太子爷小说网 > 英语电子书 > the writings-3 >

第9节

the writings-3-第9节

小说: the writings-3 字数: 每页4000字

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!




these main points; to be sure; are their thunderings of cannon;

their marching and music; their fizzlegigs and fireworks; but I

will not waste time with them。  They are but the little trappings

of the campaign。



Coming to the substance;the first point;〃popular sovereignty。〃

It is to be labeled upon the cars in which he travels; put upon

the hacks he rides in; to be flaunted upon the arches he passes

under; and the banners which wave over him。  It is to be dished

up in as many varieties as a French cook can produce soups from

potatoes。  Now; as this is so great a staple of the plan of the

campaign; it is worth while to examine it carefully; and if we

examine only a very little; and do not allow ourselves to be

misled; we shall be able to see that the whole thing is the most

arrant Quixotism that was ever enacted before a community。  What

is the matter of popular sovereignty?  The first thing; in order

to understand it; is to get a good definition of what it is; and

after that to see how it is applied。



I suppose almost every one knows that; in this controversy;

whatever has been said has had reference to the question of negro

slavery。  We have not been in a controversy about the right of

the people to govern themselves in the ordinary matters of

domestic concern in the States and Territories。  Mr。 Buchanan; in

one of his late messages (I think when he sent up the Lecompton

Constitution) urged that the main point to which the public

attention had been directed was not in regard to the great

variety of small domestic matters; but was directed to the

question of negro slavery; and he asserts that if the people had

had a fair chance to vote on that question there was no

reasonable ground of objection in regard to minor questions。

Now; while I think that the people had not had given; or offered;

them a fair chance upon that slavery question; still; if there

had been a fair submission to a vote upon that main question; the

President's proposition would have been true to the utmost。

Hence; when hereafter I speak of popular sovereignty; I wish to

be understood as applying what I say to the question of slavery

only; not to other minor domestic matters of a Territory or a

State。



Does Judge Douglas; when he says that several of the past years

of his life have been devoted to the question of 〃popular

sovereignty;〃 and that all the remainder of his life shall be

devoted to it; does he mean to say that he has been devoting his

life to securing to the people of the Territories the right to

exclude slavery from the Territories?  If he means so to say he

means to deceive; because he and every one knows that the

decision of the Supreme Court; which he approves and makes

especial ground of attack upon me for disapproving; forbids the

people of a Territory to exclude slavery。  This covers the whole

ground; from the settlement of a Territory till it reaches the

degree of maturity entitling it to form a State Constitution。  So

far as all that ground is concerned; the Judge is not sustaining

popular sovereignty; but absolutely opposing it。  He sustains the

decision which declares that the popular will of the Territory

has no constitutional power to exclude slavery during their

territorial existence。  This being so; the period of time from

the first settlement of a Territory till it reaches the point of

forming a State Constitution is not the thing that the Judge has

fought for or is fighting for; but; on the contrary; he has

fought for; and is fighting for; the thing that annihilates and

crushes out that same popular sovereignty。



Well; so much being disposed of; what is left?  Why; he is

contending for the right of the people; when they come to make a

State Constitution; to make it for themselves; and precisely as

best suits themselves。  I say again; that is quixotic。  I defy

contradiction when I declare that the Judge can find no one to

oppose him on that proposition。  I repeat; there is nobody

opposing that proposition on principle。  Let me not be

misunderstood。  I know that; with reference to the Lecompton

Constitution; I may be misunderstood; but when you understand me

correctly; my proposition will be true and accurate。  Nobody is

opposing; or has opposed; the right of the people; when they form

a constitution; to form it for themselves。  Mr。 Buchanan and his

friends have not done it; they; too; as well as the Republicans

and the Anti…Lecompton Democrats; have not done it; but on the

contrary; they together have insisted on the right of the people

to form a constitution for themselves。  The difference between

the Buchanan men on the one hand; and the Douglas men and the

Republicans on the other; has not been on a question of

principle; but on a question of fact。



The dispute was upon the question of fact; whether the Lecompton

Constitution had been fairly formed by the people or not。  Mr。

Buchanan and his friends have not contended for the contrary

principle any more than the Douglas men or the Republicans。  They

have insisted that whatever of small irregularities existed in

getting up the Lecompton Constitution were such as happen in the

settlement of all new Territories。  The question was; Was it a

fair emanation of the people?  It was a question of fact; and not

of principle。  As to the principle; all were agreed。  Judge

Douglas voted with the Republicans upon that matter of fact。



He and they; by their voices and votes; denied that it was a fair

emanation of the people。  The Administration affirmed that it

was。  With respect to the evidence bearing upon that question of

fact; I readily agree that Judge Douglas and the Republicans had

the right on their side; and that the Administration was wrong。

But I state again that; as a matter of principle; there is no

dispute upon the right of a people in a Territory; merging into a

State; to form a constitution for themselves without outside

interference from any quarter。  This being so; what is Judge

Douglas going to spend his life for?  Is he going to spend his

life in maintaining a principle that nobody on earth opposes?

Does he expect to stand up in majestic dignity; and go through

his apotheosis and become a god in the maintaining of a principle

which neither man nor mouse in all God's creation is opposing?

Now something in regard to the Lecompton Constitution more

specially; for I pass from this other question of popular

sovereignty as the most arrant humbug that has ever been

attempted on an intelligent community。



As to the Lecompton Constitution; I have already said that on the

question of fact; as to whether it was a fair emanation of the

people or not; Judge Douglas; with the Republicans and some

Americans; had greatly the argument against the Administration;

and while I repeat this; I wish to know what there is in the

opposition of Judge Douglas to the Lecompton Constitution that

entitles him to be considered the only opponent to it;as being

par excellence the very quintessence of that opposition。  I agree

to the rightfulness of his opposition。  He in the Senate and his

class of men there formed the number three and no more。  In the

House of Representatives his class of menthe Anti…Lecompton

Democratsformed a number of about twenty。  It took one hundred

and twenty to defeat the measure; against one hundred and twelve。

Of the votes of that one hundred and twenty; Judge Douglas's

friends furnished twenty; to add to which there were six

Americans and ninety…four Republicans。  I do not say that I am

precisely accurate in their numbers; but I am sufficiently so for

any use I am making of it。



Why is it that twenty shall be entitled to all the credit of

doing that work; and the hundred none of it?  Why; if; as Judge

Douglas says; the honor is to be divided and due credit is to be

given to other parties; why is just so much given as is consonant

with the wishes; the interests; and advancement of the twenty?

My understanding is; when a common job is done; or a common

enterprise prosecuted; if I put in five dollars to your one; I

have a right to take out five dollars to your one。  But he does

not so understand it。  He declares the dividend of credit for

defeating Lecompton upon a basis which seems unprecedented and

incomprehensible。



Let us see。  Lecompton in the raw was defeated。  It afterward

took a sort of cooked…up shape; and was passed in the English

bill。  It is said by the Judge that the defeat was a good and

proper thing。  If it was a good thing; why is he entitled to more

credit than others for the performance of that good act; unless

there was something in the antecedents of the Republicans that

might induce every one to expect them to join in that good work;

and at the same time something leading them to doubt that he

would?  Does he place his superior claim to credit on the ground

that he performed a good act which was never expected of him?  H

返回目录 上一页 下一页 回到顶部 0 0

你可能喜欢的