the writings-5-第22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！


Brown；　Helper's　Book；　and　the　like；　break　up　the　Republican

organization？　Human　action　can　be　modified　to　some　extent；　but　human

nature　cannot　be　changed。　　There　is　a　judgment　and　a　feeling　against

slavery　in　this　nation；　which　cast　at　least　a　million　and　a　half　of

votes。　　You　cannot　destroy　that　judgment　and　feelingthat　sentiment…

…by　breaking　up　the　political　organization　which　rallies　around　it。

You　can　scarcely　scatter　and　disperse　an　army　which　has　been　formed

into　order　in　the　face　of　your　heaviest　fire；　but　if　you　could；　how

much　would　you　gain　by　forcing　the　sentiment　which　created　it　out　of

the　peaceful　channel　of　the　ballot…box；　into　some　other　channel？

What　would　that　other　channel　probably　be？　　Would　the　number　of　John

Browns　be　lessened　or　enlarged　by　the　operation？



But　you　will　break　up　the　Union　rather　than　submit　to　a　denial　of

your　constitutional　rights。



That　has　a　somewhat　reckless　sound；　but　it　would　be　palliated；　if　not

fully　justified；　were　we　proposing；　by　the　mere　force　of　numbers；　to

deprive　you　of　some　right　plainly　written　down　in　the　Constitution。

But　we　are　proposing　no　such　thing。



When　you　make　these　declarations；　you　have　a　specific　and　well…

understood　allusion　to　an　assumed　constitutional　right　of　yours　to

take　slaves　into　the　Federal　Territories；　and　to　hold　them　there　as

property。　　But　no　such　right　is　specifically　written　in　the

Constitution。　　That　instrument　is　literally　silent　about　any　such

right。　　We；　on　the　contrary；　deny　that　such　a　right　has　any　existence

in　the　Constitution；　even　by　implication。



Your　purpose；　then；　plainly　stated；　is　that　you　will　destroy　the

Government　unless　you　be　allowed　to　construe　and　enforce　the

Constitution　as　you　please　on　all　points　in　dispute　between　you　and

us。　　You　will　rule　or　ruin；　in　all　events。



This；　plainly　stated；　is　your　language。　　Perhaps　you　will　say　the

Supreme　Court　has　decided　the　disputed　constitutional　question　in

your　favor。　　Not　quite　so。　　But；　waiving　the　lawyer's　distinction

between　dictum　and　decision；　the　court　have　decided　the　question　for

you　in　a　sort　of　way。　　The　court　have　substantially　said　it　is　your

constitutional　right　to　take　slaves　into　the　Federal　Territories；　and

to　hold　them　there　as　property。　　When　I　say；　the　decision　was　made　in

a　sort　of　way；　I　mean　it　was　made　in　a　divided　court；　by　a　bare

majority　of　the　judges；　and　they　not　quite　agreeing　with　one　another

in　the　reasons　for　making　it；　that　it　is　so　made　as　that　its　avowed

supporters　disagree　with　one　another　about　its　meaning；　and　that　it

was　mainly　based　upon　a　mistaken　statement　of　factthe　statement　in

the　opinion　that　〃the　right　of　property　in　a　slave　is　distinctly　and

expressly　affirmed　in　the　Constitution。〃



An　inspection　of　the　Constitution　will　show　that　the　right　of

property　in　a　slave　is　not　〃distinctly　and　expressly　affirmed〃　in　it。

Bear　in　mind；　the　judges　do　not　pledge　their　judicial　opinion　that

such　right　is　impliedly　affirmed　in　the　Constitution；　but　they　pledge

their　veracity　that　it　is　〃distinctly　and　expressly〃　affirmed　there…

…〃distinctly；〃　that　is；　not　mingled　with　anything　else；　〃expressly；〃

that　is；　in　words　meaning　just　that；　without　the　aid　of　any

inference；　and　susceptible　of　no　other　meaning。



If　they　had　only　pledged　their　judicial　opinion　that　such　right　is

affirmed　in　the　instrument　by　implication；　it　would　be　open　to　others

to　show　that　neither　the　word　〃slave〃　nor　〃slavery〃　is　to　be　found　in

the　Constitution；　nor　the　word　〃property〃　even；　in　any　connection

with　language　alluding　to　the　things　slave　or　slavery；　and　that

wherever　in　that　instrument　the　slave　is　alluded　to；　he　is　called　a

〃person〃；　and　wherever　his　master's　legal　right　in　relation　to　him　is

alluded　to；　it　is　spoken　of　as　〃service　or　labor　which　may　be　due；〃

as　a　debt　payable　in　service　or　labor。　　Also；　it　would　be　open　to

show；　by　contemporaneous　history；　that　this　mode　of　alluding　to

slaves　and　slavery；　instead　of　speaking　of　them；　was　employed　on

purpose　to　exclude　from　the　Constitution　the　idea　that　there　could　be

property　in　man。



To　show　all　this；　is　easy　and　certain。



When　this　obvious　mistake　of　the　judges　shall　be　brought　to　their

notice；　is　it　not　reasonable　to　expect　that　they　will　withdraw　the

mistaken　statement；　and　reconsider　the　conclusion　based　upon　it？



And　then　it　is　to　be　remembered　that　〃our　fathers；　who　framed　the

Government　under　which　we　live〃；the　men　who　made　the　Constitution

decided　this　same　constitutional　question　in　our　favor；　long　ago；

decided　it　without　division　among　themselves；　when　making　the

decision；　without　division　among　themselves　about　the　meaning　of　it

after　it　was　made；　and；　so　far　as　any　evidence　is　left；　without

basing　it　upon　any　mistaken　statement　of　facts。



Under　all　these　circumstances；　do　you　really　feel　yourselves

justified　to　break　up　this　Government　unless　such　a　court　decision　as

yours　is　shall　be　at　once　submitted　to　as　a　conclusive　and　final　rule

of　political　action？　　But　you　will　not　abide　the　election　of　a

Republican　President！　　In　that　supposed　event；　you　say；　you　will

destroy　the　Union；；　and　then；　you　say；　the　great　crime　of　having

destroyed　it　will　be　upon　us！　　That　is　cool。　　A　highwayman　holds　a

pistol　to　my　ear；　and　mutters　through　his　teeth；　〃stand　and　deliver；

or　I　shall　kill　you；　and　then　you'll　be　a　murderer！〃



To　be　sure；　what　the　robber　demanded　of　me…my　money　was　my　own；　and　I

had　a　clear　right　to　keep　it；　but　it　was　no　more　my　own　than　my　vote

is　my　own；　and　the　threat　of　death　to　me；　to　extort　my　money；　and　the

threat　of　destruction　to　the　Union；　to　extort　my　vote；　can　scarcely

be　distinguished　in　principle。



A　few　words　now　to　Republicans：　It　is　exceedingly　desirable　that　all

parts　of　this　great　confederacy　shall　be　at　peace　and　in　harmony　one

with　another。　　Let　us　Republicans　do　our　part　to　have　it　so。　　Even

though　much　provoked；　let　us　do　nothing　through　passion　and　ill

temper。　　Even　though　the　Southern　people　will　not　so　much　as　listen

to　us；　let　us　calmly　consider　their　demands；　and　yield　to　them　if；　in

our　deliberate　view　of　our　duty；　we　possibly　can。　　Judging　by　all

they　say　and　do；　and　by　the　subject　and　nature　of　their　controversy

with　us；　let　us　determine；　if　we　can；　what　will　satisfy　them。



Will　they　be　satisfied　if　the　Territories　be　unconditionally

surrendered　to　them？　　We　know　they　will　not。　　In　all　their　present

complaints　against　us；　the　Territories　are　scarcely　mentioned。

Invasions　and　insurrections　are　the　rage　now。　　Will　it　satisfy　them

if；　in　the　future；　we　have　nothing　to　do　with　invasions　and；

insurrections？　　We　know　it　will　not。　　We　so　know　because　we　know　we

never　had　anything　to　do　with　invasions　and　insurrections；　and　yet

this　total　abstaining　does　not　exempt　us　from　the　charge　and　the

denunciation。



The　question　recurs；　what　will　satisfy　them？　　Simply　this：　We　must

not　only　let　them　alone；　but　we　must；　somehow；　convince　them　that　we

do　let　them　alone。　　This；　we　know　by　experience；　is　no　easy　task。

We　have　been　so　trying　to　convince　them　from　the　very　beginning　of

our　organization；　but　with　no　success。　　In　all　our　platforms　and

speeches　we　have　constantly　protested　our　purpose　to　let　them　alone；

but　this　has　had　no　tendency　to　convince　them。　　Alike　unavailing　to

convince　them　is　the　fact　that　they　have　never　detected　a　man　of　us

in　any　attempt　to　disturb　them。



These　natural　and　apparently　adequate　means　all　failing；　what　will

convince　them？　　This；　and　this　only：　cease　to　call　slavery　wrong；　and

join　them　in　calling　it　right。　　And　this　must　be　done　thoroughly

done　in　acts　as　well　as　in　words。　　Silence　will　not　be　toleratedwe

must　place　ourselves　avowedly　with　them。　　Senator　Douglas's　new

sedition　law　must　be　enacted　and　enforced；　suppressing　all

declarations　that　slavery　is　wrong；　whether　made　in　politics；　in

presses；　in　pulpits；　or　in　private。　　We　must　arrest　and　return　their

fugitive　slaves　with　greedy　pleasure。　　We　must　pull　down　our　free

State　constitutions。　　The　whole　atmosphere　must　be　disinfected　from

all　taint　of　opposition　to　slavery；　before　they　will　cease　to　believe

that　all　their　troubles　proceed　from　us。



I　am　quite　aware　they　do　not　state　their　case　precisely　in　this　way。

Most　of　them　would　probably　say　to　us；　〃Let　us　alone；　do　nothing　to

us；　and　say　what　you　please　about　slavery。〃　　But　we　do　let　them　alone

have　never　disturbed　themso　that　after　all　it　is　what　we　say　which

dissatisfies　them。　　They　will　continue　to　accuse　us　of　doing；　until

we　cease　saying。



I　am　also　aware　they　have　not　as　yet；　in　terms；　demanded　the

overthrow　of　our　free　State　constitutions。　　Yet　those　constitutions

declare　the　wrong　of　slavery；　with　more　solemn　emphasis　than　do　all

other　sayings　against　it；　and　when　all　these　other　sayings　shall　have

been　silenced；　the　overthrow　of　these　constitutions　will　be　demanded；

and　nothing　be　left　to　resist　the　demand。　　It　is　nothing　to　the

contrary；　that　they　do　not　demand　the　whole　of　this　just　now。

Demanding　what　they　do；　and　for　the　reason　they　do；　they　can

voluntarily　stop　nowhere　short　of　this　consummation。　　Holding；　as

they　do；　that　slavery　is　morally　right；　and　socially　elevating；　they

cannot　cease　to　demand　a　full　national　recognition　of　it；　as　a　legal

right　and　a　social　blessing。



Nor　can　we　justifiably　withhold　this　on　any　ground　save　our

conviction　that　slavery　is　wrong。　　If　slavery　is　right；　all　words；

acts；　laws；　and　constitutions　against　it　are　themselves　wrong；　and

should　be　silenced　and　swept　away。　　If　it　is　right；　we　cannot　justly

object　to　its　nationality　its　universality；　if　it　is　wrong；　they

cannot　justly　insist　upon　its　extensionits　enlargement。　　All　they

ask　we　could　readily　grant　if　we　thought　slavery　right；　all　we　ask

they　could　as　readily　grant；　if　they　thought　it　wrong。　　Their

thinking　it　right　and　our　thinking　it　wrong　is　the　precise　fact　upon

which　depends　the　whole　controversy。　　Thinking　it　right；　as　they　do；

they　are　not　to　blame　for　desiring　its　full　recognition；　as　being

right；　but　thinking　it　wrong；　as　we　do；　can　we　yield　to　them？　　Can　we

cast　our　votes　with　their　view；　and　against　our　own？　　In　view　of　our

moral；　social；　and　political　responsibilities；　can　we　do　this？　　Wrong

as　we　think　slavery　is；　we　can　yet　afford　to　let　it　alone　where　it

is；　because　that　much　is　due　to　the　necessity　arising　from　its　actual

presence　in　the　nation；　but　can　we；　while　our　votes　will　prevent　it；

allow　it　to　spread　into　the　national　Territories；　and　to　overrun　us

here　in　these　free　States？　　If　our　sense　of　duty　forbids　this；　then

let　us　stand　by　our　duty；　fearlessly　and　effectively。　　Let　us　be

diverted　by　none　of　those　sophistical　contrivances　wherewith　we　are

so　industriously　plied　and　belabored…contrivances　such　as　groping　for

some　middle　ground　between　the　right　and　the　wrong；　vain　as　the

search　for