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！
They were democrats； but not after the simple； elementary manner of the democrats at the opening of the century。 In the North； there had come to life a peculiar phase of idealism that had touched democracy with mysticism and had added to it a vague but genuine romance。 This new vision of the destiny of the country had the practical effect of making the Northerners identify themselves in their imaginations with all mankind and in creating in them an enthusiastic desire； not only to give to every American a home of his own； but also to throw open the gates of the nation and to share the wealth of America with the poor of all the world。 In very truth； it was their dominating passion to give 〃land to the landless。〃 Here was the clue to much of their attitude toward the South。 Most of these Northern dreamers gave little or no thought to slavery itself； but they felt that the section which maintained such a system so committed to aristocracy that any real friendship with it was impossible。
We are thus forced to conceive the American Republic in the years immediately following the Compromise of 1850 as； in effect； a dual nation； without a common loyalty between the two parts。 Before long the most significant of the great Northerners of the time was to describe this impossible condition by the appropriate metaphor of a house divided against itself。 It was not； however； until eight years after the division of the country had been acknowledged in 1850 that these words were uttered。 In those eight years both sections awoke to the seriousness of the differences that they had admitted。 Both perceived that； instead of solving their problem in 1850； they had merely drawn sharply the lines of future conflict。 In every thoughtful mind there arose the same alternative questions： Is there no solution but fighting it out until one side destroys the other； or we end as two nations confessedly independent？ Or is there some conceivable new outlet for this opposition of energy on the part of the sections； some new mode of permanent adjustment？
It was at the moment when thinking men were asking these questions that one of the nimblest of politicians took the center of the stage。 Stephen A。 Douglas was far…sighted enough to understand the land…hunger of the time。 One is tempted to add that his ear was to the ground。 The statement will not； however； go unchallenged； for able apologists have their good word to say for Douglas。 Though in the main； the traditional view of him as the prince of political jugglers still holds its own； let us admit that his bold； rough spirit； filled as it was with political daring； was not without its strange vein of idealism。 And then let us repeat that his ear was to the ground。 Much careful research has indeed been expended in seeking to determine who originated the policy which； about 1853； Douglas decided to make his own。 There has also been much dispute about his motives。 Most of us； however； see in his course of action an instance of playing the game of politics with an audacity that was magnificent。
His conduct may well have been the result of a combination of motives which included a desire to retain the favor of the Northwest； a wish to pave the way to his candidacy for the Presidency； the intention to enlist the aid of the South as well as that of his own locality； and perhaps the hope that he was performing a service of real value to his country。 That is； he saw that the favor of his own Northwest would be lavished upon any man who opened up to settlement the rich lands beyond Iowa and Missouri which were still held by the Indians； and for which the Westerners were clamoring。 Furthermore； they wanted a railroad that would reach to the Pacific。 There were； however； local entanglements and political cross…purposes which involved the interests of the free State of Illinois and those of the slave State of Missouri。
Douglas's great stroke was a programme for harmonizing all these conflicting interests and for drawing together the West and the South。 Slaveholders were to be given what at that moment they wanted mostan opportunity to expand into that territory to the north and west of Missouri which had been made free by the Compromise of 1820； while the free Northwest was to have its railroad to the coast and also its chance to expand into the Indian country。 Douglas thus became the champion of a bill which would organize two new territories； Kansas and Nebraska； but which would leave the settlers in each to decide whether slavery or free labor should prevail within their boundaries。 This territorial scheme was accepted by a Congress in which the Southerners and their Northern allies held control； and what is known as the Kansas…Nebraska Bill was signed by President Pierce on May 30；1854。*
*The origin of the Kansas…Nebraska Bill has been a much discussed subject among historians in recent years。 The older view that Douglas was simply playing into the hands of the 〃slavepower〃 by sacrificing Kansas； is no longer tenable。 This point has been elaborated by Allen Johnson in his study of Douglas （〃Stephen A。 Douglas： a Study in American Politics〃）。 In his 〃Repeal of the Missouri Compromise〃； P。O。 Ray contends that the legislation of 1854 originated in a factional controversy in Missouri； and that Douglas merely served the interests of the proslavery group led by Senator David R。 Atchinson of Missouri。 Still another point of view is that presented in the 〃Genesis of the Kansas…Nebraska Act；〃 by F。 H。 Hodder； who would explain not only the division of the Nebraska Territory into Kansas and Nebraska； but the object of the entire bill by the insistent efforts of promoters of the Pacific railroad scheme to secure a right of way through Nebraska。 This project involved the organization of a territorial government and the repeal of the Missouri Compromise。 Douglas was deeply interested in the western railroad interests and carried through the necessary legislation。
CHAPTER II。 THE PARTY OF POLITICAL EVASION
In order to understand Douglas one must understand the Democratic party of 1854 in which Douglas was a conspicuous leader。 The Democrats boasted that they were the only really national party and contended that their rivals； the Whigs and the Know…Nothings； were merely the representatives of localities or classes。 Sectionalism was the favorite charge which the Democrats brought against their enemies； and yet it was upon these very Democrats that the slaveholders had hitherto relied； and it was upon certain members of this party that the label； 〃Northern men with Southern principles；〃 had been bestowed。
The label was not； however； altogether fair； for the motives of the Democrats were deeply rooted in their own peculiar temperament。 In the last analysis； what had held their organization together； and what had enabled them to dominate politics for nearly the span of a generation； was their faith in a principle that then appealed powerfully； and that still appeals； to much in the American character。 This was the principle of negative action on the part of the governmentthe old idea that the government should do as little as possible and should confine itself practically to the duties of the policeman。 This principle has seemed always to express to the average mind that traditional individualism which is an inheritance of the Anglo…Saxon race。 In America； in the middle of the nineteenth century； it reenforced that tradition of local independence which was strong throughout the West and doubly strong in the South。 Then； too； the Democratic party still spoke the language of the theoretical Democracy inherited from Jefferson。 And Americans have always been the slaves of phrases！
Furthermore； the close alliance of the Northern party machine with the South made it； generally； an object of care for all those Northern interests that depended on the Southern market。 As to the Southerners； their relation with this party has two distinct chapters。 The first embraced the twenty years preceding the Compromise of 1850； and may be thought of as merging into the second during three or four years following the great equivocation。 In that period； while the antislavery crusade was taking form； the aim of Southern politicians was mainly negative。 〃Let us alone；〃 was their chief demand。 Though aggressive in their policy； they were too far…sighted to demand of the North any positive course in favor of slavery。 The rise of a new type of Southern politician； however； created a different situation and began a second chapter in the relation between the South and the Democratic party machine in the North。 But of that hereafter。
Until 1854； it was the obvious part of wisdom for Southerners to cooperate as far as possible with that party whose cardinal idea was that the government should come as near as conceivable to a system of non…interference； that it should not interfere with business； and therefore oppose a tariff； that it should not interfere with local government； and therefore applaud states rights； that it should not interfere with slavery； and therefore frown upon militant abolition。 Its policy was； to adopt a familiar phrase； one of masterly inactivity。 Indeed it may well be called the