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！
Does he mean that？ The truth about the matter is this： Judge Douglas
has sung paeans to his 〃Popular Sovereignty〃 doctrine until his
Supreme Court； co…operating with him； has squatted his Squatter
Sovereignty out。 But he will keep up this species of humbuggery
about Squatter Sovereignty。 He has at last invented this sort of
do…nothing sovereignty；that the people may exclude slavery by a
sort of 〃sovereignty〃 that is exercised by doing nothing at all。 Is
not that running his Popular Sovereignty down awfully？ Has it not
got down as thin as the homeopathic soup that was made by boiling the
shadow of a pigeon that had starved to death？ But at last； when it
is brought to the test of close reasoning； there is not even that
thin decoction of it left。 It is a presumption impossible in the
domain of thought。 It is precisely no other than the putting of that
most unphilosophical proposition； that two bodies can occupy the same
space at the same time。 The Dred Scott decision covers the whole
ground； and while it occupies it； there is no room even for the
shadow of a starved pigeon to occupy the same ground。
Judge Douglas； in reply to what I have said about having upon a
previous occasion made the speech at Ottawa as the one he took an
extract from at Charleston； says it only shows that I practiced the
deception twice。 Now； my friends； are any of you obtuse enough to
swallow that？ Judge Douglas had said I had made a speech at
Charleston that I would not make up north； and I turned around and
answered him by showing I had made that same speech up north；had
made it at Ottawa； made it in his hearing； made it in the Abolition
District；in Lovejoy's District；in the personal presence of
Lovejoy himself；in the same atmosphere exactly in which I had made
my Chicago speech； of which he complains so much。
Now； in relation to my not having said anything about the quotation
from the Chicago speech： he thinks that is a terrible subject for me
to handle。 Why； gentlemen； I can show you that the substance of the
Chicago speech I delivered two years ago in 〃Egypt；〃 as he calls it。
It was down at Springfield。 That speech is here in this book； and I
could turn to it and read it to you but for the lack of time。 I have
not now the time to read it。 ＇〃Read it； read it。〃＇ No； gentlemen； I
am obliged to use discretion in disposing most advantageously of my
brief time。 The Judge has taken great exception to my adopting the
heretical statement in the Declaration of Independence； that 〃all men
are created equal；〃 and he has a great deal to say about negro
equality。 I want to say that in sometimes alluding to the
Declaration of Independence； I have only uttered the sentiments that
Henry Clay used to hold。 Allow me to occupy your time a moment with
what he said。 Mr。 Clay was at one time called upon in Indiana； and
in a way that I suppose was very insulting； to liberate his slaves；
and he made a written reply to that application； and one portion of
it is in these words：
〃What is the foundation of this appeal to me in Indiana to liberate
the slaves under my care in Kentucky？ It is a general declaration in
the act announcing to the world the independence of the thirteen
American colonies； that men are created equal。 Now； as an abstract
principle； there is no doubt of the truth of that declaration； and it
is desirable in the original construction of society； and in
organized societies； to keep it in view as a great fundamental
principle。〃
When I sometimes； in relation to the organization of new societies in
new countries； where the soil is clean and clear； insisted that we
should keep that principle in view； Judge Douglas will have it that I
want a negro wife。 He never can be brought to understand that there
is any middle ground on this subject。 I have lived until my fiftieth
year； and have never had a negro woman either for a slave or a wife；
and I think I can live fifty centuries； for that matter； without
having had one for either。 I maintain that you may take Judge
Douglas's quotations from my Chicago speech； and from my Charleston
speech； and the Galesburgh speech；in his speech of to…day；and
compare them over； and I am willing to trust them with you upon his
proposition that they show rascality or double…dealing。 I deny that
they do。
The Judge does not seem at all disposed to have peace； but I find he
is disposed to have a personal warfare with me。 He says that my oath
would not be taken against the bare word of Charles H。 Lanphier or
Thomas L。 Harris。 Well； that is altogether a matter of opinion。 It
is certainly not for me to vaunt my word against oaths of these
gentlemen； but I will tell Judge Douglas again the facts upon which I
〃dared〃 to say they proved a forgery。 I pointed out at Galesburgh
that the publication of these resolutions in the Illinois State
Register could not have been the result of accident； as the
proceedings of that meeting bore unmistakable evidence of being done
by a man who knew it was a forgery； that it was a publication partly
taken from the real proceedings of the Convention； and partly from
the proceedings of a convention at another place； which showed that
he had the real proceedings before him； and taking one part of the
resolutions； he threw out another part； and substituted false and
fraudulent ones in their stead。 I pointed that out to him； and also
that his friend Lanphier； who was editor of the Register at that time
and now is； must have known how it was done。 Now； whether he did it；
or got some friend to do it for him； I could not tell； but he
certainly knew all about it。 I pointed out to Judge Douglas that in
his Freeport speech he had promised to investigate that matter。
Does he now say that he did not make that promise？ I have a right
to ask why he did not keep it。 I call upon him to tell here to…day
why he did not keep that promise？ That fraud has been traced up so
that it lies between him； Harris； and Lanphier。 There is little room
for escape for Lanphier。 Lanphier is doing the Judge good service；
and Douglas desires his word to be taken for the truth。 He desires
Lanphier to be taken as authority in what he states in his newspaper。
He desires Harris to be taken as a man of vast credibility； and when
this thing lies among them； they will not press it to show where the
guilt really belongs。 Now； as he has said that he would investigate
it； and implied that he would tell us the result of his
investigation； I demand of him to tell why he did not investigate it；
if he did not； and if he did； why he won't tell the result。 I call
upon him for that。
This is the third time that Judge Douglas has assumed that he learned
about these resolutions by Harris's attempting to use them against
Norton on the floor of Congress。 I tell Judge Douglas the public
records of the country show that he himself attempted it upon
Trumbull a month before Harris tried them on Norton； that Harris had
the opportunity of learning it from him； rather than he from Harris。
I now ask his attention to that part of the record on the case。 My
friends； I am not disposed to detain you longer in regard to that
matter。
I am told that I still have five minutes left。 There is another
matter I wish to call attention to。 He says； when he discovered
there was a mistake in that case； he came forward magnanimously；
without my calling his attention to it； and explained it。 I will
tell you how he became so magnanimous。 When the newspapers of our
side had discovered and published it； and put it beyond his power to
deny it； then he came forward and made a virtue of necessity by
acknowledging it。 Now he argues that all the point there was in
those resolutions； although never passed at Springfield； is retained
by their being passed at other localities。 Is that true？ He said I
had a hand in passing them； in his opening speech； that I was in the
convention and helped to pass them。 Do the resolutions touch me at
all？ It strikes me there is some difference between holding a man
responsible for an act which he has not done and holding him
responsible for an act that he has
done。 You will judge whether there is any difference in the 〃spots。〃
And he has taken credit for great magnanimity in coming forward and
acknowledging what is proved on him beyond even the capacity of Judge
Douglas to deny； and he has more capacity in that way than any other
living man。
Then he wants to know why I won't withdraw the charge in regard to a
conspiracy to make slavery national； as he has withdrawn the one he
made。 May it please his worship； I will withdraw it when it is
proven false on me as that was proven false on him。 I will add a
little more than that； I will withdraw it whenever a reasonable man
shall be brought to believe that the charge is not true。 I have
asked Judge Douglas's attention to certain matters of fact tendi