diff options
| -rw-r--r-- | .gitattributes | 3 | ||||
| -rw-r--r-- | 2655-h.zip | bin | 0 -> 99765 bytes | |||
| -rw-r--r-- | 2655-h/2655-h.htm | 5013 | ||||
| -rw-r--r-- | 2655.txt | 4486 | ||||
| -rw-r--r-- | 2655.zip | bin | 0 -> 95911 bytes | |||
| -rw-r--r-- | LICENSE.txt | 11 | ||||
| -rw-r--r-- | README.md | 2 | ||||
| -rw-r--r-- | old/2655.txt | 4512 | ||||
| -rw-r--r-- | old/2655.zip | bin | 0 -> 95647 bytes | |||
| -rw-r--r-- | old/3linc10.txt | 4899 | ||||
| -rw-r--r-- | old/3linc10.zip | bin | 0 -> 94696 bytes | |||
| -rw-r--r-- | old/3linc11.txt | 4967 | ||||
| -rw-r--r-- | old/3linc11.zip | bin | 0 -> 97561 bytes |
13 files changed, 23893 insertions, 0 deletions
diff --git a/.gitattributes b/.gitattributes new file mode 100644 index 0000000..6833f05 --- /dev/null +++ b/.gitattributes @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +* text=auto +*.txt text +*.md text diff --git a/2655-h.zip b/2655-h.zip Binary files differnew file mode 100644 index 0000000..dceec52 --- /dev/null +++ b/2655-h.zip 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> diff --git a/2655.txt b/2655.txt new file mode 100644 index 0000000..398b533 --- /dev/null +++ b/2655.txt @@ -0,0 +1,4486 @@ +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: June, 2001 [Etext #2655] +Posting Date: July 5, 2009 + +Language: English + +Character set encoding: ASCII + +*** START OF THIS PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK LINCOLN'S PAPERS *** + + + + +Produced by David Widger + + + + + +THE PAPERS AND WRITINGS OF ABRAHAM LINCOLN + +VOLUME THREE + +CONSTITUTIONAL EDITION + +By Abraham Lincoln + + +Edited by Arthur Brooks Lapsley + + + + +THE LINCOLN-DOUGLAS DEBATES I + +POLITICAL SPEECHES & DEBATES of LINCOLN WITH DOUGLAS In the Senatorial +Campaign of 1858 in Illinois SPEECH AT SPRINGFIELD, JUNE 17, 1858 + + +[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.] + + +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. + +Have we no tendency to the latter condition? + +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. + +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. + +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. + +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: + +"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." + +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. + +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." + +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. + +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! + +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. + +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: + +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." + +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. + +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. + +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. + +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? + +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. + +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. + +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? + +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. + +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. + +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. + + + + +SPEECH AT CHICAGO, JULY 10, 1858. + +IN REPLY TO SENATOR DOUGLAS + +DELIVERED AT CHICAGO, SATURDAY EVENING, JULY 10, 1858. + +(Mr. DOUGLAS WAS NOT PRESENT.) + +[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,] + +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. + +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: + +"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." + +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! + +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. + +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: + +"...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." + +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. + +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." + +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? + +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. + +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."] + +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: + +"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." + +There is the origin of popular sovereignty. Who, then, shall come in at +this day and claim that he invented it? + +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. + +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? + +[A voice: Judge Douglas.] + +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. + +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? + +[A voice: Douglas.] + +Why, yes, Douglas did it! To be sure he did. + +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? + +[A voice: Who killed the bill?] + +[Another voice: Douglas.] + +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. + +[A voice: Why don't they come out on it?] + +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. + +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? + +[A voice: We have.] + +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. + +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. + +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." + +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. + +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. + +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. + +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. + +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. + +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. + +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. + +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? + +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. + +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. + +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. + +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. + +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. + +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. + +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"? + +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. + +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. + +[A voice: "Three cheers for Lincoln".--The cheers were given with a hearty +good-will.] + +I should say at least that that is a self-evident truth. + +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. + +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. + +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. + +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. + +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. + +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. + +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. + + + + +SPEECH AT SPRINGFIELD, JULY 17, 1858. + +DELIVERED SATURDAY EVENING + +(Mr. Douglas was not present.) + +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. + +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. + +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. + +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. + +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. + +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. + +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. + +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. + +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. + +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. + +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. + +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. + +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. + +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." + +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. + +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. + +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. + +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. + +I now pass from popular sovereignty and Lecompton. I may have occasion to +refer to one or both. + +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. + +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. + +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. + +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: + +"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." + +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. + +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. + +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. + +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. + +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. + +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. + +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? + +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. + +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. + +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. + +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. + +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. + +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: + +"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." + +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. + +Now, I have said no more than this,--in fact, never quite so much as this; +at least I am sustained by Mr. Jefferson. + +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. + +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. + +Free men of Sangamon, free men of Illinois, free men everywhere, judge ye +between him and me upon this issue. + +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. + +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? + +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. + +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. + +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. + +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. + +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. + +Who shall say, "I am the superior, and you are the inferior"? + +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. + +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. + +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. + +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. + +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. + + + + +CORRESPONDENCE BETWEEN LINCOLN AND DOUGLAS + +[The following is the correspondence between the two rival candidates for +the United States Senate] + + + + +MR. LINCOLN TO MR. DOUGLAS. + +CHICAGO, ILL., July 24, 1558. + +HON. S. A. DOUGLAS: + +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. + +Your obedient servant, + +A. LINCOLN. + + + + +Mr. DOUGLAS TO Mr. LINCOLN. + +BEMENT, PLATT Co., ILL., July 30, 1858. + +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. + +The times and places designated are as follows: + + 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, + +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. + +Very respectfully, your obedient servant, + +S. A. DOUGLAS. + + + + +Mr. LINCOLN TO Mr. DOUGLAS. + +SPRINGFIELD, July 31, 1858. HON. S. A. DOUGLAS: + +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. + +Your obedient servant, + +A. LINCOLN. + + + + +FIRST JOINT DEBATE, AT OTTAWA, + +AUGUST 21, 1858 + +Mr. LINCOLN'S REPLY + +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. + +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. + +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. + +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. + +[Voice: "Put on your specs."] + +Mr. LINCOLN: Yes, sir, I am obliged to do so; I am no longer a young man. + +"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. + +"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. + +"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. + +"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. + +"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. + +"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. + +"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." + +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. + +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. + +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. + +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. + +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. + +[A voice: "Then do you repudiate popular sovereignty?"] + +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. + +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. + +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: + +"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." + +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? + +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. + +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." + +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." + +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. + +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. + +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: + +"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." + +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: + +"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?" + +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: + +"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. + +"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: + +"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..." + +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? + +"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." + +Then in the schedule is a provision that the Constitution may be amended +after 1864 by a two-thirds vote: + +"But no alteration shall be made to affect the right of property in the +ownership of slaves." + +"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." + +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: + +"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." + +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? + +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! + +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. + +[A HIBERNIAN: "Give us something besides Dred Scott."] + +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. + +My friends, that ends the chapter. The Judge can take his half-hour. + + + + +SECOND JOINT DEBATE, AT FREEPORT, + +AUGUST 27, 1858 + +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. + +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. + +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. + +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: + +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. + +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. + +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. + +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. + +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. + +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. + +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. + +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. + +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. + +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. + +The third interrogatory is answered by the answer to the second, it being, +as I conceive, the same as the second. + +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." + +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. + +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. + +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. + +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: + +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? + +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? + +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? + +Q. 4. Are you in favor of acquiring additional territory, in disregard of +how such acquisition may affect the nation on the slavery question? + +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. + +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. + +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. + +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. + +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. + +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." + +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? + +[Cries of "Yes," "Yes," and "No," "No."] + +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. + +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. + +Go on, Judge Douglas. + + + + +Mr. LINCOLN'S REJOINDER. + +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. + +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. + +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. + +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. + +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. + +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. + +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. + +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. + +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: + +"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. + +"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: + +"'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...." + +"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? + +"'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.' + +"Then in the schedule is a provision that the Constitution may be amended +after 1864 by a two-thirds vote. + +"'But no alteration shall be made to affect the right of property in the +ownership of slaves.' + +"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. + +"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." + +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: + +"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." + +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. + + + + +THIRD JOINT DEBATE, AT JONESBORO, + +SEPTEMBER 15, 1858 + +Mr. LINCOLN'S REPLY. + +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. + +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. + +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. + +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. + +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. + +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. + +[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.] + +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. + +[It almost a natural law that, when dead--no matter how bad we were--we +are automatically beatified.] + +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?" + +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. + +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. + +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? + +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. + +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? + +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? + +[Mr. DOUGLAS: I do not.] + +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. + +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: + + + + +INTERROGATORIES: + +"1st. Will you, if elected, vote for and cordially support a bill +prohibiting slavery in the Territories of the United States? + +"2d. Will you vote for and support a bill abolishing slavery in the +District of Columbia? + +"3d. Will you oppose the admission of any Slave States which may be formed +out of Texas or the Territories? + +"4th. Will you vote for and advocate the repeal of the Fugitive Slave law +passed at the recent session of Congress? + +"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? + +"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?" + + + + +CAMPBELL'S REPLY. + +"To the first and second interrogatories, I answer unequivocally in the +affirmative. + +"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. + +"To the fourth and fifth interrogatories I unhesitatingly answer in the +affirmative. + +"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. + +"T. CAMPBELL." + + +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. + +[Judge DOUGLAS: Give me the date of the letter.] + +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. + +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: + +"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." + +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: + +"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. + +"To your fourth interrogatory I answer most decidedly in the affirmative, +and for reasons set forth in my reported remarks at Ottawa last Monday. + +"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. + +"Yours, etc., R. S. MOLONY." + + +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: + +"Cook County,--E. B. Williams, Charles McDonell, Arno Voss, Thomas Hoyne, +Isaac Cook." + +I reckon we ought to except Cook. + + "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." + +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: + + "Du Page,--Nathan Allen. + "De Kalb,--Z. B. Mayo." + +Here is another set of resolutions which I think are apposite to the +matter in hand. + +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: + +"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. + +"Resolved, That in the opinion of this Convention, the time has arrived +when all men should be free, whites as well as others." + +[Judge DOUGLAS: What is the date of those resolutions?] + +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: + +"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. + +"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." + +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. + +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: + +"Resolved, That liberty is a right inherent and inalienable in man, and +that herein all men are equal. + +"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. + +"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. + +"Resolved, That no more Slave States should be admitted into the Federal +Union. + +"Resolved, That the Government ought to return to its ancient policy, +not to extend, nationalize, or encourage, but to limit, localize, and +discourage slavery." + +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: + +"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?" + +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. + +The second interrogatory that I propounded to him was this: + +"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?" + +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. + +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. + +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? + +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. + +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. + +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. + +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. + +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. + +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: + +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? + +[Judge DOUGLAS: Will you repeat that? I want to answer that question.] + +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? + +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. + +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: + +"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." + +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. + +[Judge DOUGLAS: Did n't they carry you off?] + +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. set my knees trembling again, if he can. + + + + + +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.txt or 2655.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. diff --git a/2655.zip b/2655.zip Binary files differnew file mode 100644 index 0000000..1e7a329 --- /dev/null +++ b/2655.zip diff --git a/LICENSE.txt b/LICENSE.txt new file mode 100644 index 0000000..6312041 --- /dev/null +++ b/LICENSE.txt @@ -0,0 +1,11 @@ +This eBook, including all associated images, markup, improvements, +metadata, and any other content or labor, has been confirmed to be +in the PUBLIC DOMAIN IN THE UNITED STATES. + +Procedures for determining public domain status are described in +the "Copyright How-To" at https://www.gutenberg.org. + +No investigation has been made concerning possible copyrights in +jurisdictions other than the United States. Anyone seeking to utilize +this eBook outside of the United States should confirm copyright +status under the laws that apply to them. diff --git a/README.md b/README.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000..678bb7e --- /dev/null +++ b/README.md @@ -0,0 +1,2 @@ +Project Gutenberg (https://www.gutenberg.org) public repository for +eBook #2655 (https://www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/2655) diff --git a/old/2655.txt b/old/2655.txt new file mode 100644 index 0000000..143bc13 --- /dev/null +++ b/old/2655.txt @@ -0,0 +1,4512 @@ +The Project Gutenberg EBook of The Writings of Abraham Lincoln, Volume 3 +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.net + + +Title: The Writings of Abraham Lincoln, Volume 3 + Political Speeches & Debates Of Lincoln in The Senatorial Campaign + Of 1858 in Illinois + + +Author: Abraham Lincoln + +Release Date: August 16, 2006 [EBook #2655] + +Language: English + +Character set encoding: ASCII + +*** START OF THIS PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK WRITINGS OF LINCOLN *** + + + + +Produced by David Widger + + + + + +THE WRITINGS OF ABRAHAM LINCOLN, Volume Three + +CONSTITUTIONAL EDITION + + + +THE LINCOLN-DOUGLAS DEBATES I + +POLITICAL SPEECHES & DEBATES of LINCOLN WITH DOUGLAS +In the Senatorial Campaign of 1858 in Illinois +SPEECH AT SPRINGFIELD, JUNE 17, 1858 + + + +[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.] + + +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. + +Have we no tendency to the latter condition? + +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. + +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. + +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. + +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: + +"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." + +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. + +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." + +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. + +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! + +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. + +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: + +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." + +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. + +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. + +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. + +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? + +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. + +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. + +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? + +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. + +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. + +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. + + + + +SPEECH AT CHICAGO, JULY 10, 1858. + +IN REPLY TO SENATOR DOUGLAS +DELIVERED AT CHICAGO, SATURDAY EVENING, JULY 10, 1858. + +(Mr. DOUGLAS WAS NOT PRESENT.) + +[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,] + +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. + +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: + +"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." + +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! + +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. + +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: + +"...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." + +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. + +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." + +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? + +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. + +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."] + +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: + +"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." + +There is the origin of popular sovereignty. Who, then, shall come in at +this day and claim that he invented it? + +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. + +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? + +[A voice: Judge Douglas.] + +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. + +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? + +[A voice: Douglas.] + +Why, yes, Douglas did it! To be sure he did. + +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? + +[A voice: Who killed the bill?] + +[Another voice: Douglas.] + +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. + +[A voice: Why don't they come out on it?] + +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. + +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? + +[A voice: We have.] + +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. + +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. + +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." + +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. + +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. + +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. + +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. + +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. + +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. + +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. + +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? + +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. + +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. + +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. + +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. + +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. + +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. + +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"? + +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. + +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. + +[A voice: "Three cheers for Lincoln".--The cheers were given with a +hearty good-will.] + +I should say at least that that is a self-evident truth. + +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. + +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. + +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. + +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. + +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. + +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. + +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. + + + + +SPEECH AT SPRINGFIELD, JULY 17, 1858. + +DELIVERED SATURDAY EVENING + +(Mr. Douglas was not present.) + +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. + +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. + +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. + +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. + +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. + +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. + +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. + +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. + +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. + +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. + +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. + +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. + +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. + +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." + +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. + +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. + +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. + +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. + +I now pass from popular sovereignty and Lecompton. I may have occasion to +refer to one or both. + +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. + +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. + +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. + +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: + +"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." + +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. + +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. + +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. + +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. + +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. + +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. + +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? + +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. + +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. + +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. + +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. + +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. + +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: + +"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." + +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. + +Now, I have said no more than this,--in fact, never quite so much as +this; at least I am sustained by Mr. Jefferson. + +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. + +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. + +Free men of Sangamon, free men of Illinois, free men everywhere, judge ye +between him and me upon this issue. + +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. + +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? + +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. + +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. + +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. + +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. + +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. + +Who shall say, "I am the superior, and you are the inferior"? + +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. + +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. + +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. + +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. + +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. + + + + +CORRESPONDENCE BETWEEN LINCOLN AND DOUGLAS + +[The following is the correspondence between the two rival candidates for +the United States Senate] + +MR. LINCOLN TO MR. DOUGLAS. + +CHICAGO, ILL., July 24, 1558. +HON. S. A. DOUGLAS: + +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. + +Your obedient servant, +A. LINCOLN. + + + + +Mr. DOUGLAS TO Mr. LINCOLN. + +BEMENT, PLATT Co., ILL., July 30, 1858. + +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. + +The times and places designated are as follows: + +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, + +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. + +Very respectfully, your obedient servant, +S. A. DOUGLAS. + + + + +Mr. LINCOLN TO Mr. DOUGLAS. + +SPRINGFIELD, July 31, 1858. +HON. S. A. DOUGLAS: + +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. + +Your obedient servant, +A. LINCOLN. + + + + +FIRST JOINT DEBATE, AT OTTAWA, + +AUGUST 21, 1858 + +Mr. LINCOLN'S REPLY + +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. + +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. + +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. + +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. + +[Voice: "Put on your specs."] + +Mr. LINCOLN: Yes, sir, I am obliged to do so; I am no longer a young man. + +"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. + +"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. + +"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. + +"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. + +"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. + +"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. + +"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." + +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. + +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. + +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. + +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. + +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. + +[A voice: "Then do you repudiate popular sovereignty?"] + +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. + +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. + +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: + +"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." + +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? + +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. + +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." + +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." + +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. + +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. + +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: + +"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." + +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: + +"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?" + +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: + +"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. + +"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: + +"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 ..." + +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? + +"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." + +Then in the schedule is a provision that the Constitution may be amended +after 1864 by a two-thirds vote: + +"But no alteration shall be made to affect the right of property in the +ownership of slaves." + +"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." + +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: + +"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." + +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? + +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! + +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. + +[A HIBERNIAN: "Give us something besides Dred Scott."] + +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. + +My friends, that ends the chapter. The Judge can take his half-hour. + + + + +SECOND JOINT DEBATE, AT FREEPORT, + +AUGUST 27, 1858 + +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. + +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. + +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. + +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: + +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. + +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. + +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. + +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. + +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. + +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. + +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. + +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. + +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. + +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. + +The third interrogatory is answered by the answer to the second, it +being, as I conceive, the same as the second. + +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." + +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. + +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. + +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. + +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: + +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? + +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? + +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? + +Q. 4. Are you in favor of acquiring additional territory, in disregard of +how such acquisition may affect the nation on the slavery question? + +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. + +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. + +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. + +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. + +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. + +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." + +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? + +[Cries of "Yes," "Yes," and "No," "No."] + +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. + +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. + +Go on, Judge Douglas. + + + + +Mr. LINCOLN'S REJOINDER. + +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. + +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. + +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. + +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. + +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. + +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. + +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. + +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. + +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: + +"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. + +"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: + +"'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...." + +"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? + +"'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.' + +"Then in the schedule is a provision that the Constitution may be amended +after 1864 by a two-thirds vote. + +"'But no alteration shall be made to affect the right of property in the +ownership of slaves.' + +"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. + +"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." + +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: + +"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." + +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. + + + + +THIRD JOINT DEBATE, AT JONESBORO, + +SEPTEMBER 15, 1858 + +Mr. LINCOLN'S REPLY. + +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. + +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. + +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. + +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. + +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. + +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. + +[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.] + +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. + +[It almost a natural law that, when dead--no matter how bad we were--we +are automatically beatified.] + +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?" + +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. + +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. + +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? + +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. + +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? + +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? + +[Mr. DOUGLAS: I do not.] + +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. + +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: + + + + +INTERROGATORIES: + +"1st. Will you, if elected, vote for and cordially support a bill +prohibiting slavery in the Territories of the United States? + +"2d. Will you vote for and support a bill abolishing slavery in the +District of Columbia? + +"3d. Will you oppose the admission of any Slave States which may be +formed out of Texas or the Territories? + +"4th. Will you vote for and advocate the repeal of the Fugitive Slave law +passed at the recent session of Congress? + +"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? + +"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?" + + + + +CAMPBELL'S REPLY. + +"To the first and second interrogatories, I answer unequivocally in the +affirmative. + +"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. + +"To the fourth and fifth interrogatories I unhesitatingly answer in the +affirmative. + +"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. + +"T. CAMPBELL." + + +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. + +[Judge DOUGLAS: Give me the date of the letter.] + +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. + +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: + +"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." + +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: + +"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. + +"To your fourth interrogatory I answer most decidedly in the affirmative, +and for reasons set forth in my reported remarks at Ottawa last Monday. + +"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. + +"Yours, etc., R. S. MOLONY." + + + + +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: + +"Cook County,--E. B. Williams, Charles McDonell, Arno Voss, +Thomas Hoyne, Isaac Cook." + +I reckon we ought to except Cook. + +"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." + +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: + +"Du Page,--Nathan Allen. +"De Kalb,--Z. B. Mayo." + +Here is another set of resolutions which I think are apposite to the +matter in hand. + +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: + +"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. + +"Resolved, That in the opinion of this Convention, the time has arrived +when all men should be free, whites as well as others." + +[Judge DOUGLAS: What is the date of those resolutions?] + +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: + +"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. + +"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." + +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. + +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: + +"Resolved, That liberty is a right inherent and inalienable in man, and +that herein all men are equal. + +"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. + +"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. + +"Resolved, That no more Slave States should be admitted into the Federal +Union. + +"Resolved, That the Government ought to return to its ancient policy, not +to extend, nationalize, or encourage, but to limit, localize, and +discourage slavery." + +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: + +"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?" + +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. + +The second interrogatory that I propounded to him was this: + +"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?" + +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. + +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. + +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? + +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. + +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. + +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. + +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. + +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. + +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: + +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? + +[Judge DOUGLAS: Will you repeat that? I want to answer that question.] + +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? + +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. + +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: + +"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." + +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. + +[Judge DOUGLAS: Did n't they carry you off?] + +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. +set my knees trembling again, if he can. + + + + + +End of the Project Gutenberg EBook of The Writings of Abraham Lincoln, +Volume 3, by Abraham Lincoln + +*** END OF THIS PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK WRITINGS OF LINCOLN *** + +***** This file should be named 2655.txt or 2655.zip ***** +This and all associated files of various formats will be found in: + http://www.gutenberg.net/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.net/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.net + +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.net), +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, is 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 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.net + +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. diff --git a/old/2655.zip b/old/2655.zip Binary files differnew file mode 100644 index 0000000..8d01ddb --- /dev/null +++ b/old/2655.zip diff --git a/old/3linc10.txt b/old/3linc10.txt new file mode 100644 index 0000000..b4520a2 --- /dev/null +++ b/old/3linc10.txt @@ -0,0 +1,4899 @@ +Project Gutenberg Etext of The Writings of Abraham Lincoln, Vol 3 + +Volume 3 of 7 + +Copyright laws are changing all over the world, be sure to check +the copyright laws for your country before posting these files!! + +Please take a look at the important information in this header. +We encourage you to keep this file on your own disk, keeping an +electronic path open for the next readers. Do not remove this. + +*It must legally be the first thing seen when opening the book.* +In fact, our legal advisors said we can't even change margins. + +**Welcome To The World of Free Plain Vanilla Electronic Texts** + +**Etexts Readable By Both Humans and By Computers, Since 1971** + +*These Etexts Prepared By Hundreds of Volunteers and Donations* + +Information on contacting Project Gutenberg to get Etexts, and +further information is included below. We need your donations. + + +Title: The Writings of Abraham Lincoln + +Author: Abraham Lincoln + +June, 2001 [Etext #2655] + + +Project Gutenberg Etext of The Writings of Abraham Lincoln, Vol 3 +*******This file should be named 3linc10.txt or 3linc10.zip****** + +Corrected EDITIONS of our etexts get a new NUMBER, 3linc11.txt +VERSIONS based on separate sources get new LETTER, 3linc10a.txt + + +Etext prepared for Gutenberg by David Widger, widger@cecomet.net + +Project Gutenberg Etexts are usually created from multiple editions, +all of which are in the Public Domain in the United States, unless a +copyright notice is included. Therefore, we usually do NOT keep any +of these books in compliance with any particular paper edition. + + +We are now trying to release all our books one month in advance +of the official release dates, leaving time for better editing. + +Please note: neither this list nor its contents are final till +midnight of the last day of the month of any such announcement. +The official release date of all Project Gutenberg Etexts is at +Midnight, Central Time, of the last day of the stated month. A +preliminary version may often be posted for suggestion, comment +and editing by those who wish to do so. To be sure you have an +up to date first edition [xxxxx10x.xxx] please check file sizes +in the first week of the next month. Since our ftp program has +a bug in it that scrambles the date [tried to fix and failed] a +look at the file size will have to do, but we will try to see a +new copy has at least one byte more or less. + + +Information about Project Gutenberg (one page) + +We produce about two million dollars for each hour we work. The +time it takes us, a rather conservative estimate, is fifty hours +to get any etext selected, entered, proofread, edited, copyright +searched and analyzed, the copyright letters written, etc. This +projected audience is one hundred million readers. If our value +per text is nominally estimated at one dollar then we produce $2 +million dollars per hour this year as we release thirty-six text +files per month, or 432 more Etexts in 1999 for a total of 2000+ +If these reach just 10% of the computerized population, then the +total should reach over 200 billion Etexts given away this year. + +The Goal of Project Gutenberg is to Give Away One Trillion Etext +Files by December 31, 2001. [10,000 x 100,000,000 = 1 Trillion] +This is ten thousand titles each to one hundred million readers, +which is only ~5% of the present number of computer users. + +At our revised rates of production, we will reach only one-third +of that goal by the end of 2001, or about 3,333 Etexts unless we +manage to get some real funding; currently our funding is mostly +from Michael Hart's salary at Carnegie-Mellon University, and an +assortment of sporadic gifts; this salary is only good for a few +more years, so we are looking for something to replace it, as we +don't want Project Gutenberg to be so dependent on one person. + +We need your donations more than ever! + + +All donations should be made to "Project Gutenberg/CMU": and are +tax deductible to the extent allowable by law. (CMU = Carnegie- +Mellon University). + +For these and other matters, please mail to: + +Project Gutenberg +P. O. Box 2782 +Champaign, IL 61825 + +When all other email fails. . .try our Executive Director: +Michael S. Hart <hart@pobox.com> +hart@pobox.com forwards to hart@prairienet.org and archive.org +if your mail bounces from archive.org, I will still see it, if +it bounces from prairienet.org, better resend later on. . . . + +We would prefer to send you this information by email. + +****** + +To access Project Gutenberg etexts, use any Web browser +to view http://promo.net/pg. This site lists Etexts by +author and by title, and includes information about how +to get involved with Project Gutenberg. You could also +download our past Newsletters, or subscribe here. This +is one of our major sites, please email hart@pobox.com, +for a more complete list of our various sites. + +To go directly to the etext collections, use FTP or any +Web browser to visit a Project Gutenberg mirror (mirror +sites are available on 7 continents; mirrors are listed +at http://promo.net/pg). + +Mac users, do NOT point and click, typing works better. + +Example FTP session: + +ftp metalab.unc.edu +login: anonymous +password: your@login +cd pub/docs/books/gutenberg +cd etext90 through etext99 or etext00 through etext01, etc. +dir [to see files] +get or mget [to get files. . .set bin for zip files] +GET GUTINDEX.?? [to get a year's listing of books, e.g., GUTINDEX.99] +GET GUTINDEX.ALL [to get a listing of ALL books] + +*** + +**Information prepared by the Project Gutenberg legal advisor** + +(Three Pages) + + +***START**THE SMALL PRINT!**FOR PUBLIC DOMAIN ETEXTS**START*** +Why is this "Small Print!" statement here? You know: lawyers. +They tell us you might sue us if there is something wrong with +your copy of this etext, even if you got it for free from +someone other than us, and even if what's wrong is not our +fault. So, among other things, this "Small Print!" statement +disclaims most of our liability to you. It also tells you how +you can distribute copies of this etext if you want to. + +*BEFORE!* YOU USE OR READ THIS ETEXT +By using or reading any part of this PROJECT GUTENBERG-tm +etext, you indicate that you understand, agree to and accept +this "Small Print!" statement. If you do not, you can receive +a refund of the money (if any) you paid for this etext by +sending a request within 30 days of receiving it to the person +you got it from. If you received this etext on a physical +medium (such as a disk), you must return it with your request. + +ABOUT PROJECT GUTENBERG-TM ETEXTS +This PROJECT GUTENBERG-tm etext, like most PROJECT GUTENBERG- +tm etexts, is a "public domain" work distributed by Professor +Michael S. Hart through the Project Gutenberg Association at +Carnegie-Mellon University (the "Project"). Among other +things, this means that no one owns a United States copyright +on or for this work, so the Project (and you!) can copy and +distribute it in the United States without permission and +without paying copyright royalties. Special rules, set forth +below, apply if you wish to copy and distribute this etext +under the Project's "PROJECT GUTENBERG" trademark. + +To create these etexts, the Project expends considerable +efforts to identify, transcribe and proofread public domain +works. Despite these efforts, the Project's etexts and any +medium they may be on may contain "Defects". Among other +things, Defects may take the form of incomplete, inaccurate or +corrupt data, transcription errors, a copyright or other +intellectual property infringement, a defective or damaged +disk or other etext medium, a computer virus, or computer +codes that damage or cannot be read by your equipment. + +LIMITED WARRANTY; DISCLAIMER OF DAMAGES +But for the "Right of Replacement or Refund" described below, +[1] the Project (and any other party you may receive this +etext from as a PROJECT GUTENBERG-tm etext) disclaims all +liability to you for damages, costs and expenses, including +legal fees, and [2] YOU HAVE NO REMEDIES FOR NEGLIGENCE OR +UNDER STRICT LIABILITY, OR FOR BREACH OF WARRANTY OR CONTRACT, +INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO INDIRECT, CONSEQUENTIAL, PUNITIVE +OR INCIDENTAL DAMAGES, EVEN IF YOU GIVE NOTICE OF THE +POSSIBILITY OF SUCH DAMAGES. + +If you discover a Defect in this etext within 90 days of +receiving it, you can receive a refund of the money (if any) +you paid for it by sending an explanatory note within that +time to the person you received it from. If you received it +on a physical medium, you must return it with your note, and +such person may choose to alternatively give you a replacement +copy. If you received it electronically, such person may +choose to alternatively give you a second opportunity to +receive it electronically. + +THIS ETEXT IS OTHERWISE PROVIDED TO YOU "AS-IS". NO OTHER +WARRANTIES OF ANY KIND, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, ARE MADE TO YOU AS +TO THE ETEXT OR ANY MEDIUM IT MAY BE ON, INCLUDING BUT NOT +LIMITED TO WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR A +PARTICULAR PURPOSE. + +Some states do not allow disclaimers of implied warranties or +the exclusion or limitation of consequential damages, so the +above disclaimers and exclusions may not apply to you, and you +may have other legal rights. + +INDEMNITY +You will indemnify and hold the Project, its directors, +officers, members and agents harmless from all liability, cost +and expense, including legal fees, that arise directly or +indirectly from any of the following that you do or cause: +[1] distribution of this etext, [2] alteration, modification, +or addition to the etext, or [3] any Defect. + +DISTRIBUTION UNDER "PROJECT GUTENBERG-tm" +You may distribute copies of this etext electronically, or by +disk, book or any other medium if you either delete this +"Small Print!" and all other references to Project Gutenberg, +or: + +[1] Only give exact copies of it. Among other things, this + requires that you do not remove, alter or modify the + etext or this "small print!" statement. You may however, + if you wish, distribute this etext in machine readable + binary, compressed, mark-up, or proprietary form, + including any form resulting from conversion by word pro- + cessing or hypertext software, but only so long as + *EITHER*: + + [*] The etext, when displayed, is clearly readable, and + does *not* contain characters other than those + intended by the author of the work, although tilde + (~), asterisk (*) and underline (_) characters may + be used to convey punctuation intended by the + author, and additional characters may be used to + indicate hypertext links; OR + + [*] The etext may be readily converted by the reader at + no expense into plain ASCII, EBCDIC or equivalent + form by the program that displays the etext (as is + the case, for instance, with most word processors); + OR + + [*] You provide, or agree to also provide on request at + no additional cost, fee or expense, a copy of the + etext in its original plain ASCII form (or in EBCDIC + or other equivalent proprietary form). + +[2] Honor the etext refund and replacement provisions of this + "Small Print!" statement. + +[3] Pay a trademark license fee to the Project of 20% of the + net profits you derive calculated using the method you + already use to calculate your applicable taxes. If you + don't derive profits, no royalty is due. Royalties are + payable to "Project Gutenberg Association/Carnegie-Mellon + University" within the 60 days following each + date you prepare (or were legally required to prepare) + your annual (or equivalent periodic) tax return. + +WHAT IF YOU *WANT* TO SEND MONEY EVEN IF YOU DON'T HAVE TO? +The Project gratefully accepts contributions in money, time, +scanning machines, OCR software, public domain etexts, royalty +free copyright licenses, and every other sort of contribution +you can think of. Money should be paid to "Project Gutenberg +Association / Carnegie-Mellon University". + +We are planning on making some changes in our donation structure +in 2000, so you might want to email me, hart@pobox.com beforehand. + + + + +*END THE SMALL PRINT! FOR PUBLIC DOMAIN ETEXTS*Ver.04.29.93*END* + + + + + +Etext prepared for Gutenberg by David Widger, widger@cecomet.net + + + + + +THE WRITINGS OF ABRAHAM LINCOLN--VOLUME THREE + +THE LINCOLN-DOUGLAS DEBATES I + + + +POLITICAL SPEECHES & DEBATES of LINCOLN WITH DOUGLAS + +In the Senatorial Campaign of 1858 in Illinois + + + + +SPEECH AT SPRINGFIELD, JUNE 17, 1858 + +[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.] + + +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. + +Have we no tendency to the latter condition? + +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. + +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. + +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. + +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: + +"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." + +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. + +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." + +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. + +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! + +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. + +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: + +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." + +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. + +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. + +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. + +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? + +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. + +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. + +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? + +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. + +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. + +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. + + + + +SPEECH AT CHICAGO, JULY 10, 1858. + +IN REPLY TO SENATOR DOUGLAS + +DELIVERED AT CHICAGO, SATURDAY EVENING, JULY 10, 1858. + +(Mr. DOUGLAS WAS NOT PRESENT.) + +[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,] + +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. + +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: + +"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." + +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! + +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. + +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: + +"...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." + +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. + +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." + +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? + +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. + +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."] + +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: + +"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." + +There is the origin of popular sovereignty. Who, then, shall +come in at this day and claim that he invented it? + +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. + +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? + +[A voice: Judge Douglas.] + +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. + +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? + +[A voice: Douglas.] + +Why, yes, Douglas did it! To be sure he did. + +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? + +[A voice: Who killed the bill?] + +[Another voice: Douglas.] + +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. + +[A voice: Why don't they come out on it?] + +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. + +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? + +[A voice: We have.] + +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. + +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. + +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." + +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. + +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. + +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. + +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. + +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. + +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. + +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. + +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? + +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, + +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. + +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. + +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. + +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. + +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. + +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"? + +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. + +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. + +[A voice: "Three cheers for Lincoln". --The cheers were given +with a hearty good-will.] + +I should say at least that that is a self-evident truth. + +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. + +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. + +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. + +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. + +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. + +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. + +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. + + + + +SPEECH AT SPRINGFIELD, JULY 17, 1858. + +DELIVERED SATURDAY EVENING + +(Mr. Douglas was not present.) + +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. + +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. + +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. + +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. + +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. + +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. + +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. + +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. + +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. + +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. + +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. + +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. + +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. + +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." + +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. + +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. + +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. + +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. + +I now pass from popular sovereignty and Lecompton. I may have +occasion to refer to one or both. + +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. + +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. + +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. + +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: + +"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." + +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. + +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. + +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. + +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. + +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. + +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. + +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? + +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. + +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. + +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. + +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. + +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. + +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: + +"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." + +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. + +Now, I have said no more than this,--in fact, never quite so much +as this; at least I am sustained by Mr. Jefferson. + +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. + +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. + +Free men of Sangamon, free men of Illinois, free men everywhere, +judge ye between him and me upon this issue. + +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. + +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? + +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. + +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. + +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. + +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. + +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. + +Who shall say, "I am the superior, and you are the inferior"? + +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. + +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. + +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. + +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. + +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. + + + + +CORRESPONDENCE BETWEEN LINCOLN AND DOUGLAS + +[The following is the correspondence between the two rival +candidates for the United States Senate] + +MR. LINCOLN TO MR. DOUGLAS. + +CHICAGO, ILL., July 24, 1558. + +HON. S. A. DOUGLAS: + +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. + +Your obedient servant, + +A. LINCOLN. + + + + +Mr. DOUGLAS TO Mr. LINCOLN. + +BEMENT, PIATT Co., ILL., July 30, 1858. + +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. + +The times and places designated are as follows: + +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, + +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. + +Very respectfully, your obedient servant, + +S. A. DOUGLAS. + + + + +Mr. LINCOLN TO Mr. DOUGLAS. + +SPRINGFIELD, July 31, 1858. + +HON. S. A. DOUGLAS: + +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. + +Your obedient servant, + +A. LINCOLN. + + + + +FIRST JOINT DEBATE, AT OTTAWA, + +AUGUST 21, 1858 + +Mr. LINCOLN'S REPLY + +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. + +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. + +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. + +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. + +[Voice:"Put on your specs."] + +Mr. LINCOLN: Yes, sir, I am obliged to do so; I am no longer a +young man. + +"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. + +"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. + +"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. + +"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. + +"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 surp1us 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. + +"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. + +"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." + +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. + +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. + +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. + +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. + +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. + +[A voice: "Then do you repudiate popular sovereignty?"] + +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. + +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. + +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: + +"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." + +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? + +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. + +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." + +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." + +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. + +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. + +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: + +"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." + +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: + +"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?" + +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: + +"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. + +"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: + +"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 ..." + +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? + +"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." + +Then in the schedule is a provision that the Constitution may be +amended after 1864 by a two-thirds vote: + +"But no alteration shall be made to affect the right of property +in the ownership of slaves." + +"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." + +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: + +"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." + +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? + +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! + +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. + +[A HIBERNIAN: "Give us something besides Dred Scott."] + +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. + +My friends, that ends the chapter. The Judge can take his +half-hour. + + + + +SECOND JOINT DEBATE, AT FREEPORT, + +AUGUST 27, 1858 + +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. + +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. + +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. + +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: + +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. + +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. + +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. + +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. + +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. + +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. + +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. + +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. + +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. + +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. + +The third interrogatory is answered by the answer to the second, +it being, as I conceive, the same as the second. + +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." + +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. + +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. + +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. + +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: + +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? + +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? + +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? + +Q. 4. Are you in favor of acquiring additional territory, in +disregard of how such acquisition may affect the nation on the +slavery question? + +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. + +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. + +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. + +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. + +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. + +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." + +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? + +[Cries of "Yes, "Yes," and "No," "No."] + +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. + +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. + +Go on, Judge Douglas. + + + + +Mr. LINCOLN'S REJOINDER. + +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. + +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. + +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. + +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. + +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. + +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. + +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. + +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. + +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: + +"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. + +"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: + +"'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...." + +"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? + +"'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.' + +"Then in the schedule is a provision that the Constitution may be +amended after 1864 by a two-thirds vote. + +"'But no alteration shall be made to affect the right of property +in the ownership of slaves.' + +"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. + +"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." + +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: + +"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." + +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. + + + + +THIRD JOINT DEBATE, AT JONESBORO, + +SEPTEMBER 15, 1858 + +Mr. LINCOLN'S REPLY. + +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. + +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. + +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. + +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. + +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. + +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. + +[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.] + +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. + +[It almost a natural law that, when dead--no matter how bad we +were--we are automatically beatified.] + +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?" + +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. + +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. + +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? + +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. + +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? + +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? + +[Mr. DOUGLAS: I do not.] + +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. + +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: + + + + +INTERROGATORIES: + +"1st. Will you, if elected, vote for and cordially support a +bill prohibiting slavery in the Territories of the United States? + +"2d. Will you vote for and support a bill abolishing slavery in +the District of Columbia? + +"3d. Will you oppose the admission of any Slave States which may +be formed out of Texas or the Territories? + +"4th. Will you vote for and advocate the repeal of the Fugitive +Slave law passed at the recent session of Congress? + +"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? + +"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?" + + + + +CAMPBELL'S REPLY. + +"To the first and second interrogatories, I answer unequivocally +in the affirmative. + +"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. + +"To the fourth and fifth interrogatories I unhesitatingly answer +in the affirmative. + +"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. + +"T. CAMPBELL." + + + + +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. + +[Judge DOUGLAS: Give me the date of the letter.] + +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. + +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: + +"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." + +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: + +"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. + +"To your fourth interrogatory I answer most decidedly in the +affirmative, and for reasons set forth in my reported remarks at +Ottawa last Monday. + +"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. + +"Yours, etc.,R. S. MOLONY." + + + + +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: + +"Cook County,--E. B. Williams, Charles McDonell, Arno Voss, +Thomas Hoyne, Isaac Cook." + +I reckon we ought to except Cook. + +"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." + +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: + +"Du Page,--Nathan Allen. +"De Kalb,--Z. B. Mayo." + +Here is another set of resolutions which I think are apposite to +the matter in hand. + +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: + +"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. + +"Resolved, That in the opinion of this Convention, the time has +arrived when all men should be free, whites as well as others." + + +[Judge DOUGLAS: What is the date of those resolutions?] + + +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: + +"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. + +"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." + +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. + +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: + +"Resolved, That liberty is a right inherent and inalienable in +man, and that herein all men are equal. +"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. +"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. +"Resolved, That no more Slave States should be admitted into the +Federal Union. +"Resolved, That the Government ought to return to its ancient +policy, not to extend, nationalize, or encourage, but to limit, +localize, and discourage slavery." + +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: + +"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?" + +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. + +The second interrogatory that I propounded to him was this: + +"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?" + +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. + +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. + +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 Congressiona1 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? + +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. + +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. + +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. + +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. + +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. + +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: + +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? + +[Judge DOUGLAS: Will you repeat that? I want to answer that +question.] + +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? + +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 plausib1e 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. + +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: + +"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." + +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. + +[Judge DOUGLAS: Did n't they carry you off?] + +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. + + + + + +End of Project Gutenberg Etext of The Writings of Abraham Lincoln, Vol 3 + diff --git a/old/3linc10.zip b/old/3linc10.zip Binary files differnew file mode 100644 index 0000000..9a0299f --- /dev/null +++ b/old/3linc10.zip diff --git a/old/3linc11.txt b/old/3linc11.txt new file mode 100644 index 0000000..1272324 --- /dev/null +++ b/old/3linc11.txt @@ -0,0 +1,4967 @@ +The Project Gutenberg Etext of The Writings of Abraham Lincoln, v3 +#3 in our series of the Writings of Abraham Lincoln + +Copyright laws are changing all over the world. Be sure to check the +copyright laws for your country before distributing this or any other +Project Gutenberg file. + +We encourage you to keep this file, exactly as it is, on your +own disk, thereby keeping an electronic path open for future +readers. Please do not remove this. + +This header should be the first thing seen when anyone starts to +view the etext. Do not change or edit it without written permission. +The words are carefully chosen to provide users with the +information they need to understand what they may and may not +do with the etext. + + +**Welcome To The World of Free Plain Vanilla Electronic Texts** + +**Etexts Readable By Both Humans and By Computers, Since 1971** + +*****These Etexts Are Prepared By Thousands of Volunteers!***** + +Information on contacting Project Gutenberg to get etexts, and +further information, is included below. We need your donations. + +The Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation is a 501(c)(3) +organization with EIN [Employee Identification Number] 64-6221541 + + + +Title: The Writings of Abraham Lincoln, v3 + +Author: Abraham Lincoln + +Release Date: May, 2001 [Etext #2655] +[Yes, we are more than one year ahead of schedule] +[Most recently updated: December 4, 2001] + +Edition: 11 + +Language: English + +Character set encoding: ASCII + +The Project Gutenberg Etext of The Writings of Abraham Lincoln, v3 +*******This file should be named 3linc11.txt or 3linc11.zip******* + +Corrected EDITIONS of our etexts get a new NUMBER, 3linc12.txt +VERSIONS based on separate sources get new LETTER, 3linc11a.txt + +This etext was produced by David Widger <widger@cecomet.net> + +Project Gutenberg Etexts are often created from several printed +editions, all of which are confirmed as Public Domain in the US +unless a copyright notice is included. Thus, we usually do not +keep etexts in compliance with any particular paper edition. + +We are now trying to release all our etexts one year in advance +of the official release dates, leaving time for better editing. +Please be encouraged to tell us about any error or corrections, +even years after the official publication date. + +Please note neither this listing nor its contents are final til +midnight of the last day of the month of any such announcement. +The official release date of all Project Gutenberg Etexts is at +Midnight, Central Time, of the last day of the stated month. A +preliminary version may often be posted for suggestion, comment +and editing by those who wish to do so. + +Most people start at our sites at: +http://gutenberg.net or +http://promo.net/pg + +These Web sites include award-winning information about Project +Gutenberg, including how to donate, how to help produce our new +etexts, and how to subscribe to our email newsletter (free!). + + +Those of you who want to download any Etext before announcement +can get to them as follows, and just download by date. This is +also a good way to get them instantly upon announcement, as the +indexes our cataloguers produce obviously take a while after an +announcement goes out in the Project Gutenberg Newsletter. + +http://www.ibiblio.org/gutenberg/etext03 or +ftp://ftp.ibiblio.org/pub/docs/books/gutenberg/etext03 + +Or /etext02, 01, 00, 99, 98, 97, 96, 95, 94, 93, 92, 92, 91 or 90 + +Just search by the first five letters of the filename you want, +as it appears in our Newsletters. + + +Information about Project Gutenberg (one page) + +We produce about two million dollars for each hour we work. The +time it takes us, a rather conservative estimate, is fifty hours +to get any etext selected, entered, proofread, edited, copyright +searched and analyzed, the copyright letters written, etc. Our +projected audience is one hundred million readers. If the value +per text is nominally estimated at one dollar then we produce $2 +million dollars per hour in 2001 as we release over 50 new Etext +files per month, or 500 more Etexts in 2000 for a total of 4000+ +If they reach just 1-2% of the world's population then the total +should reach over 300 billion Etexts given away by year's end. + +The Goal of Project Gutenberg is to Give Away One Trillion Etext +Files by December 31, 2001. [10,000 x 100,000,000 = 1 Trillion] +This is ten thousand titles each to one hundred million readers, +which is only about 4% of the present number of computer users. + +At our revised rates of production, we will reach only one-third +of that goal by the end of 2001, or about 4,000 Etexts. We need +funding, as well as continued efforts by volunteers, to maintain +or increase our production and reach our goals. + +The Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation has been created +to secure a future for Project Gutenberg into the next millennium. + +We need your donations more than ever! + +As of November, 2001, contributions are being solicited from people +and organizations in: Alabama, Arkansas, Connecticut, Delaware, +Florida, Georgia, Idaho, Illinois, Indiana, Iowa, Kansas, Kentucky, +Louisiana, Maine, Michigan, Missouri, Montana, Nebraska, Nevada, New +Jersey, New Mexico, New York, North Carolina, Oklahoma, Oregon, +Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, South Carolina, South Dakota, Tennessee, +Texas, Utah, Vermont, Virginia, Washington, West Virginia, Wisconsin, +and Wyoming. + +*In Progress + +We have filed in about 45 states now, but these are the only ones +that have responded. + +As the requirements for other states are met, additions to this list +will be made and fund raising will begin in the additional states. +Please feel free to ask to check the status of your state. + +In answer to various questions we have received on this: + +We are constantly working on finishing the paperwork to legally +request donations in all 50 states. If your state is not listed and +you would like to know if we have added it since the list you have, +just ask. + +While we cannot solicit donations from people in states where we are +not yet registered, we know of no prohibition against accepting +donations from donors in these states who approach us with an offer to +donate. + +International donations are accepted, but we don't know ANYTHING about +how to make them tax-deductible, or even if they CAN be made +deductible, and don't have the staff to handle it even if there are +ways. + +All donations should be made to: + +Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation +PMB 113 +1739 University Ave. +Oxford, MS 38655-4109 + +Contact us if you want to arrange for a wire transfer or payment +method other than by check or money order. + + +The Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation has been approved by +the US Internal Revenue Service as a 501(c)(3) organization with EIN +[Employee Identification Number] 64-622154. Donations are +tax-deductible to the maximum extent permitted by law. As fundraising +requirements for other states are met, additions to this list will be +made and fundraising will begin in the additional states. + +We need your donations more than ever! + +You can get up to date donation information at: + +http://www.gutenberg.net/donation.html + + +*** + +If you can't reach Project Gutenberg, +you can always email directly to: + +Michael S. Hart <hart@pobox.com> + +Prof. Hart will answer or forward your message. + +We would prefer to send you information by email. + + +**The Legal Small Print** + + +(Three Pages) + +***START**THE SMALL PRINT!**FOR PUBLIC DOMAIN ETEXTS**START*** +Why is this "Small Print!" statement here? You know: lawyers. +They tell us you might sue us if there is something wrong with +your copy of this etext, even if you got it for free from +someone other than us, and even if what's wrong is not our +fault. So, among other things, this "Small Print!" statement +disclaims most of our liability to you. It also tells you how +you may distribute copies of this etext if you want to. + +*BEFORE!* YOU USE OR READ THIS ETEXT +By using or reading any part of this PROJECT GUTENBERG-tm +etext, you indicate that you understand, agree to and accept +this "Small Print!" statement. If you do not, you can receive +a refund of the money (if any) you paid for this etext by +sending a request within 30 days of receiving it to the person +you got it from. If you received this etext on a physical +medium (such as a disk), you must return it with your request. + +ABOUT PROJECT GUTENBERG-TM ETEXTS +This PROJECT GUTENBERG-tm etext, like most PROJECT GUTENBERG-tm etexts, +is a "public domain" work distributed by Professor Michael S. Hart +through the Project Gutenberg Association (the "Project"). +Among other things, this means that no one owns a United States copyright +on or for this work, so the Project (and you!) can copy and +distribute it in the United States without permission and +without paying copyright royalties. Special rules, set forth +below, apply if you wish to copy and distribute this etext +under the "PROJECT GUTENBERG" trademark. + +Please do not use the "PROJECT GUTENBERG" trademark to market +any commercial products without permission. + +To create these etexts, the Project expends considerable +efforts to identify, transcribe and proofread public domain +works. Despite these efforts, the Project's etexts and any +medium they may be on may contain "Defects". Among other +things, Defects may take the form of incomplete, inaccurate or +corrupt data, transcription errors, a copyright or other +intellectual property infringement, a defective or damaged +disk or other etext medium, a computer virus, or computer +codes that damage or cannot be read by your equipment. + +LIMITED WARRANTY; DISCLAIMER OF DAMAGES +But for the "Right of Replacement or Refund" described below, +[1] Michael Hart and the Foundation (and any other party you may +receive this etext from as a PROJECT GUTENBERG-tm etext) disclaims +all liability to you for damages, costs and expenses, including +legal fees, and [2] YOU HAVE NO REMEDIES FOR NEGLIGENCE OR +UNDER STRICT LIABILITY, OR FOR BREACH OF WARRANTY OR CONTRACT, +INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO INDIRECT, CONSEQUENTIAL, PUNITIVE +OR INCIDENTAL DAMAGES, EVEN IF YOU GIVE NOTICE OF THE +POSSIBILITY OF SUCH DAMAGES. + +If you discover a Defect in this etext within 90 days of +receiving it, you can receive a refund of the money (if any) +you paid for it by sending an explanatory note within that +time to the person you received it from. If you received it +on a physical medium, you must return it with your note, and +such person may choose to alternatively give you a replacement +copy. If you received it electronically, such person may +choose to alternatively give you a second opportunity to +receive it electronically. + +THIS ETEXT IS OTHERWISE PROVIDED TO YOU "AS-IS". NO OTHER +WARRANTIES OF ANY KIND, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, ARE MADE TO YOU AS +TO THE ETEXT OR ANY MEDIUM IT MAY BE ON, INCLUDING BUT NOT +LIMITED TO WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR A +PARTICULAR PURPOSE. + +Some states do not allow disclaimers of implied warranties or +the exclusion or limitation of consequential damages, so the +above disclaimers and exclusions may not apply to you, and you +may have other legal rights. + +INDEMNITY +You will indemnify and hold Michael Hart, the Foundation, +and its trustees and agents, and any volunteers associated +with the production and distribution of Project Gutenberg-tm +texts harmless, from all liability, cost and expense, including +legal fees, that arise directly or indirectly from any of the +following that you do or cause: [1] distribution of this etext, +[2] alteration, modification, or addition to the etext, +or [3] any Defect. + +DISTRIBUTION UNDER "PROJECT GUTENBERG-tm" +You may distribute copies of this etext electronically, or by +disk, book or any other medium if you either delete this +"Small Print!" and all other references to Project Gutenberg, +or: + +[1] Only give exact copies of it. Among other things, this + requires that you do not remove, alter or modify the + etext or this "small print!" statement. You may however, + if you wish, distribute this etext in machine readable + binary, compressed, mark-up, or proprietary form, + including any form resulting from conversion by word + processing or hypertext software, but only so long as + *EITHER*: + + [*] The etext, when displayed, is clearly readable, and + does *not* contain characters other than those + intended by the author of the work, although tilde + (~), asterisk (*) and underline (_) characters may + be used to convey punctuation intended by the + author, and additional characters may be used to + indicate hypertext links; OR + + [*] The etext may be readily converted by the reader at + no expense into plain ASCII, EBCDIC or equivalent + form by the program that displays the etext (as is + the case, for instance, with most word processors); + OR + + [*] You provide, or agree to also provide on request at + no additional cost, fee or expense, a copy of the + etext in its original plain ASCII form (or in EBCDIC + or other equivalent proprietary form). + +[2] Honor the etext refund and replacement provisions of this + "Small Print!" statement. + +[3] Pay a trademark license fee to the Foundation of 20% of the + gross profits you derive calculated using the method you + already use to calculate your applicable taxes. If you + don't derive profits, no royalty is due. Royalties are + payable to "Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation" + the 60 days following each date you prepare (or were + legally required to prepare) your annual (or equivalent + periodic) tax return. Please contact us beforehand to + let us know your plans and to work out the details. + +WHAT IF YOU *WANT* TO SEND MONEY EVEN IF YOU DON'T HAVE TO? +Project Gutenberg is dedicated to increasing the number of +public domain and licensed works that can be freely distributed +in machine readable form. + +The Project gratefully accepts contributions of money, time, +public domain materials, or royalty free copyright licenses. +Money should be paid to the: +"Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation." + +If you are interested in contributing scanning equipment or +software or other items, please contact Michael Hart at: +hart@pobox.com + +[Portions of this header are copyright (C) 2001 by Michael S. Hart +and may be reprinted only when these Etexts are free of all fees.] +[Project Gutenberg is a TradeMark and may not be used in any sales +of Project Gutenberg Etexts or other materials be they hardware or +software or any other related product without express permission.] + +*END THE SMALL PRINT! FOR PUBLIC DOMAIN ETEXTS*Ver.10/04/01*END* + + + + + +This etext was produced by David Widger <widger@cecomet.net> + + + + + +THE WRITINGS OF ABRAHAM LINCOLN, Volume Three + +CONSTITUTIONAL EDITION + + + +THE LINCOLN-DOUGLAS DEBATES I + + + +POLITICAL SPEECHES & DEBATES of LINCOLN WITH DOUGLAS + +In the Senatorial Campaign of 1858 in Illinois + + + +SPEECH AT SPRINGFIELD, JUNE 17, 1858 + +[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.] + + +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. + +Have we no tendency to the latter condition? + +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. + +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. + +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. + +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: + +"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." + +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. + +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." + +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. + +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! + +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. + +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: + +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." + +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. + +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. + +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. + +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? + +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. + +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. + +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? + +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. + +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. + +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. + + + + +SPEECH AT CHICAGO, JULY 10, 1858. + +IN REPLY TO SENATOR DOUGLAS + +DELIVERED AT CHICAGO, SATURDAY EVENING, JULY 10, 1858. + +(Mr. DOUGLAS WAS NOT PRESENT.) + +[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,] + +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. + +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: + +"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." + +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! + +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. + +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: + +"...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." + +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. + +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." + +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? + +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. + +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."] + +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: + +"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." + +There is the origin of popular sovereignty. Who, then, shall +come in at this day and claim that he invented it? + +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. + +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? + +[A voice: Judge Douglas.] + +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. + +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? + +[A voice: Douglas.] + +Why, yes, Douglas did it! To be sure he did. + +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? + +[A voice: Who killed the bill?] + +[Another voice: Douglas.] + +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. + +[A voice: Why don't they come out on it?] + +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. + +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? + +[A voice: We have.] + +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. + +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. + +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." + +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. + +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. + +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. + +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. + +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. + +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. + +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. + +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? + +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, + +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. + +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. + +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. + +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. + +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. + +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"? + +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. + +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. + +[A voice: "Three cheers for Lincoln".--The cheers were given +with a hearty good-will.] + +I should say at least that that is a self-evident truth. + +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. + +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. + +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. + +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. + +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. + +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. + +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. + + + + +SPEECH AT SPRINGFIELD, JULY 17, 1858. + +DELIVERED SATURDAY EVENING + +(Mr. Douglas was not present.) + +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. + +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. + +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. + +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. + +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. + +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. + +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. + +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. + +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. + +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. + +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. + +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. + +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. + +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." + +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. + +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. + +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. + +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. + +I now pass from popular sovereignty and Lecompton. I may have +occasion to refer to one or both. + +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. + +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. + +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. + +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: + +"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." + +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. + +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. + +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. + +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. + +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. + +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. + +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? + +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. + +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. + +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. + +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. + +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. + +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: + +"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." + +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. + +Now, I have said no more than this,--in fact, never quite so much +as this; at least I am sustained by Mr. Jefferson. + +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. + +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. + +Free men of Sangamon, free men of Illinois, free men everywhere, +judge ye between him and me upon this issue. + +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. + +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? + +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. + +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. + +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. + +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. + +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. + +Who shall say, "I am the superior, and you are the inferior"? + +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. + +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. + +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. + +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. + +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. + + + + +CORRESPONDENCE BETWEEN LINCOLN AND DOUGLAS + +[The following is the correspondence between the two rival +candidates for the United States Senate] + +MR. LINCOLN TO MR. DOUGLAS. + +CHICAGO, ILL., July 24, 1558. + +HON. S. A. DOUGLAS: + +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. + +Your obedient servant, + +A. LINCOLN. + + + + +Mr. DOUGLAS TO Mr. LINCOLN. + +BEMENT, PIATT Co., ILL., July 30, 1858. + +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. + +The times and places designated are as follows: + +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, + +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. + +Very respectfully, your obedient servant, + +S. A. DOUGLAS. + + + + +Mr. LINCOLN TO Mr. DOUGLAS. + +SPRINGFIELD, July 31, 1858. + +HON. S. A. DOUGLAS: + +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. + +Your obedient servant, + +A. LINCOLN. + + + + +FIRST JOINT DEBATE, AT OTTAWA, + +AUGUST 21, 1858 + +Mr. LINCOLN'S REPLY + +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. + +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. + +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. + +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. + +[Voice: "Put on your specs."] + +Mr. LINCOLN: Yes, sir, I am obliged to do so; I am no longer a +young man. + +"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. + +"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. + +"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. + +"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. + +"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. + +"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. + +"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." + +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. + +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. + +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. + +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. + +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. + +[A voice: "Then do you repudiate popular sovereignty?"] + +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. + +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. + +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: + +"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." + +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? + +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. + +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." + +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." + +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. + +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. + +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: + +"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." + +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: + +"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?" + +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: + +"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. + +"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: + +"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 ..." + +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? + +"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." + +Then in the schedule is a provision that the Constitution may be +amended after 1864 by a two-thirds vote: + +"But no alteration shall be made to affect the right of property +in the ownership of slaves." + +"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." + +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: + +"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." + +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? + +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! + +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. + +[A HIBERNIAN: "Give us something besides Dred Scott."] + +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. + +My friends, that ends the chapter. The Judge can take his +half-hour. + + + + +SECOND JOINT DEBATE, AT FREEPORT, + +AUGUST 27, 1858 + +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. + +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. + +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. + +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: + +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. + +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. + +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. + +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. + +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. + +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. + +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. + +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. + +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. + +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. + +The third interrogatory is answered by the answer to the second, +it being, as I conceive, the same as the second. + +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." + +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. + +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. + +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. + +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: + +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? + +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? + +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? + +Q. 4. Are you in favor of acquiring additional territory, in +disregard of how such acquisition may affect the nation on the +slavery question? + +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. + +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. + +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. + +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. + +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. + +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." + +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? + +[Cries of "Yes," "Yes," and "No," "No."] + +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. + +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. + +Go on, Judge Douglas. + + + + +Mr. LINCOLN'S REJOINDER. + +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. + +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. + +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. + +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. + +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. + +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. + +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. + +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. + +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: + +"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. + +"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: + +"'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...." + +"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? + +"'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.' + +"Then in the schedule is a provision that the Constitution may be +amended after 1864 by a two-thirds vote. + +"'But no alteration shall be made to affect the right of property +in the ownership of slaves.' + +"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. + +"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." + +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: + +"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." + +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. + + + + +THIRD JOINT DEBATE, AT JONESBORO, + +SEPTEMBER 15, 1858 + +Mr. LINCOLN'S REPLY. + +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. + +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. + +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. + +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. + +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. + +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. + +[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.] + +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. + +[It almost a natural law that, when dead--no matter how bad we +were--we are automatically beatified.] + +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?" + +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. + +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. + +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? + +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. + +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? + +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? + +[Mr. DOUGLAS: I do not.] + +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. + +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: + + + + +INTERROGATORIES: + +"1st. Will you, if elected, vote for and cordially support a +bill prohibiting slavery in the Territories of the United States? + +"2d. Will you vote for and support a bill abolishing slavery in +the District of Columbia? + +"3d. Will you oppose the admission of any Slave States which may +be formed out of Texas or the Territories? + +"4th. Will you vote for and advocate the repeal of the Fugitive +Slave law passed at the recent session of Congress? + +"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? + +"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?" + + + + +CAMPBELL'S REPLY. + +"To the first and second interrogatories, I answer unequivocally +in the affirmative. + +"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. + +"To the fourth and fifth interrogatories I unhesitatingly answer +in the affirmative. + +"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. + +"T. CAMPBELL." + + + + +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. + +[Judge DOUGLAS: Give me the date of the letter.] + +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. + +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: + +"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." + +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: + +"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. + +"To your fourth interrogatory I answer most decidedly in the +affirmative, and for reasons set forth in my reported remarks at +Ottawa last Monday. + +"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. + +"Yours, etc., R. S. MOLONY." + + + + +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: + +"Cook County,--E. B. Williams, Charles McDonell, Arno Voss, +Thomas Hoyne, Isaac Cook." + +I reckon we ought to except Cook. + +"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." + +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: + +"Du Page,--Nathan Allen. +"De Kalb,--Z. B. Mayo." + +Here is another set of resolutions which I think are apposite to +the matter in hand. + +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: + +"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. + +"Resolved, That in the opinion of this Convention, the time has +arrived when all men should be free, whites as well as others." + + +[Judge DOUGLAS: What is the date of those resolutions?] + + +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: + +"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. + +"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." + +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. + +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: + +"Resolved, That liberty is a right inherent and inalienable in +man, and that herein all men are equal. +"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. +"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. +"Resolved, That no more Slave States should be admitted into the +Federal Union. +"Resolved, That the Government ought to return to its ancient +policy, not to extend, nationalize, or encourage, but to limit, +localize, and discourage slavery." + +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: + +"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?" + +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. + +The second interrogatory that I propounded to him was this: + +"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?" + +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. + +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. + +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? + +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. + +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. + +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. + +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. + +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. + +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: + +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? + +[Judge DOUGLAS: Will you repeat that? I want to answer that +question.] + +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? + +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. + +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: + +"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." + +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. + +[Judge DOUGLAS: Did n't they carry you off?] + +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. + + + + +End of this Project Gutenberg Etext of The Writings of Lincoln, v3 +By Abraham Lincoln + diff --git a/old/3linc11.zip b/old/3linc11.zip Binary files differnew file mode 100644 index 0000000..1c0e6eb --- /dev/null +++ b/old/3linc11.zip |