the writings-3-第17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！



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　canvassmade　more　extraordinary　by　this

incidentis；　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　lawif　the

amendment　were　adoptedexpressly　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　partyto

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　waysone　of

these　excuseswas　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　brough