the writings-4-第17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！



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