our email newsletter to hear about new eBooks. + + +</pre> + </body> +</html> |