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！
any case； we should do so upon evidence so conclusive； and argument
so clear； that even their great authority； fairly considered and
weighed； cannot stand； and most surely not in a case whereof we
ourselves declare they understood the question better than we。
If any man at this day sincerely believes that proper division of
local from Federal authority； or any part of the Constitution；
forbids the Federal Government to control as to slavery in the
Federal Territories； he is right to say so； and to enforce his
position by all truthful evidence and fair argument which he can。
But he has no right to mislead others who have less access to
history； and less leisure to study it； into the false belief that
〃our fathers who framed the Government under which we live〃 were of
the same opinion thus substituting falsehood and deception for
truthful evidence and fair argument。 If any man at this day
sincerely believes 〃our fathers； who framed the Government under
which we live；〃 used and applied principles； in other cases； which
ought to have led them to understand that a proper division of local
from Federal authority； or some part of the Constitution； forbids the
Federal Government to control as to slavery in the Federal
Territories； he is right to say so。 But he should； at the same time；
brave the responsibility of declaring that； in his opinion； he
understands their principles better than they did themselves； and
especially should he not shirk that responsibility by asserting that
they 〃understood the question just as well； and even better than we
do now。〃
But enough！ Let all who believe that 〃our fathers； who framed the
Government under which we live； understood this question just as
well； and even better than we do now；〃 speak as they spoke； and act
as they acted upon it。 This is all Republicans askall Republicans
desirein relation to slavery。 As those fathers marked it； so let
it be again marked； as an evil not to be extended； but to be
tolerated and protected only because of； and so far as； its actual
presence among us makes that toleration and protection a necessity。
Let all the guaranties those fathers gave it be not grudgingly； but
fully and fairly maintained。 For this Republicans contend； and with
this； so far as I know or believe； they will be content。
And now； if they would listenas I suppose they will notI would
address a few words to the Southern people。
I would say to them： You consider yourselves a reasonable and a just
people； and I consider that in the general qualities of reason and
justice you are not inferior to any other people。 Still； when you
speak of us Republicans； you do so only to denounce us as reptiles；
or； at the best； as no better than outlaws。 You will grant a hearing
to pirates or murderers； but nothing like it to 〃Black Republicans。〃
In all your contentions with one another； each of you deems an
unconditional condemnation of 〃Black Republicanism〃 as the first
thing to be attended to。 Indeed； such condemnation of us seems to be
an indispensable prerequisite license； so to speak among you； to be
admitted or permitted to speak at all： Now； can you； or not； be
prevailed upon to pause； and to consider whether this is quite just
to us； or even to yourselves？ Bring forward your charges and
specifications； and then be patient long enough to hear us deny or
justify。
You say we are sectional。 We deny it。 That makes an issue； and the
burden of proof is upon you。 You produce your proof； and what is it？
Why； that our party has no existence in your sectiongets no votes
in your section。 The fact is substantially true； but does it prove
the issue？ If it does； then in case we should； without change of
principle； begin to get votes in your section； we should thereby
cease to be sectional。 You cannot escape this conclusion； and yet；
are you willing to abide by it？ If you are； you will probably soon
find that we have ceased to be sectional； for we shall get votes in
your section this very year。 You will then begin to discover； as the
truth plainly is； that your proof； does not touch the issue。 The fact
that we get no votes in your section is a fact of your making； and
not of ours。 And if there be fault in that fact； that fault is
primarily yours； and remains so until you show that we repel you by；
some wrong principle or practice。 If we do repel you by any wrong
principle or practice； the fault is ours； but this brings you to
where you ought to have started to a discussion of the right or wrong
of our principle。 If our principle； put in practice； would wrong
your section for the benefit of ours； or for any other object； then
our principle； and we with it； are sectional； and are justly opposed
and denounced as such。 Meet us； then； on the question of whether our
principle； put in practice； would wrong your section； and so meet us
as if it were possible that something may be said on our side。 Do
you accept the challenge？ No！ Then you really believe that the
principle which 〃our fathers who framed the Government under which we
live〃 thought so clearly right as to adopt it； and indorse it again
and again； upon their official oaths； is in fact so clearly wrong as
to demand your condemnation without a moment's consideration。
Some of you delight to flaunt in our faces the warning against
sectional parties given by Washington in his Farewell Address。 Less
than eight years before Washington gave that warning； he had； as
President of the United States； approved and signed an act of
Congress enforcing the prohibition of slavery in the Northwestern
Territory； which act embodied the policy of the Government upon that
subject up to； and at； the very moment he penned that warning； and
about one year after he penned it； he wrote La Fayette that he
considered that prohibition a wise measure； expressing in the same
connection his hope that we should at some time have a confederacy of
free States。
Bearing this in mind； and seeing that sectionalism has since arisen
upon this same subject； is that warning a weapon in your hands
against us； or in our hands against you？ Could Washington himself
speak； would he cast the blame of that sectionalism upon us； who
sustain his policy； or upon you； who repudiate it？ We respect that
warning of Washington； and we commend it to you； together with his
example pointing to the right application of it。
But you say you are conservativeeminently conservativewhile we
are revolutionary； destructive； or something； of the sort。 What is
conservatism？ Is it not adherence to the old and tried； against a
new and untried？ We stick to； contend for； the identical old policy
on the point in controversy which was adopted by 〃our fathers who
framed the Government under which we live〃； while you with one accord
reject； and scout； and spit upon that old policy and insist upon
substituting something new。 True； you disagree among yourselves as
to what that substitute shall be。 You are divided on new
propositions and plans； but you are unanimous in rejecting and
denouncing the old policy of the fathers。 Some of you are for
reviving the foreign slave trade； some for a Congressional slave code
for the Territories； some for Congress forbidding the Territories to
prohibit slavery within their limits； some for maintaining slavery in
the Territories through the judiciary； some for the 〃gur…reat
pur…rinciple〃 that 〃if one man would enslave another； no third man
should object；〃 fantastically called 〃popular sovereignty〃； but never
a man among you in favor of Federal prohibition of slavery in Federal
Territories； according to the practice of 〃our fathers who framed the
Government under which we live。〃 Not one of all your various plans
can show a precedent or an advocate in the century within which our
Government originated。 Consider； then； whether your claim of
conservatism for yourselves； and your charge of destructiveness