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！
difficulty in regard to the institution of slavery is the mere
agitation of office…seekers and ambitious Northern politicians。 He
thinks we want to get 〃his place；〃 I suppose。 I agree that there are
office…seekers amongst us。 The Bible says somewhere that we are
desperately selfish。 I think we would have discovered that fact
without the Bible。 I do not claim that I am any less so than the
average of men； but I do claim that I am not more selfish than Judge
Douglas。
But is it true that all the difficulty and agitation we have in
regard to this institution of slavery spring from office…seeking；
from the mere ambition of politicians？ Is that the truth？ How many
times have we had danger from this question？ Go back to the day of
the Missouri Compromise。 Go back to the nullification question； at
the bottom of which lay this same slavery question。 Go back to the
time of the annexation of Texas。 Go back to the troubles that led to
the Compromise of 1850。 You will find that every time； with the
single exception of the Nullification question； they sprung from an
endeavor to spread this institution。 There never was a party in the
history of this country； and there probably never will be； of
sufficient strength to disturb the general peace of the country。
Parties themselves may be divided and quarrel on minor questions； yet
it extends not beyond the parties themselves。 But
does not this question make a disturbance outside of political
circles？ Does it not enter into the churches and rend them asunder？
What divided the great Methodist Church into two parts； North and
South？ What has raised this constant disturbance in every
Presbyterian General Assembly that meets？ What disturbed the
Unitarian Church in this very city two years ago？ What has jarred
and shaken the great American Tract Society recently； not yet
splitting it； but sure to divide it in the end？ Is it not this same
mighty； deep…seated power that somehow operates on the minds of men；
exciting and stirring them up in every avenue of society；in
politics； in religion； in literature； in morals； in all the manifold
relations of life？ Is this the work of politicians？ Is that
irresistible power； which for fifty years has shaken the government
and agitated the people； to be stifled and subdued by pretending that
it is an exceedingly simple thing； and we ought not to talk about it？
If you will get everybody else to stop talking about it； I assure you
I will quit before they have half done so。 But where is the
philosophy or statesmanship which assumes that you can quiet that
disturbing element in our society which has disturbed us for more
than half a century； which has been the only serious danger that has
threatened our institutions；I say； where is the philosophy or the
statesmanship based on the assumption that we are to quit talking
about it； and that the public mind is all at once to cease being
agitated by it？ Yet this is the policy here in the North that
Douglas is advocating； that we are to care nothing about it！ I ask
you if it is not a false philosophy。 Is it not a false statesmanship
that undertakes to build up a system of policy upon the basis of
caring nothing about the very thing that everybody does care the most
abouta thing which all experience has shown we care a very great
deal about？
The Judge alludes very often in the course of his remarks to the
exclusive right which the States have to decide the whole thing for
themselves。 I agree with him very readily that the different States
have that right。 He is but fighting a man of straw when he assumes
that I am contending against the right of the States to do as they
please about it。 Our controversy with him is in regard to the new
Territories。 We agree that when the States come in as States they
have the right and the power to do as they please。 We have no power
as citizens of the free…States； or in our Federal capacity as members
of the Federal Union through the General Government； to disturb
slavery in the States where it exists。 We profess constantly that we
have no more inclination than belief in the power of the government
to disturb it； yet we are driven constantly to defend ourselves from
the assumption that we are warring upon the rights of the Sates。
What I insist upon is； that the new Territories shall be kept free
from it while in the Territorial condition。 Judge Douglas assumes
that we have no interest in them；that we have no right whatever to
interfere。 I think we have some interest。 I think that as white men
we have。 Do we not wish for an outlet for our surplus population； if
I may so express myself？ Do we not feel an interest in getting to
that outlet with such institutions as we would like to have prevail
there？ If you go to the Territory opposed to slavery； and another
man comes upon the same ground with his slave； upon the assumption
that the things are equal； it turns out that he has the equal right
all his way； and you have no part of it your way。 If he goes in and
makes it a slave Territory； and by consequence a slave State； is it
not time that those who desire to have it a free State were on equal
ground？ Let me suggest it in a different way。 How many Democrats
are there about here ＇〃A thousand〃＇ who have left slave States and
come into the free State of Illinois to get rid of the institution of
slavery？ ＇Another voice： 'A thousand and one。〃＇ I reckon there are a
thousand and one。 I will ask you； if the policy you are now
advocating had prevailed when this country was in a Territorial
condition； where would you have gone to get rid of it？ Where would
you have found your free State or Territory to go to？ And when
hereafter； for any cause； the people in this place shall desire to
find new homes； if they wish to be rid of the institution； where will
they find the place to go to？
Now； irrespective of the moral aspect of this question as to whether
there is a right or wrong in enslaving a negro； I am still in favor
of our new Territories being in such a condition that white men may
find a home；may find some spot where they can better their
condition； where they can settle upon new soil and better their
condition in life。 I am in favor of this； not merely （I must say it
here as I have elsewhere） for our own people who are born amongst us；
but as an outlet for free white people everywhere the world overin
which Hans； and Baptiste； and Patrick； and all other men from all the
world； may find new homes and better their conditions in life。
I have stated upon former occasions； and I may as well state again；
what I understand to be the real issue in this controversy between
Judge Douglas and myself。 On the point of my wanting to make war
between the free and the slave States； there has been no issue
between us。 So； too； when he assumes that I am in favor of producing
a perfect social and political equality between the white and black
races。 These are false issues； upon which Judge Douglas has tried to
force the controversy。 There is no foundation in truth for the
charge that I maintain either of these propositions。 The real issue
in this controversythe one pressing upon every mindis the
sentiment on the part of one class that looks upon the institution of
slavery as a wrong； and of another class that does not look upon it
as a wrong。 The sentiment that contemplates the institution of
slavery in this country as a wrong is the sentiment of the Republican
party。 It is the sentiment around which all their actions； all their
arguments； circle； from which all their propositions radiate。 They
look upon it as being a moral； social； and political wrong； and while
they contemplate it a； such； they nevertheless have due regard for
its actual existence among us； and the difficulties of getting rid of
it in any satisfactory way； and to all the constitutional obligations
thrown about it。 Yet； having a due regard for these； they desire a
policy in regard to it that looks to its not creating any more
danger。 They insist that it should； as far as may be； be treated as
a wrong； and one of the methods of treating it as a wrong is to make
provision that it shall grow no larger。 They also desire a policy
that looks to a peaceful end of slavery at some time。 These are the
views they entertain in regard to it as I understand them； and all
their sentiments； all their arguments and propositions； are brought
within this range。 I have said； and I repeat it here； that if there
be a man amongst us who does not think that the institution of
slavery is wrong in any one of the aspects of which I have spoken； he
is misplaced； and ought not to be with us。 And if there be a man
amongst us who is so impatient of it as a wrong as to disregard its
actual presence among us and the difficulty of getting rid of it
suddenly in a satisfactory way； and to disregard the constitutional
obligations th