the writings-2-第33节

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！



to　so　late　as　the　year　1849。



But　going　back　a　little　in　point　of　time。　　Our　war　with　Mexico

broke　out　in　1846。　　When　Congress　was　about　adjourning　that

session；　President　Polk　asked　them　to　place　two　millions　of

dollars　under　his　control；　to　be　used　by　him　in　the　recess；　if

found　practicable　and　expedient；　in　negotiating　a　treaty　of　peace

with　Mexico；　and　acquiring　some　part　of　her　territory。　　A　bill

was　duly　gotten　up　for　the　purpose；　and　was　progressing

swimmingly　in　the　House　of　Representatives；　when　a　member　by　the

name　of　David　Wilmot；　a　Democrat　from　Pennsylvania；　moved　as　an

amendment；　〃Provided；　that　in　any　territory　thus　acquired　there

never　shall　be　slavery。〃



This　is　the　origin　of　the　far…famed　Wilmot　Proviso。　　It　created　a

great　flutter；　but　it　stuck　like　wax；　was　voted　into　the　bill；

and　the　bill　passed　with　it　through　the　House。　　The　Senate；

however；　adjourned　without　final　action　on　it；　and　so　both

appropriation　and　proviso　were　lost　for　the　time。　　The　war

continued；　and　at　the　next　session　the　President　renewed　his

request　for　the　appropriation；　enlarging　the　amount；　I　think；　to

three　millions。　　Again　came　the　proviso；　and　defeated　the

measure。　　Congress　adjourned　again；　and　the　war　went　on。　　In

December；　1847；　the　new　Congress　assembled。　　I　was　in　the　lower

House　that　term。　　The　Wilmot　Proviso；　or　the　principle　of　it；　was

constantly　coming　up　in　some　shape　or　other；　and　I　think　I　may

venture　to　say　I　voted　for　it　at　least　forty　times　during　the

short　time　I　was　there。　　The　Senate；　however；　held　it　in　check；

and　it　never　became　a　law。　　In　the　spring　of　1848　a　treaty　of

peace　was　made　with　Mexico；　by　which　we　obtained　that　portion　of

her　country　which　now　constitutes　the　Territories　of　New　Mexico

and　Utah　and　the　present　State　of　California。　　By　this　treaty　the

Wilmot　Proviso　was　defeated；　in　so　far　as　it　was　intended　to　be　a

condition　of　the　acquisition　of　territory。　　Its　friends；　however；

were　still　determined　to　find　some　way　to　restrain　slavery　from

getting　into　the　new　country。　　This　new　acquisition　lay　directly

west　of　our　old　purchase　from　France；　and　extended　west　to　the

Pacific　Ocean；　and　was　so　situated　that　if　the　Missouri　line

should　be　extended　straight　west；　the　new　country　would　be

divided　by　such　extended　line；　leaving　some　north　and　some　south

of　it。　　On　Judge　Douglas's　motion；　a　bill；　or　provision　of　a

bill；　passed　the　Senate　to　so　extend　the　Missouri　line。　　The

proviso　men　in　the　House；　including　myself；　voted　it　down；

because；　by　implication；　it　gave　up　the　southern　part　to　slavery；

while　we　were　bent　on　having　it　all　free。



In　the　fall　of　1848　the　gold…mines　were　discovered　in　California。

This　attracted　people　to　it　with　unprecedented　rapidity；　so　that

on；　or　soon　after；　the　meeting　of　the　new　Congress　in　December；

1849；　she　already　had　a　population　of　nearly　a　hundred　thousand；

had　called　a　convention；　formed　a　State　constitution　excluding

slavery；　and　was　knocking　for　admission　into　the　Union。　　The

proviso　men；　of　course；　were　for　letting　her　in；　but　the　Senate；

always　true　to　the　other　side；　would　not　consent　to　her

admission；　and　there　California　stood；　kept　out　of　the　Union

because　she　would　not　let　slavery　into　her　borders。　　Under　all

the　circumstances；　perhaps；　this　was　not　wrong。　　There　were　other

points　of　dispute　connected　with　the　general　question　of　Slavery；

which　equally　needed　adjustment。　　The　South　clamored　for　a　more

efficient　fugitive　slave　law。　　The　North　clamored　for　the

abolition　of　a　peculiar　species　of　slave　trade　in　the　District　of

Columbia；　in　connection　with　which；　in　view　from　the　windows　of

the　Capitol；　a　sort　of　negro　livery…stable；　where　droves　of

negroes　were　collected；　temporarily　kept；　and　finally　taken　to

Southern　markets；　precisely　like　droves　of　horses；　had　been

openly　maintained　for　fifty　years。　　Utah　and　New　Mexico　needed

territorial　governments；　and　whether　slavery　should　or　should　not

be　prohibited　within　them　was　another　question。　　The　indefinite

western　boundary　of　Texas　was　to　be　settled。　　She　was　a　slave

State；　and　consequently　the　farther　west　the　slavery　men　could

push　her　boundary；　the　more　slave　country　they　secured；　and　the

farther　east　the　slavery　opponents　could　thrust　the　boundary

back；　the　less　slave　ground　was　secured。　　Thus　this　was　just　as

clearly　a　slavery　question　as　any　of　the　others。



These　points　all　needed　adjustment；　and　they　were　held　up；

perhaps　wisely；　to　make　them　help　adjust　one　another。　　The　Union

now；　as　in　1820；　was　thought　to　be　in　danger；　and　devotion　to　the

Union　rightfully　inclined　men　to　yield　somewhat　in　points　where

nothing　else　could　have　so　inclined　them。　　A　compromise　was

finally　effected。　　The　South　got　their　new　fugitive　slave　law；

and　the　North　got　California；　（by　far　the　best　part　of　our

acquisition　from　Mexico）　as　a　free　State。　　The　South　got　a

provision　that　New　Mexico　and　Utah；　when　admitted　as　States；　may

come　in　with　or　without　slavery　as　they　may　then　choose；　and　the

North　got　the　slave　trade　abolished　in　the　District　of　Columbia。。

The　North　got　the　western　boundary　of　Texas　thrown　farther　back

eastward　than　the　South　desired；　but；　in　turn；　they　gave　Texas

ten　millions　of　dollars　with　which　to　pay　her　old　debts。　　This　is

the　Compromise　of　1850。



Preceding　the　Presidential　election　of　1852；　each　of　the　great

political　parties；　Democrats　and　Whigs；　met　in　convention　and

adopted　resolutions　indorsing　the　Compromise　of　'50；　as　a

〃finality；〃　a　final　settlement；　so　far　as　these　parties　could

make　it　so；　of　all　slavery　agitation。　　Previous　to　this；　in　1851；

the　Illinois　Legislature　had　indorsed　it。



During　this　long　period　of　time；　Nebraska　（the　Nebraska

Territory；　not　the　State　of　as　we　know　it　now）　had　remained

substantially　an　uninhabited　country；　but　now　emigration　to　and

settlement　within　it　began　to　take　place。　　It　is　about　one　third

as　large　as　the　present　United　States；　and　its　importance；　so

long　overlooked；　begins　to　come　into　view。　　The　restriction　of

slavery　by　the　Missouri　Compromise　directly　applies　to　itin

fact　was　first　made；　and　has　since　been　maintained　expressly　for

it。　　In　1853；　a　bill　to　give　it　a　territorial　government　passed

the　House　of　Representatives；　and；　in　the　hands　of　Judge　Douglas；

failed　of　passing　only　for　want　of　time。　　This　bill　contained　no

repeal　of　the　Missouri　Compromise。　　Indeed；　when　it　was　assailed

because　it　did　not　contain　such　repeal；　Judge　Douglas　defended　it

in　its　existing　form。　　On　January　4；　1854；　Judge　Douglas

introduces　a　new　bill　to　give　Nebraska　territorial　government。

He　accompanies　this　bill　with　a　report；　in　which　last　he

expressly　recommends　that　the　Missouri　Compromise　shall　neither

be　affirmed　nor　repealed。　　Before　long　the　bill　is　so　modified　as

to　make　two　territories　instead　of　one；　calling　the　southern　one

Kansas。



Also；　about　a　month　after　the　introduction　of　the　bill；　on　the

Judge's　own　motion　it　is　so　amended　as　to　declare　the　Missouri

Compromise　inoperative　and　void；　and；　substantially；　that　the

people　who　go　and　settle　there　may　establish　slavery；　or　exclude

it；　as　they　may　see　fit。　　In　this　shape　the　bill　passed　both

branches　of　Congress　and　became　a　law。



This　is　the　repeal　of　the　Missouri　Compromise。　　The　foregoing

history　may　not　be　precisely　accurate　in　every　particular；　but　I

am　sure　it　is　sufficiently　so　for　all　the　use　I　shall　attempt　to

make　of　it；　and　in　it　we　have　before　us　the　chief　material

enabling　us　to　judge　correctly　whether　the　repeal　of　the　Missouri

Compromise　is　right　or　wrong。　　I　think；　and　shall　try　to　show；

that　it　is　wrongwrong　in　its　direct　effect；　letting　slavery

into　Kansas　and　Nebraska；　and　wrong　in　its　prospective　principle；

allowing　it　to　spread　to　every　other　part　of　the　wide　world　where

men　can　be　found　inclined　to　take　it。



This　declared　indifference；　but；　as　I　must　think；　covert　real

zeal；　for　the　spread　of　slavery；　I　cannot　but　hate。　　I　hate　it

because　of　the　monstrous　injustice　of　slavery　itself。　　I　hate　it

because　it　deprives　our　republican　example　of　its　just　influence

in　the　world；　enables　the　enemies　of　free　institutions　with

plausibility　to　taunt　us　as　hypocrites；　causes　the　real　friends

of　freedom　to　doubt　our　sincerity；　and　especially　because　it

forces　so　many　good　men　among　ourselves　into　an　open　war　with　the

very　fundamental　principles　of　civil　liberty；　criticizing　the

Declaration　of　Independence；　and　insisting　that　there　is　no　right

principle　of　action　but　self…interest。



Before　proceeding　let　me　say　that　I　think　I　have　no　prejudice

against　the　Southern　people。　　They　are　just　what　we　would　be　in

their　situation。　　If　slavery　did　not　now　exist　among　them；　they

would　not　introduce　it。　　If　it　did　now　exist　among　us；　we　should

not　instantly　give　it　up。　　This　I　believe　of　the　masses　North　and

South。　　Doubtless　there　are　individuals　on　both　sides　who　would