the writings-5-第13章

按键盘上方向键 ← 或 → 可快速上下翻页，按键盘上的 Enter 键可回到本书目录页，按键盘上方向键 ↑ 可回到本页顶部！
————未阅读完？加入书签已便下次继续阅读！



Douglas；　who　has　not；　at　some　time　in　his　life；　declared　his　opinion

whether　the　thing　is　right　or　wrong；　but　Senator　Douglas　never

declares　it　is　wrong。　　He　leaves　himself　at　perfect　liberty　to　do　all

in　your　favor　which　he　would　be　hindered　from　doing　if　he　were　to

declare　the　thing　to　be　wrong。　　On　the　contrary；　he　takes　all　the

chances　that　he　has　for　inveigling　the　sentiment　of　the　North；

opposed　to　slavery；　into　your　support；　by　never　saying　it　is　right。

This　you　ought　to　set　down　to　his　credit：　You　ought　to　give　him　full

credit　for　this　much；　little　though　it　be；　in　comparison　to　the　whole

which　he　does　for　you。



Some　other；　things　I　will　ask　your　attention　to。　He　said　upon　the

floor　of　the　United　States　Senate；　and　he　has　repeated　it；　as　I

understand；　a　great　many　times；　that　he　does　not　care　whether　slavery

is　〃voted　up　or　voted　down。〃　　This　again　shows　you；　or　ought　to　show

you；　if　you　would　reason　upon　it；　that　he　does　not　believe　it　to　be

wrong；　for　a　man　may　say　when　he　sees　nothing　wrong　in　a　thing；　that

he；　dues　not　care　whether　it　be　voted　up　or　voted　down　but　no　man　can

logically　say　that　he　cares　not　whether　a　thing　goes　up　or　goes　down

which　to　him　appears　to　be　wrong。　You　therefore　have　a　demonstration

in　this　that　to　Judge　Douglas's　mind　your　favorite　institution；　which

you　would　have　spread　out　and　made　perpetual；　is　no　wrong。



Another　thing　he　tells　you；　in　a　speech　made　at　Memphis　in　Tennessee；

shortly　after　the　canvass　in　Illinois；　last　year。　　He　there

distinctly　told　the　people　that　there　was　a　〃line　drawn　by　the

Almighty　across　this　continent；　on　the　one　side　of　which　the　soil

must　always　be　cultivated　by　slaves〃；　that　he　did　not　pretend　to　know

exactly　where　that　line　was；　but　that　there　was　such　a　line。　　I　want

to　ask　your　attention　to　that　proposition　again；　that　there　is　one

portion　of　this　continent　where　the　Almighty　has　signed　the　soil

shall　always　be　cultivated　by　slaves；　that　its　being　cultivated　by

slaves　at　that　place　is　right；　that　it　has　the　direct　sympathy　and

authority　of　the　Almighty。　　Whenever　you　can　get　these　Northern

audiences　to　adopt　the　opinion　that　slavery　is　right　on　the　other

side　of　the　Ohio；　whenever　you　can　get　them；　in　pursuance　of

Douglas's　views；　to　adopt　that　sentiment；　they　will　very　readily　make

the　other　argument；　which　is　perfectly　logical；　that　that　which　is

right　on　that　side　of　the　Ohio　cannot　be　wrong　on　this；　and　that　if

you　have　that　property　on　that　side　of　the　Ohio；　under　the　seal　and

stamp　of　the　Almighty；　when　by　any　means　it　escapes　over　here　it　is

wrong　to　have　constitutions　and　laws　〃to　devil〃　you　about　it。　So

Douglas　is　moulding　the　public　opinion　of　the　North；　first　to　say

that　the　thing　is　right　in　your　State　over　the　Ohio　River；　and　hence

to　say　that　that　which　is　right　there　is　not　wrong　here；　and　that　all

laws　and　constitutions　here　recognizing　it　as　being　wrong　are

themselves　wrong；　and　ought　to　be　repealed　and　abrogated。　　He　will

tell　you；　men　of　Ohio；　that　if　you　choose　here　to　have　laws　against

slavery；　it　is　in　conformity　to　the　idea　that　your　climate　is　not

suited　to　it；　that　your　climate　is　not　suited　to　slave　labor；　and

therefore　you　have　constitutions　and　laws　against　it。



Let　us　attend　to　that　argument　for　a　little　while　and　see　if　it　be

sound。　　You　do　not　raise　sugar…cane　（except　the　new…fashioned

sugar…cane；　and　you　won't　raise　that　long）；　but　they　do　raise　it　in

Louisiana。　　You　don't　raise　it　in　Ohio；　because　you　can't　raise　it

profitably；　because　the　climate　don't　suit　it。　　They　do　raise　it　in

Louisiana；　because　there　it　is　profitable。　　Now；　Douglas　will　tell

you　that　is　precisely　the　slavery　question：　that　they　do　have　slaves

there　because　they　are　profitable；　and　you　don't　have　them　here

because　they　are　not　profitable。　　If　that　is　so；　then　it　leads　to

dealing　with　the　one　precisely　as　with　the　other。　　Is　there；　then；

anything　in　the　constitution　or　laws　of　Ohio　against　raising

sugar…cane？　　Have　you　found　it　necessary　to　put　any　such　provision　in

your　law？　　Surely　not！　　No　man　desires　to　raise　sugar…cane　in　Ohio；

but　if　any　man　did　desire　to　do　so；　you　would　say　it　was　a　tyrannical

law　that　forbids　his　doing　so；　and　whenever　you　shall　agree　with

Douglas；　whenever　your　minds　are　brought　to　adopt　his　argument；　as

surely　you　will　have　reached　the　conclusion　that　although　it　is　not

profitable　in　Ohio；　if　any　man　wants　it；　is　wrong　to　him　not　to　let

him　have　it。



In　this　matter　Judge　Douglas　is　preparing　the　public　mind　for　you　of

Kentucky　to　make　perpetual　that　good　thing　in　your　estimation；　about

which　you　and　I　differ。



In　this　connection；　let　me　ask　your　attention　to　another　thing。　　I

believe　it　is　safe　to　assert　that　five　years　ago　no　living　man　had

expressed　the　opinion　that　the　negro　had　no　share　in　the　Declaration

of　Independence。　　Let　me　state　that　again：　five　years　ago　no　living

man　had　expressed　the　opinion　that　the　negro　had　no　share　in　the

Declaration　of　Independence。　　If　there　is　in　this　large　audience　any

man　who　ever　knew　of　that　opinion　being　put　upon　paper　as　much　as

five　years　ago；　I　will　be　obliged　to　him　now　or　at　a　subsequent　time

to　show　it。



If　that　be　true　I　wish　you　then　to　note　the　next　fact：　that　within

the　space　of　five　years　Senator　Douglas；　in　the　argument　of　this

question；　has　got　his　entire　party；　so　far　as　I　know；　without

exception；　in　saying　that　the　negro　has　no　share　in　the　Declaration

of　Independence。　　If　there　be　now　in　all　these　United　States　one

Douglas　man　that　does　not　say　this；　I　have　been　unable　upon　any

occasion　to　scare　him　up。　　Now；　if　none　of　you　said　this　five　years

ago；　and　all　of　you　say　it　now；　that　is　a　matter　that　you　Kentuckians

ought　to　note。　　That　is　a　vast　change　in　the　Northern　public

sentiment　upon　that　question。



Of　what　tendency　is　that　change？　　The　tendency　of　that　change　is　to

bring　the　public　mind　to　the　conclusion　that　when　men　are　spoken　of；

the　negro　is　not　meant；　that　when　negroes　are　spoken　of；　brutes　alone

are　contemplated。　　That　change　in　public　sentiment　has　already

degraded　the　black　man　in　the　estimation　of　Douglas　and　his　followers

from　the　condition　of　a　man　of　some　sort；　and　assigned　him　to　the

condition　of　a　brute。　　Now；　you　Kentuckians　ought　to　give　Douglas

credit　for　this。　　That　is　the　largest　possible　stride　that　can　be

made　in　regard　to　the　perpetuation　of　your　thing　of　slavery。



A　voice：　　Speak　to　Ohio　men；　and　not　to　Kentuckians！



Mr。　LINCOLN：　I　beg　permission　to　speak　as　I　please。



In　Kentucky　perhaps；　in　many　of　the　slave　States　certainly；　you　are

trying　to　establish　the　rightfulness　of　slavery　by　reference　to　the

Bible。　　You　are　trying　to　show　that　slavery　existed　in　the　Bible

times　by　divine　ordinance。　　Now；　Douglas　is　wiser　than　you；　for　your

own　benefit；　upon　that　subject。　　Douglas　knows　that　whenever　you

establish　that　slavery　wasright　by　the　Bible；　it　will　occur　that

that　slavery　was　the　slavery　of　the　white　man；　of　men　without

reference　to　color；　and　he　knows　very　well　that　you　may　entertain

that　idea　in　Kentucky　as　much　as　you　please；　but　you　will　never　win

any　Northern　support　upon　it。　　He　makes　a　wiser　argument　for　you：　he

makes　the　argument　that　the　slavery　of　the　black　man；　the　slavery　of

the　man　who　has　a　skin　of　a　different　color　from　your　own；　is　right。

He　thereby　brings　to　your　support　Northern　voters　who　could　not　for　a

moment　be　brought　by　your　own　argument　of　the　Bible　right　of　slavery。

Will　you　give　him　credit　for　that？　　Will　you　not　say　that　in　this

matter　he　is　more　wisely　for　you　than　you　are　for　yourselves？



Now；　having　established　with　his　entire　party　this　doctrine；　having

been　entirely　successful　in　that　branch　of　his　efforts　in　your

behalf；　he　is　ready　for　another。



At　this　same　meeting　at　Memphis　he　declared　that　in　all　contests

between　the　negro　and　the　white　man　he　was　for　the　white　man；　but

that　in　all　questions　between　the　negro　and　the　crocodile　he　was　for

the　negro。　　He　did　not　make　that　declaration　accidentally　at　Memphis。

He　made　it　a　great　many　times　in　the　canvass　in　Illinois　last　year

（though　I　don't　know　that　it　was　reported　in　any　of　his　speeches

there；　but　he　frequently　made　it）。　　I　believe　he　repeated　it　at

Columbus；　and　I　should　not　wonder　if　be　repeated　it　here。　　It　is；

then；　a　deliberate　way　of　expressing　himself　upon　that　subject。　　It

is　a　matter　of　mature　deliberation　with　him　thus　to　express　himself

upon　that　point　of　his　case。　　It　therefore　requires　deliberate

attention。



The　first　inference　seems　to　be　that　if　you　do　not　enslave　the　negro；

you　are　wronging　the　white　man　in　some　way　or　other；　and　that　whoever

is　opposed　to　the　negro　being　enslaved；　is；　in　some　way　or　other；

against　the　white　man。　　Is　not　that　a　falsehood？　　If　there　was　a

necessary　conflict　between　the　white　man　and　the　negro；　I　should　be

for　the　white　man　as　much　as　Judge　Douglas；　but　I　say　there　is　no

such　necessary　conflict。　　I　say　that　there　is　room　enough　for　us　all

to　be　free；　and　that　it　not　only　does　not　wrong　the　white　man　that

the　negro　should　be　free；　but　it　positively　wrongs　the　mass　of　the

white　men　that　the　negro　should　be　enslaved；　that　the　mass　of　white

men　are　really　injured　by　the　effects　of　slave　labor　in　the　vicinity

of　the　fields　of　their　own　labor。



But　I　do　not　desire　to　dwell　upon　this　branch　of　the　question　more

than　to　say　that　this　assumption　of　his　is　false；　and　I　do　hope　that

that　fallacy　will　not　long　prevail　in　the　minds　of　intelligent　white

men。　　At　all　events；　you　ought　to　thank　Judge　Douglas　for　it；　it　is

for　your　benefit　it　is　made。



The　other　branch　of　it　is；　that　in　the　struggle　between　the　negro　and

the　crocodile；　he　is　for　the　negro。　　Well；　I　don't　know　that　there　is

any　struggle　between　the　negro　and　the　crocodile；　either。　　I　suppose

that　if　a　crocodile　（or；　as　we　old　Ohio　River　boatmen　used　to　call

them；　alligators）　should　come　across　a　white　man；　he　would　kill　him

if　he　could；　and　so　he　would　a　negro。　　But　what；　at　last；　is　this

proposition？　　I　believe　it　is　a　sort　of　proposition　in　proportion；

which　may　be　stated　thus：　〃As　the　negro　is　to　the　white　man；　so　is

the　crocodile　to　the　negro；　and　as　the　negro　may　rightfully　treat　the

crocodile　as　a　beast　or　reptile；　so　the　white　man　may　rightfully

treat　the　negro　as　a　beast　or　a　reptile。〃　　That　is　really　the　〃knip〃

of　all　that　argument　of　his。



Now；　my　brother　Kentuckians；　who　believe　in　this；　you　ought　to　thank

Judge　Douglas　for　having　put　that　in　a　much　more　taking　way　than　any

of　yourselves　have　done。



Again；　Douglas's　great　principle；　〃popular　sovereignty；〃　as　he　calls

it；　gives　you；　by　natural　consequence；　the　revival　of　the　slave　trade

whenever　you　want　it。　　If　you　question　this；　listen　awhile；　consider

awhile　what　I　shall　advance　in　support　of　that　proposition。



He　says　that　it　is　the　sacred　right　of　the　man　w