Now it was, that the meaning of the words, "subject only to the

Constitution," as used in the Kansas-Nebraska Act, began to be

discerned. For if the people of a Territory were to be "perfectly

free," to deal with Slavery as they chose, "subject only to the

Constitution" they were by this Judicial interpretation of that

instrument "perfectly free" to deal with Slavery in any way so long as

they did not attempt "to exclude" it! The thing was all one-sided.

Mr. Douglas's attitude in inventing the peculiar phraseology in the

Kansas-Nebraska Act--which to some seemed as if expressly "made to

order" for the Dred Scott decision--was criticized with asperity; the

popularity, however, of his courageous stand against President Buchanan

on the Lecompton fraud, seemed to make it certain that, his term in the

United States Senate being about to expire, he would be overwhelmingly

re-elected to that body.

But at this juncture occurred something, which for a long time held the

result in doubt, and drew the excited attention of the whole Nation to

Illinois as the great battle-ground. In 1858 a Republican State

Convention was held at Springfield, Ill., which nominated Abraham

Lincoln as the Republican candidate for United States Senator to succeed

Senator Douglas in the National Legislature. On June 16th--after such

nomination--Mr. Lincoln made to the Convention a speech--in which, with

great and incisive power, he assailed Mr. Douglas's position as well as

that of the whole Democratic Pro-Slavery Party, and announced in compact

and cogent phrase, from his own point of view, the attitude, upon the

Slavery question, of the Republican Party.

In that remarkable speech--which at once attracted the attention of the

Country--Mr. Lincoln said: "We are now far into the fifth year, since a

policy was initiated with the avowed object, and confident promise, of

putting an end to Slavery agitation. Under the operation of that

policy, that agitation has not only not ceased, but has constantly

augmented. In my opinion it will not cease, until a crisis shall have

been reached and passed. 'A House divided against itself cannot stand.'

I believe this Government cannot endure permanently half Slave and half

Free. I do not expect the Union to be dissolved--I do not expect the

House to fall--but I do expect it will cease to be divided. It will

become all one thing, or all the other. Either the opponents of Slavery

will arrest the further spread of it, and place it where the public mind

shall rest in the belief that it is in the course of ultimate

extinction; or its advocates will push it forward, till it shall become

alike lawful in all the States, old as well as new, North as well as

South."

[Governor Seward's announcement of an "irrepressible conflict" was

made four months later.]

He then proceeded to lay bare and closely analyze the history of all

that had been done, during the four years preceding, to produce the

prevailing condition of things touching human Slavery; describing it as

resulting from that, "now almost complete legal combination-piece of

machinery, so to speak--compounded of the Nebraska doctrine and the Dred

Scott decision." After stating the several points of that decision, and

that the doctrine of the "Sacred right of self-government" had been

perverted by the Nebraska "Squatter Sovereignty," argument to mean that,

"if any one man chose to enslave another, no third man shall be allowed

to object," he proceeded to show the grounds upon which he charged

"pre-concert" among the builders of that machinery. Said he: "The people

were to be left perfectly free, 'subject only to the Constitution.'

What the Constitution had to do with it, outsiders could not see.

Plainly enough now, it was an exactly fitted niche for the Dred Scott

decision to afterward come in and declare the perfect freedom of the

people to be just no freedom at all. Why was the amendment, expressly

declaring the right of the people, voted down? Plainly enough now, the

adoption of it would have spoiled the niche for the Dred Scott decision.

Why was the Court decision held up? Why even a Senator's individual

opinion withheld, till after the Presidential election? Plainly enough

now: the speaking out then would have damaged the 'perfectly free'

argument upon which the election was to be carried. Why the outgoing

President's felicitation on the indorsement? Why the delay of a

re-argument? Why the incoming President's advance exhortation in favor of

the decision? These things look like the cautious patting and petting

of a spirited horse, preparatory to mounting him, when it is dreaded

that he may give the rider a fall. And why the hasty after-indorsement

of the decision, by the President and others? We cannot absolutely know

that all these exact adaptations are the result of pre-concert. But

when we see a lot of framed timbers, different portions of which we know

have been gotten out at different times and places and by different

workmen--Stephen, Franklin, Roger, and James--[Douglas, Pierce, Taney

and Buchanan.]--for instance--and when we see these timbers joined

together, and see they exactly make the frame of a house or a mill, all

the tenons and mortices exactly fitting, and all the lengths and

proportions of the different pieces exactly adapted to their respective

places, and not a piece too many or too few--not omitting even the

scaffolding, or, if a single piece be lacking, we see the place in the

frame exactly fitted and prepared yet to bring such piece in--in such a

case, we find it impossible not to believe that Stephen and Franklin and

Roger and James all understood one another from the beginning, and all

worked upon a common plan or draft drawn up before the first blow was

struck."

He drew attention also to the fact that by the Nebraska Bill the people

of a State, as well as a Territory, were to be left "perfectly free,"

"subject only to the Constitution," and that the object of lugging a

"State" into this merely Territorial law was to enable the United States

Supreme Court in some subsequent decision to declare, when the public

mind had been sufficiently imbued with Judge Douglas's notion of not

caring "whether Slavery be voted up or voted down," that "the

Constitution of the United States does not permit a State to exclude

Slavery from its limits"--which would make Slavery "alike lawful in all

the States." That, he declared to be Judge Douglas's present mission:

--"His avowed mission is impressing the 'public heart' to care nothing

about it." Hence Mr. Lincoln urged Republicans to stand by their cause,

which must be placed in the hands of its friends, "Whose hands are free,

whose hearts are in the work--who do care for the result;" for he held

that "a living dog is better than a dead lion."

On the evening of July 9, 1858, at Chicago, Mr. Douglas (Mr. Lincoln

being present) spoke to an enthusiastic assemblage, which he fitly

described as a "vast sea of human faces," and, after stating that he

regarded "the Lecompton battle as having been fought and the victory

won, because the arrogant demand for the admission of Kansas under the

Lecompton Constitution unconditionally, whether her people wanted it or

not, has been abandoned, and the principle which recognizes the right of

the people to decide for themselves has been submitted in its place," he

proceeded to vindicate his position throughout; declared that he opposed

"the Lecompton monstrosity solely on the ground than it was a violation

of the fundamental principles of free government; on the ground that it

was not the act and deed of the people of Kansas; that it did not embody

their will; that they were averse to it;" and hence he "denied the right

of Congress to force it upon them, either as a Free State or a Slave

State."

Said he: "I deny the right of Congress to force a Slaveholding State

upon an unwilling people. I deny their right to force a Free State upon

an unwilling people. I deny their right to force a good thing upon a

people who are unwilling to receive it. The great principle is the

right of every community to judge and decide for itself, whether a thing

is right or wrong, whether it would be good or evil for them to adopt

it; and the right of free action, the right of free thought, the right

of free judgment upon the question is dearer to every true American than

any other under a free Government. * * * It is no answer to this

argument to say that Slavery is an evil, and hence should not be

tolerated. You must allow the people to decide for themselves whether

it is good or evil." He then adverted to the arraignment of himself by

Mr. Lincoln, and took direct issue with that gentleman on his

proposition that, as to Freedom and Slavery, "the Union will become all

one thing or all the other;" and maintained on the contrary, that "it is

neither desirable nor possible that there should be uniformity in the

local institutions and domestic regulations of the different States of

this Union."

Upon the further proposition of Mr. Lincoln, which Mr. Douglas described

as "a crusade against the Supreme Court of the United States on account

of the Dred Scott decision," and as "an appeal from the decision" of

that Court "upon this high Constitutional question to a Republican

caucus sitting in the country," he also took "direct and distinct issue

with him." To "the reason assigned by Mr. Lincoln for resisting the

decision of the Supreme Court in the Dred Scott case * * * because it

deprives the Negro of the privileges, immunities and rights of

citizenship which pertain, according to that decision, only to the White

man," Mr. Douglas also took exception thus: "I am free to say to you

that in my opinion this Government of ours is founded on the White

basis. It was made by the White man for the benefit of the White man,

to be administered by White men, in such manner as they should

determine. It is also true that a Negro, an Indian, or any other man of

inferior race to a White man, should be permitted to enjoy, and humanity

requires that he should have, all the rights, privileges, and immunities

which he is capable of exercising consistent with the safety of society.

* * * But you may ask me what are these rights and these privileges?

My answer is, that each State must decide for itself the nature and

extent of these rights. * * * Without indorsing the wisdom of that

decision, I assert that Virginia has the same power by virtue of her

sovereignty to protect Slavery within her limits, as Illinois has to

banish it forever from our own borders. I assert the right of each

State to decide for itself on all these questions, and I do not

subscribe to the doctrine of my friend, Mr. Lincoln, that uniformity is

either desirable or possible. I do not acknowledge that the States must

all be Free or must all be Slave. I do not acknowledge that the Negro

must have civil and political rights everywhere or nowhere. * * * I do

not acknowledge any of these doctrines of uniformity in the local and

domestic regulations in the different States. * * * Mr. Lincoln goes

for a warfare upon the Supreme Court of the United States because of

their judicial decision in the Dred Scott case. I yield obedience to

the decisions in that Court--to the final determination of the highest

judicial tribunal known to our Constitution. He objects to the Dred

Scott decision because it does not put the Negro in the possession of

the rights of citizenship on an equality with the White man. I am

opposed to Negro equality. * * * I would extend to the Negro, and the

Indian, and to all dependent races every right, every privilege, and

every immunity consistent with the safety and welfare of the White

races; but equality they never should have, either political or social,

or in any other respect whatever. * * * My friends, you see that the

issues are distinctly drawn."

On the following evening (July 10th) at Chicago, Mr. Lincoln addressed

another enthusiastic assemblage, in reply to Mr. Douglas; and, after

protesting against a charge that had been made the previous night by the

latter, of an "unnatural and unholy" alliance between Administration

Democrats and Republicans to defeat him, as being beyond his own

knowledge and belief, proceeded: "Popular Sovereignty! Everlasting

Popular Sovereignty! Let us for a moment inquire into this vast matter

of Popular Sovereignty. What is Popular Sovereignty? We recollect at

an early period in the history of this struggle there was another name

for the same thing--Squatter Sovereignty. It was not exactly Popular

Sovereignty, but Squatter Sovereignty. What do those terms mean? What

do those terms mean when used now? And vast credit is taken by our

friend, the Judge, in regard to his support of it, when he declares the

last years of his life have been, and all the future years of his life

shall be, devoted to this matter of Popular Sovereignty. What is it?

Why it is the Sovereignty of the People! What was Squatter Sovereignty?

I suppose if it had any significance at all, it was the right of the

people to govern themselves, to be sovereign in their own affairs while

they were squatted down in a country not their own--while they had

squatted on a territory that did not belong to them in the sense that a

State belongs to the people who inhabit it--when it belonged to the

Nation--such right to govern themselves was called 'Squatter

Sovereignty.'

"Now I wish you to mark. What has become of that Squatter Sovereignty?

What has become of it? Can you get anybody to tell you now that the

people of a Territory have any authority to govern themselves, in regard

to this mooted question of Slavery, before they form a State

Constitution? No such thing at all, although there is a general running

fire and although there has been a hurrah made in every speech on that

side, assuming that that policy had given the people of a Territory the

right to govern themselves upon this question; yet the point is dodged.

To-day it has been decided--no more than a year ago it was decided by

the Supreme Court of the United States, and is insisted upon to-day,

that the people of a Territory have no right to exclude Slavery from a

Territory, that if any one man chooses to take Slaves into a Territory,

all the rest of the people have no right to keep them out. This being

so, and this decision being made one of the points that the Judge

(Douglas) approved, * * * he says he is in favor of it, and sticks to

it, and expects to win his battle on that decision, which says there is

no such thing as Squatter Sovereignty; but that any man may take Slaves

into a Territory and all the other men in the Territory may be opposed

to it, and yet by reason of the Constitution they cannot prohibit it;

when that is so, how much is left of this vast matter of Squatter

Sovereignty, I should like to know? Again, when we get to the question

of the right of the people to form a State Constitution as they please,

to form it with Slavery or without Slavery--if that is anything new, I

confess I don't know it * * *.

"We do not remember that, in that old Declaration of Independence, it is

said that 'We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are

created equal; that they are endowed by their Creator with certain

inalienable rights; that among these are life, liberty, and the pursuit

of happiness; that to secure these rights, governments are instituted

among men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed.'

There, is the origin of Popular Sovereignty. Who, then, shall come in

at this day and claim that he invented it? The Lecompton Constitution

connects itself with this question, for it is in this matter of the

Lecompton Constitution that our friend, Judge Douglas, claims such vast

credit. I agree that in opposing the Lecompton Constitution, so far as

I can perceive, he was right. * * * All the Republicans in the Nation

opposed it, and they would have opposed it just as much without Judge

Douglas's aid as with it. They had all taken ground against it long

before he did. Why, the reason that he urges against that Constitution,

I urged against him a year before. I have the printed speech in my hand

now. The argument that he makes, why that Constitution should not be

adopted, that the people were not fairly represented nor allowed to

vote, I pointed out in a speech a year ago which I hold in my hand now,

that no fair chance was to be given to the people. * * * The Lecompton

Constitution, as the Judge tells us, was defeated. The defeat of it was

a good thing or it was not. He thinks the defeat of it was a good

thing, and so do I, and we agree in that. Who defeated it? [A voice

--'Judge Douglas.'] Yes, he furnished himself, and if you suppose he

controlled the other Democrats that went with him, he furnished three

votes, while the Republicans furnished twenty. That is what he did to

defeat it. In the House of Representatives he and his friends furnished

some twenty votes, and the Republicans furnished ninety odd. Now, who

was it that did the work? * * * Ground was taken against it by the

Republicans long before Douglas did it. The proportion of opposition to

that measure is about five to one."

Mr. Lincoln then proceeded to take up the issues which Mr. Douglas had

joined with him the previous evening. He denied that he had said, or

that it could be fairly inferred from what he had said, in his

Springfield speech, that he was in favor of making War by the North upon

the South for the extinction of Slavery, "or, in favor of inviting the

South to a War upon the North, for the purpose of nationalizing

Slavery." Said he: "I did not even say that I desired that Slavery

should be put in course of ultimate extinction. I do say so now,

however; so there need be no longer any difficulty about that. * * * I

am tolerably well acquainted with the history of the Country and I know

that it has endured eighty-two years half Slave and half Free. I

believe--and that is what I meant to allude to there--I believe it has

endured, because during all that time, until the introduction of the

Nebraska Bill, the public mind did rest all the, time in the belief that

Slavery was in course of ultimate extinction. That was what gave us the

rest that we had through that period of eighty-two years; at least, so I

believe.

"I have always hated Slavery, I think, as much as any Abolitionist--I

have been an Old Line Whig--I have always hated it, but I have always

been quiet about it until this new era of the introduction of the

Nebraska Bill began. I always believed that everybody was against it,

and that it was in course of ultimate extinction. * * * The great mass

of the Nation have rested in the belief that Slavery was in course of

ultimate extinction. They had reason so to believe. The adoption of

the Constitution and its attendant history led the People to believe so,

and that such was the belief of the framers of the Constitution itself.

Why did those old men about the time of the adoption of the Constitution

decree that Slavery should not go into the new territory, where it had

not already gone? Why declare that within twenty years the African

Slave Trade, by which Slaves are supplied, might be cut off by Congress?

Why were all these acts? I might enumerate more of these acts--but

enough. What were they but a clear indication that the framers of the

Constitution intended and expected the ultimate extinction of that

institution?

"And now, when I say, as I said in my speech that Judge Douglas has

quoted from, when I say that I think the opponents of Slavery will

resist the further spread of it, and place it where the public mind

shall rest with the belief that it is in course of ultimate extinction,

I only mean to say, that they will place it where the founders of this

Government originally placed it. I have said a hundred times, and I

have now no inclination to take it back, that I believe there is no

right, and ought to be no inclination in the people of the Free States,

to enter into the Slave States, and interfere with the question of

Slavery at all. I have said that always; Judge Douglas has heard me say

it--if not quite a hundred times, at least as good as a hundred times;

and when it is said that I am in favor of interfering with Slavery where

it exists, I know that it is unwarranted by anything I have ever

intended, and as I believe, by anything I have ever said. If, by any

means, I have ever used language which could fairly be so construe (as,

however, I believe I never have) I now correct it. So much, then, for

the inference that Judge Douglas draws, that I am in favor of setting

the Sections at War with one another.

"Now in relation to his inference that I am in favor of a general

consolidation of all the local institutions of the various States * * *

I have said, very many times in Judge Douglas's hearing, that no man

believed more than I in the principle of self-government from beginning

to end. I have denied that his use of that term applies properly. But

for the thing itself, I deny that any man has ever gone ahead of me in

his devotion to the principle, whatever he may have done in efficiency

in advocating it. I think that I have said it in your hearing--that I

believe each individual is naturally entitled to do as he pleases with

himself and the fruit of his labor, so far as it in no wise interferes

with any other man's rights--that each community, as a State, has a

right to do exactly as it pleases with all the concerns within that

State that interfere with the rights of no other State, and that the

General Government, upon principle, has no right to interfere with

anything other than that general class of things that does concern the

whole. I have said that at all times.

"I have said, as illustrations, that I do not believe in the right of

Illinois to interfere with the cranberry laws of Indiana, the oyster

laws of Virginia, or the liquor laws of Maine. I have said these things

over and over again, and I repeat them here as my sentiments. * * *

What can authorize him to draw any such inference? I suppose there

might be one thing that at least enabled him to draw such an inference

that would not be true with me or many others, that is, because he looks

upon all this matter of Slavery as an exceedingly little thing--this

matter of keeping one-sixth of the population of the whole Nation in a

state of oppression and tyranny unequaled in the World.

"He looks upon it as being an exceedingly little thing only equal to the

cranberry laws of Indiana--as something having no moral question in it

--as something on a par with the question of whether a man shall pasture

his land with cattle, or plant it with tobacco--so little and so small a

thing, that he concludes, if I could desire that anything should be done

to bring about the ultimate extinction of that little thing, I must be

in favor of bringing about an amalgamation of all the other little

things in the Union.

"Now it so happens--and there, I presume, is the foundation of this

mistake--that the Judge thinks thus; and it so happens that there is a

vast portion of the American People that do not look upon that matter as

being this very little thing. They look upon it as a vast moral evil;

they can prove it as such by the writings of those who gave us the

blessings of Liberty which we enjoy, and that they so looked upon it,

and not as an evil merely confining itself to the States where it is

situated; while we agree that, by the Constitution we assented to, in

the States where it exists we have no right to interfere with it,

because it is in the Constitution; and we are by both duty and

inclination to stick by that Constitution in all its letter and spirit,

from beginning to end. * * * The Judge can have no issue with me on a

question of establishing uniformity in the domestic regulations of the

States. * * *

"Another of the issues he says that is to be made with me, is upon his

devotion to the Dred Scott decision, and my opposition to it. I have

expressed heretofore, and I now repeat, my opposition to the Dred Scott

decision; but I should be allowed to state the nature of that

opposition. * * * What is fairly implied by the term Judge Douglas has

used, 'resistance to the decision?' I do not resist it. If I wanted to

take Dred Scott from his master, I would be interfering with property

and that terrible difficulty that Judge Douglas speaks of, of

interfering with property, would arise. But I am doing no such thing as

that, but all that I am doing is refusing to obey it, as a political

rule. If I were in Congress, and a vote should come up on a question

whether Slavery should be prohibited in a new Territory, in spite of the

Dred Scott decision, I would vote that it should. That is what I would

do.

"Judge Douglas said last night, that before the decision he might

advance his opinion, and it might be contrary to the decision when it

was made; but after it was made, he would abide by it until it was

reversed. Just so! We let this property abide by the decision, but we

will try to reverse that decision. We will try to put it where Judge

Douglas would not object, for he says he will obey it until it is

reversed. Somebody has to reverse that decision, since it is made, and

we mean to reverse it, and we mean to do it peaceably.

"What are the uses of decisions of Courts? They have two uses. As

rules of property they have two uses. First, they decide upon the

question before the Court. They decide in this case that Dred Scott is

a Slave. Nobody resists that. Not only that, but they say to everybody

else, that persons standing just as Dred Scott stands, are as he is.

That is, they say that when a question comes up upon another person, it

will be so decided again, unless the Court decides in another way

--unless the Court overrules its decision.--Well, we mean to do what we

can to have the Court decide the other way. That is one thing we mean

to try to do.

"The sacredness that Judge Douglas throws around this decision is a

degree of sacredness that has never before been thrown around any other

decision. I have never heard of such a thing. Why, decisions

apparently contrary to that decision, or that good lawyers thought were

contrary to that decision, have been made by that very Court before. It

is the first of its kind; it is an astonisher in legal history. It is a

new wonder of the world. It is based upon falsehood in the main as to

the facts--allegations of facts upon which it stands are not facts at

all in many instances; and no decision made on any question--the first

instance of a decision made under so many unfavorable circumstances

--thus placed, has ever been held by the profession as law, and it has

always needed confirmation before the lawyers regarded it as settled

law. But Judge Douglas will have it that all hands must take this

extraordinary decision, made under these extraordinary circumstances,

and give their vote in Congress in accordance with it, yield to it and

obey it in every possible sense.

"Circumstances alter cases. Do not gentlemen remember the case of that

same Supreme Court, some twenty-five or thirty years ago, deciding that

a National Bank was Constitutional? * * * The Bank charter ran out,

and a recharter was granted by Congress. That re-charter was laid

before General Jackson. It was urged upon him, when he denied the

Constitutionality of the Bank, that the Supreme Court had decided that

it was Constitutional; and General Jackson then said that the Supreme

Court had no right to lay down a rule to govern a co-ordinate branch of

the Government, the members of which had sworn to support the

Constitution--that each member had sworn to support that Constitution as

he understood it. I will venture here to say, that I have heard Judge

Douglas say that he approved of General Jackson for that act. What has

now become of all his tirade about 'resistance to the Supreme Court?'"

After adverting to Judge Douglas's warfare on "the leaders" of the

Republican party, and his desire to have "it understood that the mass of

the Republican party are really his friends," Mr. Lincoln said: "If you

indorse him, you tell him you do not care whether Slavery be voted up or

down, and he will close, or try to close, your mouths with his

declaration repeated by the day, the week, the month, and the year. Is

that what you mean? * * * Now I could ask the Republican party, after

all the hard names that Judge Douglas has called them by, all his

repeated charges of their inclination to marry with and hug negroes--all

his declarations of Black Republicanism--by the way, we are improving,

the black has got rubbed off--but with all that, if he be indorsed by

Republican votes, where do you stand? Plainly, you stand ready saddled,

bridled, and harnessed, and waiting to be driven over to the

Slavery-extension camp of the Nation--just ready to be driven over, tied

together in a lot--to be driven over, every man with a rope around his

neck, that halter being held by Judge Douglas. That is the question.

If Republican men have been in earnest in what they have done, I think

that they has better not do it. * * *

"We were often--more than once at least--in the course of Judge

Douglas's speech last night, reminded that this Government was made for

White men--that he believed it was made for White men. Well, that is

putting it in a shape in which no one wants to deny it; but the Judge

then goes into his passion for drawing inferences that are not

warranted. I protest, now and forever, against that counterfeit logic

which presumes that because I do not want a Negro woman for a Slave I do

necessarily want her for a wife. My understanding is that I need not

have her for either; but, as God has made us separate, we can leave one

another alone, and do one another much good thereby. There are White

men enough to marry all the White women, and enough Black men to marry

all the Black women, and in God's name let them be so married. The

Judge regales us with the terrible enormities that take place by the

mixture of races; that the inferior race bears the superior down. Why,

Judge, if we do not let them get together in the Territories, they won't

mix there.

" * * * Those arguments that are made, that the inferior race are to be

treated with as much allowance as they are capable of enjoying; that as

much is to be done for them as their condition will allow--what are

these arguments? They are the arguments that Kings have made for

enslaving the People in all ages of the World. You will find that all

the arguments in favor of king-craft were of this class; they always

bestrode the necks of the People, not that they wanted to do it, but

because the People were better off for being ridden! That is their

argument, and this argument of the Judge is the same old Serpent that

says: you work, and I eat; you toil, and I will enjoy the fruits of it.

"Turn it whatever way you will--whether it come from the mouth of a

King, an excuse for enslaving the People of his Country, or from the

mouth of men of one race as a reason for enslaving the men of another

race, it is all the same old Serpent; and I hold, if that course of

argumentation that is made for the purpose of convincing the public mind

that we should not care about this, should be granted, it does not stop

with the Negro.

"I should like to know, taking this old Declaration of Independence,

which declares that all men are equal upon principle, and making

exceptions to it, where will it stop? If one man says it does not mean

a Negro, why not say it does not mean some other man? If that

Declaration is not the truth, let us get the Statute Book, in which we

find it, and tear it out! Who is so bold as to do it? If it is not

true, let us tear it out!" [Cries of "No, no."] "Let us stick to it

then; let us stand firmly by it, then. * * *

" * * * The Saviour, I suppose, did not expect that any human creature

could be perfect as the Father in Heaven; but He said, 'As your Father

in Heaven is perfect, be ye also perfect.' He set that up as a

standard, and he who did most toward reaching that standard, attained

the highest degree of moral perfection. So I say, in relation to the

principle that all men are created equal--let it be as nearly reached as

we can. If we cannot give Freedom to every creature, let us do nothing

that will impose Slavery upon any other creature. Let us then turn this

Government back into the channel in which the framers of the

Constitution originally placed it. Let us stand firmly by each other.

* * * Let us discard all this quibbling * * * and unite as one People

throughout this Land, until we shall once more stand up declaring that

all men are created equal."

At Bloomington, July 16th (Mr. Lincoln being present), Judge Douglas

made another great speech of vindication and attack. After sketching

the history of the Kansas-Nebraska struggle, from the introduction by

himself of the Nebraska Bill in the United States Senate, in 1854, down

to the passage of the "English" Bill--which prescribed substantially

that if the people of Kansas would come in as a Slave-holding State,

they should be admitted with but 35,000 inhabitants; but if they would

come in as a Free State, they must have 93,420 inhabitants; which unfair

restriction was opposed by Judge Douglas, but to which after it became

law he "bowed in deference," because whatever decision the people of

Kansas might make on the coming third of August would be "final and

conclusive of the whole question"--he proceeded to compliment the

Republicans in Congress, for supporting the Crittenden-Montgomery Bill

--for coming "to the Douglas platform, abandoning their own, believing

(in the language of the New York Tribune), that under the peculiar

circumstances they would in that mode best subserve the interests of the

Country;" and then again attacked Mr. Lincoln for his "unholy and

unnatural alliance" with the Lecompton-Democrats to defeat him, because

of which, said he: "You will find he does not say a word against the

Lecompton Constitution or its supporters. He is as silent as the grave

upon that subject. Behold Mr. Lincoln courting Lecompton votes, in

order that he may go to the Senate as the representative of Republican

principles! You know that the alliance exists. I think you will find

that it will ooze out before the contest is over." Then with many

handsome compliments to the personal character of Mr. Lincoln, and

declaring that the question for decision was "whether his principles are

more in accordance with the genius of our free institutions, the peace

and harmony of the Republic" than those advocated by himself, Judge

Douglas proceeded to discuss what he described as "the two points at

issue between Mr. Lincoln and myself."

Said he: "Although the Republic has existed from 1789 to this day,

divided into Free States and Slave States, yet we are told that in the

future it cannot endure unless they shall become all Free or all Slave.

* * * He wishes to go to the Senate of the United States in order to

carry out that line of public policy which will compel all the States in

the South to become Free. How is he going to do it? Has Congress any

power over the subject of Slavery in Kentucky or Virginia or any other

State of this Union? How, then, is Mr. Lincoln going to carry out that

principle which he says is essential to the existence of this Union, to

wit: That Slavery must be abolished in all the States of the Union or

must be established in them all? You convince the South that they must

either establish Slavery in Illinois and in every other Free State, or

submit to its abolition in every Southern State and you invite them to

make a warfare upon the Northern States in order to establish Slavery

for the sake of perpetuating it at home. Thus, Mr. Lincoln invites, by

his proposition, a War of Sections, a War between Illinois and Kentucky,

a War between the Free States and the Slave States, a War between the

North and South, for the purpose of either exterminating Slavery in

every Southern State or planting it in every Northern State. He tells

you that the safety of the Republic, that the existence of this Union,

depends upon that warfare being carried on until one Section or the

other shall be entirely subdued. The States must all be Free or Slave,

for a house divided against itself cannot stand. That is Mr. Lincoln's

argument upon that question. My friends, is it possible to preserve

Peace between the North and the South if such a doctrine shall prevail

in either Section of the Union?

"Will you ever submit to a warfare waged by the Southern States to

establish Slavery in Illinois? What man in Illinois would not lose the

last drop of his heart's blood before lie would submit to the

institution of Slavery being forced upon us by the other States against

our will? And if that be true of us, what Southern man would not shed

the last drop of his heart's blood to prevent Illinois, or any other

Northern State, from interfering to abolish Slavery in his State? Each

of these States is sovereign under the Constitution; and if we wish to

preserve our liberties, the reserved rights and sovereignty of each and

every State must be maintained. * * * The difference between Mr.

Lincoln and myself upon this point is, that he goes for a combination of

the Northern States, or the organization of a sectional political party

in the Free States, to make War on the domestic institutions of the

Southern States, and to prosecute that War until they all shall be

subdued, and made to conform to such rules as the North shall dictate to

them.

"I am aware that Mr. Lincoln, on Saturday night last, made a speech at

Chicago for the purpose, as he said, of explaining his position on this

question. * * * His answer to this point which I have been arguing,

is, that he never did mean, and that I ought to know that he never

intended to convey the idea, that he wished the people of

the Free States to enter into the Southern States and interfere with

Slavery. Well, I never did suppose that he ever dreamed of entering

into Kentucky, to make War upon her institutions, nor will any

Abolitionist ever enter into Kentucky to wage such War. Their mode of

making War is not to enter into those States where Slavery exists, and

there interfere, and render themselves responsible for the consequences.

Oh, no! They stand on this side of the Ohio River and shoot across.

They stand in Bloomington and shake their fists at the people of

Lexington; they threaten South Carolina from Chicago. And they call

that bravery! But they are very particular, as Mr. Lincoln says, not to

enter into those States for the purpose of interfering with the

institution of Slavery there. I am not only opposed to entering into

the Slave States, for the purpose of interfering with their

institutions, but I am opposed to a sectional agitation to control the

institutions of other States. I am opposed to organizing a sectional

party, which appeals to Northern pride, and Northern passion and

prejudice, against Southern institutions, thus stirring up ill feeling

and hot blood between brethren of the same Republic. I am opposed to

that whole system of sectional agitation, which can produce nothing but

strife, but discord, but hostility, and finally disunion. * * *

"I ask Mr. Lincoln how it is that he purposes ultimately to bring about

this uniformity in each and all the States of the Union? There is but

one possible mode which I can see, and perhaps Mr. Lincoln intends to

pursue it; that is, to introduce a proposition into the Senate to change

the Constitution of the United States in order that all the State

Legislatures may be abolished, State Sovereignty blotted out, and the

power conferred upon Congress to make local laws and establish the

domestic institutions and police regulations uniformly throughout the

United States.

"Are you prepared for such a change in the institutions of your country?

Whenever you shall have blotted out the State Sovereignties, abolished

the State Legislatures, and consolidated all the power in the Federal

Government, you will have established a Consolidated Empire as

destructive to the Liberties of the People and the Rights of the Citizen

as that of Austria, or Russia, or any other despotism that rests upon

the neck of the People. * * * There is but one possible way in which

Slavery can be abolished, and that is by leaving a State, according to

the principle of the Kansas-Nebraska Bill, perfectly free to form and

regulate its institutions in its own way. That was the principle upon

which this Republic was founded, and it is under the operation of that

principle that we have been able to preserve the Union thus far under

its operation. Slavery disappeared from New Hampshire, from Rhode

Island, from Connecticut, from New York, from New Jersey, from

Pennsylvania, from six of the twelve original Slave-holding States; and

this gradual system of emancipation went on quietly, peacefully, and

steadily, so long as we in the Free States minded our own business, and

left our neighbors alone.

"But the moment the Abolition Societies were organized throughout the

North, preaching a violent crusade against Slavery in the Southern

States, this combination necessarily caused a counter-combination in the

South, and a sectional line was drawn which was a barrier to any further

emancipation. Bear in mind that emancipation has not taken place in any

one State since the Free Soil Party was organized as a political party

in this country. Emancipation went on gradually, in State after State,

so long as the Free States were content with managing their own affairs

and leaving the South perfectly free to do as they pleased; but the

moment the North said we are powerful enough to control you of the

South, the moment the North proclaimed itself the determined master of

the South, that moment the South combined to resist the attack, and thus

sectional parties were formed and gradual emancipation ceased in all the

Slave-holding States.

"And yet Mr. Lincoln, in view of these historical facts, proposes to

keep up this sectional agitation, band all the Northern States together

in one political Party, elect a President by Northern votes alone, and

then, of course, make a Cabinet composed of Northern men, and administer

the Government by Northern men only, denying all the Southern States of

this Union any participation in the administration of affairs

whatsoever. I submit to you, my fellow-citizens, whether such a line of

policy is consistent with the peace and harmony of the Country? Can the

Union endure under such a system of policy? He has taken his position

in favor of sectional agitation and sectional warfare. I have taken

mine in favor of securing peace, harmony, and good-will among all the

States, by permitting each to mind its own business, and

discountenancing any attempt at interference on the part of one State

with the domestic concerns of the others. * * *

"Mr. Lincoln tells you that he is opposed to the decision of the Supreme

Court in the Dred Scott case. Well, suppose he is; what is he going to

do about it? * * * Why, he says he is going to appeal to Congress. Let

us see how he will appeal to Congress. He tells us that on the 8th of

March, 1820, Congress passed a law called the Missouri Compromise,

prohibiting Slavery forever in all the territory west of the Mississippi

and north of the Missouri line of thirty-six degrees and thirty minutes;

that Dred Scott, a slave in Missouri, was taken by his master to Fort

Snelling, in the present State of Minnesota, situated on the west branch

of the Mississippi River, and consequently in the Territory where

Slavery was prohibited by the Act of 1820; and that when Dred Scott

appealed for his Freedom in consequence of having been taken into that

Territory, the Supreme Court of the United States decided that Dred

Scott did not become Free by being taken into that Territory, but that

having been carried back to Missouri, was yet a Slave.

"Mr. Lincoln is going to appeal from that decision and reverse it. He

does not intend to reverse it as to Dred Scott. Oh, no! But he will

reverse it so that it shall not stand as a rule in the future. How will

he do it? He says that if he is elected to the Senate he will introduce

and pass a law just like the Missouri Compromise, prohibiting Slavery

again in all the Territories. Suppose he does re-enact the same law

which the Court has pronounced unconstitutional, will that make it

Constitutional? * * * Will it be any more valid? Will he be able to

convince the Court that the second Act is valid, when the first is

invalid and void? What good does it do to pass a second Act? Why, it

will have the effect to arraign the Supreme Court before the People, and

to bring them into all the political discussions of the Country. Will

that do any good? * * *

"The functions of Congress are to enact the Statutes, the province of

the Court is to pronounce upon their validity, and the duty of the

Executive is to carry the decision into effect when rendered by the

Court. And yet, notwithstanding the Constitution makes the decision of

the Court final in regard to the validity of an Act of Congress, Mr.

Lincoln is going to reverse that decision by passing another Act of

Congress. When he has become convinced of the Folly of the proposition,

perhaps he will resort to the same subterfuge that I have found others

of his Party resort to, which is to agitate and agitate until he can

change the Supreme Court and put other men in the places of the present

incumbents."

After ridiculing this proposition at some length, he proceeded:

"Mr. Lincoln is alarmed for fear that, under the Dred Scott decision,

Slavery will go into all the Territories of the United States. All I

have to say is that, with or without this decision, Slavery will go just

where the People want it, and not an inch further. * * * Hence, if the

People of a Territory want Slavery, they will encourage it by passing

affirmatory laws, and the necessary police regulations, patrol laws and

Slave Code; if they do not want it, they will withhold that legislation,

and, by withholding it, Slavery is as dead as if it was prohibited by a

Constitutional prohibition, especially if, in addition, their

legislation is unfriendly, as it would be if they were opposed to it."

Then, taking up what he said was "Mr. Lincoln's main objection to the

Dred Scott decision," to wit: "that that decision deprives the Negro of

the benefits of that clause of the Constitution of the United States

which entitles the citizens of each State to all the privileges and

immunities of citizens of the several States," and admitting that such

would be its effect, Mr. Douglas contended at some length that this

Government was "founded on the White basis" for the benefit of the

Whites and their posterity. He did "not believe that it was the design

or intention of the signers of the Declaration of Independence or the

frames of the Constitution to include Negroes, Indians, or other

inferior races, with White men as citizens;" nor that the former "had

any reference to Negroes, when they used the expression that all men

were created equal," nor to "any other inferior race." He held that,

"They were speaking only of the White race, and never dreamed that their

language would be construed to apply to the Negro;" and after ridiculing

the contrary view, insisted that, "The history of the Country shows that

neither the signers of the Declaration, nor the Framers of the

Constitution, ever supposed it possible that their language would be

used in an attempt to make this Nation a mixed Nation of Indians,

Negroes, Whites, and Mongrels."

The "Fathers proceeded on the White basis, making the White people the

governing race, but conceding to the Indian and Negro, and all inferior

races, all the rights and all the privileges they could enjoy consistent

with the safety of the society in which they lived. That," said he, "is

my opinion now. I told you that humanity, philanthropy, justice, and

sound policy required that we should give the Negro every right, every

privilege, every immunity consistent with the safety and welfare of the

State. The question, then, naturally arises, what are those rights and

privileges, and what is the nature and extent of them? My answer is,

that that is a question which each State and each Territory must decide

for itself. * * * I am content with that position. My friend Lincoln

is not. * * * He thinks that the Almighty made the Negro his equal and

his brother. For my part I do not consider the Negro any kin to me, nor

to any other White man; but I would still carry my humanity and my

philanthropy to the extent of giving him every privilege and every

immunity that he could enjoy, consistent with our own good."

After again referring to the principles connected with non-interference

in the domestic institutions of the States and Territories, and to the

devotion of all his energies to them "since 1850, when," said he, "I

acted side by side with the immortal Clay and the god-like Webster, in

that memorable struggle in which Whigs and Democrats united upon a

common platform of patriotism and the Constitution, throwing aside

partisan feelings in order to restore peace and harmony to a distracted

Country"--he alluded to the death-bed of Clay, and the pledges made by

himself to both Clay and Webster to devote his own life to the

vindication of the principles of that Compromise of 1850 as a means of

preserving the Union; and concluded with this appeal: "This Union can

only be preserved by maintaining the fraternal feeling between the North

and the South, the East and the West. If that good feeling can be

preserved, the Union will be as perpetual as the fame of its great

founders. It can be maintained by preserving the sovereignty of the

States, the right of each State and each Territory to settle its

domestic concerns for itself, and the duty of each to refrain from

interfering with the other in any of its local or domestic institutions.

Let that be done, and the Union will be perpetual; let that be done, and

this Republic, which began with thirteen States and which now numbers

thirty-two, which when it began, only extended from the Atlantic to the

Mississippi, but now reaches to the Pacific, may yet expand, North and

South, until it covers the whole Continent, and becomes one vast

ocean-bound Confederacy. Then, my friends, the path of duty, of honor,

of patriotism, is plain. There are a few simple principles to be

preserved. Bear in mind the dividing line between State rights and

Federal authority; let us maintain the great principles of Popular

Sovereignty, of State rights and of the Federal Union as the

Constitution has made it, and this Republic will endure forever."

On the next evening, July 17th, at Springfield, both Douglas and Lincoln

addressed separate meetings.

After covering much the same ground with regard to the history of the

Kansas-Nebraska struggle and his own attitude upon it, as he did in his

previous speech, Mr. Douglas declined to comment upon Mr. Lincoln's

intimation of a Conspiracy between Douglas, Pierce, Buchanan, and Taney

for the passage of the Nebraska Bill, the rendition of the Dred Scott

decision, and the extension of Slavery, but proceeded to dilate on the

"uniformity" issue between himself and Mr. Lincoln, in much the same

strain as before, tersely summing up with the statement that "there is a

distinct issue of principles--principles irreconcilable--between Mr.

Lincoln and myself. He goes for consolidation and uniformity in our

Government. I go for maintaining the Confederation of the Sovereign

States under the Constitution, as our fathers made it, leaving each

State at liberty to manage its own affairs and own internal

institutions."

He then ridiculed, at considerable length, Mr. Lincoln's proposed

methods of securing a reversal by the United States Supreme Court of the

Dred Scott decision--especially that of an "appeal to the People to

elect a President who will appoint judges who will reverse the Dred

Scott decision," which he characterized as "a proposition to make that

Court the corrupt, unscrupulous tool of a political party," and asked,

"when we refuse to abide by Judicial decisions, what protection is there

left for life and property? To whom shall you appeal? To mob law, to

partisan caucuses, to town meetings, to revolution? Where is the remedy

when you refuse obedience to the constituted authorities?" In other

respects the speech was largely a repetition of his Bloomington speech.

Mr. Lincoln in his speech, the same night, at Springfield, opened by

contrasting the disadvantages under which, by reason of an unfair

apportionment of State Legislative representation and otherwise, the

Republicans of Illinois labored in this fight. Among other

disadvantages--whereby he said the Republicans were forced "to fight

this battle upon principle and upon principle alone"--were those which

he said arose "out of the relative positions of the two persons who

stand before the State as candidates for the Senate."

Said he: "Senator Douglas is of world-wide renown. All the anxious

politicians of his Party, or who have been of his Party for years past,

have been looking upon him as certainly, at no distant day, to be the

President of the United States. They have seen in his round, jolly,

fruitful face, Post-offices, Land-offices, Marshalships, and Cabinet

appointments, Chargeships and Foreign Missions, bursting and sprouting

out in wonderful exuberance, ready to be laid hold of by their greedy

hands. And as they have been gazing upon this attractive picture so

long, they cannot, in the little distraction that has taken place in the

party, bring themselves to give up the charming hope; but with greedier

anxiety they rush about him, sustain him, and give him marches,

triumphal entries, and receptions, beyond what even in the days of his

highest prosperity they could have brought about in his favor. On the

contrary, nobody has ever expected me to be President. In my poor,

lean, lank face, nobody has ever seen that any cabbages were sprouting

out."

Then he described the main points of Senator Douglas's plan of campaign

as being not very numerous. "The first," he said, "is Popular

Sovereignty. The second and third are attacks upon my speech made on

the 16th of June. Out of these three points-drawing within the range of

Popular Sovereignty the question of the Lecompton Constitution--he makes

his principal assault. Upon these his successive speeches are

substantially one and the same." Touching the first point, "Popular

Sovereignty"--"the great staple" of Mr. Douglas's campaign--Mr. Lincoln

affirmed that it was "the most arrant Quixotism that was ever enacted

before a community."

He said that everybody understood that "we have not been in a

controversy about the right of a People to govern themselves in the

ordinary matters of domestic concern in the States and Territories;"

that, "in this controversy, whatever has been said has had reference to

the question of Negro Slavery;" and "hence," said he, "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."

Having cleared away the cobwebs, Mr. Lincoln proceeded:

"Does Judge Douglas, when he says that several of the past years of his

life have been devoted to the question of 'Popular Sovereignty' * * *

mean to say that he has been devoting his life to securing 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

special 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. * * * 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. * * * Nobody is opposing, or has opposed, the right of the

People when they form a State 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 * * * whether the Lecompton Constitution had been fairly formed by

the People or not. * * * 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. * * * 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 no body 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?"

After ridiculing the assumption that Judge Douglas was entitled to all

the credit for the defeat of the Lecompton Constitution in the House of

Representatives--when the defeating vote numbered 120, of which 6 were

Americans, 20 Douglas (or Anti-Lecompton) Democrats, and 94 Republicans

--and hinting that perhaps he placed "his superior claim to credit, on

the ground that he performed a good act which was never expected of

him," or "upon the ground of the parable of the lost sheep," of which it

had been said, "that there was more rejoicing over the one sheep that

was lost and had been found, than over the ninety and nine in the fold

--" he added: "The application is made by the Saviour in this parable,

thus: 'Verily, I say unto you, there is more rejoicing in Heaven over

one sinner that repenteth, than over ninety and nine just persons that

need no repentance.' And now if the Judge claims the benefit of this

parable, let him repent. Let him not come up here and say: 'I am the

only just person; and you are the ninety-nine sinners!' Repentance

before forgiveness is a provision of the Christian system, and on that

condition alone will the Republicans grant his forgiveness."

After complaining that Judge Douglas misrepresented his attitude as

indicated in his 16th of June speech at Springfield, in charging that he

invited "a War of Sections;"--that he proposed that "all the local

institutions of the different States shall become consolidated and

uniform," Mr. Lincoln denied that that speech could fairly bear such

construction.

In that speech he (Mr. L.) had simply expressed an expectation that

"either the opponents of Slavery will arrest the further spread of it,

and place it where the public mind shall rest in the belief that it is

in the course of ultimate extinction, or its advocates will push it

forward till it shall become alike lawful in all the States, old as well

as new, North as well as South." Since then, at Chicago, he had also

expressed a "wish to see the spread of Slavery arrested, and to see it

placed where the public mind shall rest in the belief that it is in the

course of ultimate extinction"--and, said he: "I said that, because I

supposed, when the public mind shall rest in that belief, we shall have

Peace on the Slavery question. I have believed--and now believe--the

public mind did rest on that belief up to the introduction of the

Nebraska Bill. Although I have ever been opposed to Slavery, so far I

rested in the hope and belief that it was in the course of ultimate

extinction. For that reason, it had been a minor question with me. I

might have been mistaken; but I had believed, and now believe, that the

whole public mind, that is, the mind of the great majority, had rested

in that belief up to the Repeal of the Missouri Compromise. But upon

that event, I became convinced that either I had been resting in a

delusion, or the institution was being placed on a new basis--a basis

for making it Perpetual, National, and Universal. Subsequent events

have greatly confirmed me in that belief.

"I believe that Bill to be the beginning of a Conspiracy for that

purpose. So believing, I have since then considered that question a

paramount one. So believing, I thought the public mind would never rest

till the power of Congress to restrict the spread of it shall again be

acknowledged and exercised on the one hand, or, on the other, all

resistance be entirely crushed out. I have expressed that opinion and I

entertain it to-night."

Having given some pieces of evidence in proof of the "tendency," he had

discovered, to the Nationalization of Slavery in these States, Mr.

Lincoln continued: "And now, as to the Judge's inference, that because I

wish to see Slavery placed in the course of ultimate extinction--placed

where our fathers originally placed it--I wish to annihilate the State

Legislatures--to force cotton to grow upon the tops of the Green

Mountains--to freeze ice in Florida--to cut lumber on the broad Illinois

prairies--that I am in favor of all these ridiculous and impossible

things! It seems to me it is a complete answer to all this, to ask if,

when Congress did have the fashion of restricting Slavery from Free

Territory; when Courts did have the fashion of deciding that taking a

Slave into a Free, Country made him Free--I say it is a sufficient

answer to ask, if any of this ridiculous nonsense, about consolidation

and uniformity, did actually follow? Who heard of any such thing,

because of the Ordinance of '87? because of the Missouri Restriction

because of the numerous Court decisions of that character?

"Now, as to the Dred Scott decision; for upon that he makes his last

point at me. He boldly takes ground in favor of that decision. This is

one-half the onslaught and one-third of the entire plan of the campaign.

I am opposed to that decision in a certain sense, but not in the sense

which he puts on it. I say that in so far as it decided in favor of

Dred Scott's master, and against Dred Scott and his family, I do not

propose to disturb or resist the decision. I never have proposed to do

any such thing. I think, that in respect for judicial authority, my

humble history would not suffer in comparison with that of Judge

Douglas. He would have the citizen conform his vote to that decision;

the member of Congress, his; the President, his use of the veto power.

He would make it a rule of political action for the People and all the

departments of the Government. I would not. By resisting it as a

political rule, I disturb no right of property, create no disorder,

excite no mobs."

After quoting from a letter of Mr. Jefferson (vol. vii., p. 177, of his

Correspondence,) in which he held that "to consider the judges as the

ultimate arbiters of all Constitutional questions," is "a very dangerous

doctrine indeed; and one which would place us under the despotism of an

Oligarchy," Mr. Lincoln continued: "Let us go a little further. You

remember we once had a National Bank. Some one owed the Bank a debt; he

was sued, and sought to avoid payment on the ground that the Bank was

unconstitutional. The case went to the Supreme Court, and therein it

was decided that the Bank was Constitutional. The whole Democratic

party revolted against that decision. General Jackson himself asserted

that he, as President, would not be bound to hold a National Bank to be

Constitutional, even though the Court had decided it to be so. He fell

in, precisely, with the view of Mr. Jefferson, and acted upon it under

his official oath, in vetoing a charter for a National Bank.

"The declaration that Congress does not possess this Constitutional

power to charter a Bank, has gone into the Democratic platform, at their

National Conventions, and was brought forward and reaffirmed in their

last Convention at Cincinnati. They have contended for that

declaration, in the very teeth of the Supreme Court, for more than a

quarter of a century. In fact, they have reduced the decision to an

absolute nullity. That decision, I repeat, is repudiated in the

Cincinnati platform; and still, as if to show that effrontery can go no

further, Judge Douglas vaunts in the very speeches in which he denounces

me for opposing the Dred Scott decision, that he stands on the

Cincinnati platform.

"Now, I wish to know what the Judge can charge upon me, with respect to

decisions of the Supreme Court, which does not lie in all its length,

breadth, and proportions, at his own door? The plain truth is simply

this: Judge Douglas is for Supreme Court decisions when he likes, and

against them when he does not like them. He is for the Dred Scott

decision because it tends to Nationalize Slavery--because it is a part

of the original combination for that object. It so happens, singularly

enough, that I never stood opposed to a decision of the Supreme Court

till this. On the contrary, I have no recollection that he was ever

particularly in favor of one till this. He never was in favor of any,

nor (I) opposed to any, till the present one, which helps to Nationalize

Slavery. Free men of Sangamon--Free men of Illinois, Free men

everywhere--judge ye between him and me, upon this issue!

"He says this Dred Scott case is a very small matter at

most--that it has no practical effect; that at best, or rather I suppose

at worst, it is but an abstraction. * * * How has the planting of

Slavery in new countries always been effected? It has now been decided

that Slavery cannot be kept out of our new Territories by any legal

means. In what do our new Territories now differ in this respect from

the old Colonies when Slavery was first planted within them?

"It was planted, as Mr. Clay once declared, and as history proves true,

by individual men in spite of the wishes of the people; the

Mother-Government refusing to prohibit it, and withholding from the

People of the Colonies the authority to prohibit it for themselves. Mr.

Clay says this was one of the great and just causes of complaint against

Great Britain by the Colonies, and the best apology we can now make for

having the institution amongst us. In that precise condition our

Nebraska politicians have at last succeeded in placing our own new

Territories; the Government will not prohibit Slavery within them, nor

allow the People to prohibit it."

Alluding to that part of Mr. Douglas's speech the previous night

touching the death-bed scene of Mr. Clay, with Mr. Douglas's promise to

devote the remainder of his life to "Popular Sovereignty"--and to his

relations with Mr. Webster--Mr. Lincoln said: "It would be amusing, if

it were not disgusting, to see how quick these Compromise breakers

administer on the political effects of their dead adversaries. If I

should be found dead to-morrow morning, nothing but my insignificance

could prevent a speech being made on my authority, before the end of

next week. It so happens that in that 'Popular Sovereignty' with which

Mr. Clay was identified, the Missouri Compromise was expressly reserved;

and it was a little singular if Mr. Clay cast his mantle upon Judge

Douglas on purpose to have that Compromise repealed. Again, the Judge

did not keep faith with Mr. Clay when he first brought in the Nebraska

Bill. He left the Missouri Compromise unrepealed, and in his report

accompanying the Bill, he told the World he did it on purpose. The

manes of Mr. Clay must have been in great agony, till thirty days later,

when 'Popular Sovereignty' stood forth in all its glory."

Touching Mr. Douglas's allegations of Mr. Lincoln's disposition to make

Negroes equal with the Whites, socially and politically, the latter

said: "My declarations upon this subject of Negro Slavery may be

misrepresented, but cannot be misunderstood. I have said that I do not

understand the Declaration (of Independence) to mean that all men were

created equal in all respects. They are not equal in color; but I

suppose that it does mean to declare that all men are equal in some

respects; they are equal in their right to 'Life, Liberty, and the

pursuit of Happiness.' Certainly the Negro is not our equal in color

--perhaps not in many other respects; still, in the right to put into his

mouth the bread that his own hands have earned, he is the equal of every

other man, White or Black. In pointing out that more has been given

you, you cannot be justified in taking away the little which has been

given him. All I ask for the Negro is that if you do not like him, let

him alone. If God gave him but little, that little let him enjoy.

"The framers of the Constitution," continued Mr. Lincoln, "found the

institution of Slavery amongst their other institutions at the time.

They found that by an effort to eradicate it, they might lose much of

what they had already gained. They were obliged to bow to the

necessity. They gave Congress power to abolish the Slave Trade at the

end of twenty years. They also prohibited it in the Territories where

it did not exist. They did what they could, and yielded to the

necessity for the rest. I also yield to all which follows from that

necessity. What I would most desire would be the separation of the

White and Black races."

Mr. Lincoln closed his speech by referring to the "New Departure" of

the Democracy--to the charge he had made, in his 16th of June speech,

touching "the existence of a Conspiracy to Perpetuate and Nationalize

Slavery"--which Mr. Douglas had not contradicted--and, said he, "on his

own tacit admission I renew that charge. I charge him with having been

a party to that Conspiracy, and to that deception, for the sole purpose

of Nationalizing Slavery."

This closed the series of preliminary speeches in the canvass. But they

only served to whet the moral and intellectual and political appetite of

the public for more. It was generally conceded that, at last, in the

person of Mr. Lincoln, the "Little Giant" had met his match.

On July 24, Mr. Lincoln opened a correspondence with Mr. Douglas,

which eventuated in an agreement between them, July 31st, for

joint-discussions, to take place at Ottawa, Freeport, Jonesboro,

Charleston, Galesburgh, Quincy, and Alton, on fixed dates in August,

September and October--at Ottawa, Mr. Douglas to open and speak one

hour, Mr. Lincoln to have an hour and a half in reply, and Mr. Douglas

to close in a half hour's speech; at Freeport, Mr. Lincoln to open and

speak for one hour, Mr. Douglas to take the next hour and a half in

reply, and Mr. Lincoln to have the next half hour to close; and so on,

alternating at each successive place, making twenty-one hours of joint

political debate.

To these absorbingly interesting discussions, vast assemblages listened

with breathless attention; and to the credit of all parties be it said,

with unparalleled decorum. The People evidently felt that the greatest

of all political principles--that of Human Liberty--was hanging on the

issue of this great political contest between intellectual giants, thus

openly waged before the World--and they accordingly rose to the dignity

and solemnity of the occasion, vindicating by their very example the

sacredness with which the Right of Free Speech should be regarded at all

times and everywhere.

CHAPTER V.

THE PRESIDENTIAL CONTEST OF 1860

THE CRISIS APPROACHING.

The immediate outcome of the remarkable joint-debate between the two

intellectual giants of Illinois was, that while the popular vote stood

124,698 for Lincoln, to 121,130 for Douglas--showing a victory for

Lincoln among the People--yet, enough Douglas-Democrats were elected to

the Legislature, when added to those of his friends in the Illinois

Senate, who had been elected two years before, and "held over," to give

him, in all, 54 members of both branches of the Legislature on joint

ballot, against 46 for Mr. Lincoln. Lincoln had carried the people, but

Douglas had secured the Senatorial prize for which they had striven--and

by that Legislative vote was elected to succeed himself in the United

States Senate. This result was trumpeted throughout the Union as a

great Douglas victory.

During the canvass of Illinois, Douglas's friends had seen to it that

nothing on their part should be wanting to secure success. What with

special car trains, and weighty deputations, and imposing processions,

and flag raisings, the inspiration of music, the booming of cannon, and

the eager shouts of an enthusiastic populace, his political journey

through Illinois had been more like a Royal Progress than anything the

Country had yet seen; and now that his reelection was accomplished, they

proposed to make the most of it--to extend, as it were, the sphere of

his triumph, or vindication, so that it would include not the State

alone, but the Nation--and thus so accentuate and enhance his

availability as a candidate for the Democratic Presidential nomination

of 1860, as to make his nomination and election to the Presidency of the

United States an almost foregone conclusion.

The programme was to raise so great a popular tidal-wave in his

interest, as would bear him irresistibly upon its crest to the White

House. Accordingly, as the idol of the Democratic popular heart,

Douglas, upon his return to the National Capital, was triumphantly

received by the chief cities of the Mississippi and the Atlantic

sea-board. Hailed as victor in the great political contest in Illinois

--upon the extended newspaper reports of which, the absorbed eyes of the

entire nation, for months, had greedily fed--Douglas was received with

much ostentation and immense enthusiasm at St. Louis, Memphis, New

Orleans, New York, Philadelphia, Baltimore and Washington. Like the

"Triumphs" decreed by Rome, in her grandest days, to the greatest of her

victorious heroes, Douglas's return was a series of magnificent popular

ovations.

In a speech made two years before this period, Mr. Lincoln, while

contrasting his own political career with that of Douglas, and modestly

describing his own as "a flat failure" had said: "With him it has been

one of splendid success. His name fills the Nation, and is not unknown

even in foreign lands. I affect no contempt for the high eminence he

has reached. So reached, that the oppressed of my species might have

shared with me in the elevation, I would rather stand on that eminence

than wear the richest crown that ever pressed a monarch's brow." And

now the star of Douglas had reached a higher altitude, nearing its

meridian splendor. He had become the popular idol of the day.

But Douglas's partial victory--if such it was--so far from settling the

public mind and public conscience, had the contrary effect. It added to

the ferment which the Pro-Slavery Oligarchists of the South--and

especially those of South Carolina--were intent upon increasing, until

so grave and serious a crisis should arrive as would, in their opinion,

furnish a justifiable pretext in the eyes of the World for the

contemplated Secession of the Slave States from the Union.

Under the inspiration of the Slave Power, and in the direct line of the

Dred Scott decision, and of the "victorious" doctrine of Senator

Douglas, which he held not inconsistent therewith, that the people of

any Territory of the United States could do as they pleased as to the

institution of Slavery within their own limits, and if they desired the

institution, they had the right by local legislation to "protect and

encourage it," the Legislature of the Territory of New Mexico at once

(1859) proceeded to enact a law "for the protection of property in

Slaves," and other measures similar to the prevailing Slave Codes in the

Southern States.

The aggressive attitude of the South--as thus evidenced anew--naturally

stirred, to their very core, the Abolition elements of the North; on the

other hand, the publication of Hinton Rowan Helper's "Impending Crisis,"

which handled the Slavery question without gloves, and supported its

views with statistics which startled the Northern mind, together with

its alleged indorsement by the leading Republicans of the North,

exasperated the fiery Southrons to an intense degree. Nor was the

capture, in October, 1859, of Harper's Ferry, Virginia, by John Brown

and his handful of Northern Abolitionist followers, and his subsequent

execution in Virginia, calculated to allay the rapidly intensifying

feeling between the Freedom-loving North and the Slaveholding South.

When, therefore, the Congress met, in December, 1859, the sectional

wrath of the Country was reflected in the proceedings of both branches

of that body, and these again reacted upon the People of both the

Northern and Southern States, until the fires of Slavery Agitation were

stirred to a white heat.

The bitterness of feeling in the House at this time, was shown, in part,

by the fact that not until the 1st of February, 1860, was it able, upon

a forty-fourth ballot, to organize by the election of a Speaker, and

that from the day of its meeting on the 5th of December, 1859, up to

such organization, it was involved in an incessant and stormy wrangle

upon the Slavery question.

So also in the Democratic Senate, the split in the Democratic Party,

between the Lecompton and Anti-Lecompton Democracy, was widened, at the

same time that the Republicans of the North were further irritated, by

the significantly decisive passage of a series of resolutions proposed

by Jefferson Davis, which, on the one hand, purposely and deliberately

knifed Douglas's "Popular Sovereignty" doctrine and read out of the

Party all who believed in it, by declaring "That neither Congress nor a

Territorial Legislature, whether by direct legislation, or legislation

of an indirect and unfriendly character, possesses power to annul or

impair the Constitutional right of any citizen of the United States to

take his Slave-property into the common Territories, and there hold and

enjoy the same while the Territorial condition remains," and, on the

other, purposely and deliberately slapped in the face the Republicans of

the North, by declaring-among other things "That in the adoption of the

Federal Constitution, the States adopting the same, acted severally as

Free and Independent sovereignties, delegating a portion of their powers

to be exercised by the Federal Government for the increased security of

each against dangers, domestic as well as foreign; and that any

intermeddling by any one or more States or by a combination of their

citizens, with the domestic institutions of the others, on any pretext

whatever, political, moral, or religious, with a view to their

disturbance or subversion, is in violation of the Constitution,

insulting to the States so interfered with, endangers their domestic

peace and tranquillity--objects for which the Constitution was formed

--and, by necessary consequence, tends to weaken and destroy the Union

itself."

Another of these resolutions declared Negro Slavery to be recognized in

the Constitution, and that all "open or covert attacks thereon with a

view to its overthrow," made either by the Non-Slave-holding States or

their citizens, violated the pledges of the Constitution, "are a

manifest breach of faith, and a violation of the most solemn

obligations."

This last was intended as a blow at the Freedom of Speech and of the

Press in the North; and only served, as was doubtless intended, to still

more inflame Northern public feeling, while at the same time endeavoring

to place the arrogant and aggressive Slave Power in an attitude of

injured innocence. In short, the time of both Houses of Congress was

almost entirely consumed during the Session of 1859-60 in the heated,

and sometimes even furious, discussion of the Slavery question; and

everywhere, North and South, the public mind was not alone deeply

agitated, but apprehensive that the Union was founded not upon a rock,

but upon the crater of a volcano, whose long-smouldering energies might

at any moment burst their confines, and reduce it to ruin and

desolation.

On the 23rd of April, 1860, the Democratic National Convention met at

Charleston, South Carolina. It was several days after the permanent

organization of the Convention before the Committee on Resolutions

reported to the main body, and not until the 30th of April did it reach

a vote upon the various reports, which had in the meantime been

modified. The propositions voted upon were three:

First, The Majority Report of the Committee, which reaffirmed the

Cincinnati platform of 1856--with certain "explanatory" resolutions

added, which boldly proclaimed: That the Government of a Territory

organized by an Act of Congress, is provisional and temporary; and,

during its existence, all citizens of the United States have an equal

right to settle with their property in the Territory, without their

rights, either of person or property, being destroyed or impaired by

Congressional or Territorial Legislation;" that "it is the duty of the

Federal Government, in all its departments, to protect, when necessary,

the rights of persons and property in the Territories, and wherever else

its Constitutional authority extends;" that "when the settlers in a

Territory, having an adequate population, form a State Constitution, the

right of Sovereignty commences, and, being consummated by admission into

the Union, they stand on an equal footing with the people of other

States, and the State thus organized ought to be admitted into the

Federal Union, whether its Constitution prohibits or recognizes the

institution of Slavery;" and that "the enactments of State Legislatures

to defeat the faithful execution of the Fugitive Slave Law, are hostile

in character, subversive of the Constitution, and revolutionary in

effect." The resolutions also included a declaration in favor of the

acquisition of Cuba, and other comparatively minor matters.

Second, The Minority Report of the Committee, which, after re-affirming

the Cincinnati platform, declared that "Inasmuch as differences of

opinion exist in the Democratic party as to the nature and extent of the

powers of a Territorial Legislature, and as to the powers and duties of

Congress, under the Constitution of the United States, over the

institution of Slavery within the Territories * * * the Democratic Party

will abide by the decisions of the Supreme Court of the United States on

the questions of Constitutional law."

Third, The recommendation of Benjamin F. Butler, that the platform

should consist simply of a re-affirmation of the Cincinnati platform,

and not another word.

The last proposition was first voted on, and lost, by 105 yeas to 198

nays. The Minority platform was then adopted by 165 yeas to 138 nays.

The aggressive Slave-holders (Majority) platform, and the Butler

Compromise do-nothing proposition, being both defeated, and the Douglas

(Minority) platform adopted, the Alabama delegation, under instructions

from their State Convention to withdraw in case the National Convention

refused to adopt radical Territorial Pro-Slavery resolutions, at once

presented a written protest and withdrew from the Convention, and were

followed, in rapid succession, by; the delegates from Mississippi,

Louisiana (all but two), South Carolina, Florida, Texas, Arkansas (in

part), Delaware (mostly), and Georgia (mostly)--the seceding delegates

afterwards organizing in another Hall, adopting the above Majority

platform, and after a four days' sitting, adjourning to meet at

Richmond, Virginia, on the 11th of June.

Meanwhile, the Regular Democratic National Convention had proceeded to

ballot for President--after adopting the two-thirds rule. Thirty-seven

ballots having been cast, that for Stephen A. Douglas being, on the

thirty-seventh, 151, the Convention, on the 3d of May, adjourned to meet

again at Baltimore, June 18th.

After re-assembling, and settling contested election cases, the

delegates (in whole or in part) from Virginia, North Carolina,

Tennessee, California, Delaware, Kentucky, Maryland and Massachusetts,

withdrew from the Convention, the latter upon the ground mainly that

there had been "a withdrawal, in part, of a majority of the States,"

while Butler, who had voted steadily for Jefferson Davis throughout all

the balloting at Charleston, gave as an additional ground personal to

himself, that "I will not sit in a convention where the African Slave

Trade--which is piracy by the laws of my Country--is approvingly

advocated"--referring thereby to a speech, that had been much applauded

by the Convention at Charleston, made by a Georgia delegate (Gaulden),

in which that delegate had said: "I would ask my friends of the South to

come up in a proper spirit; ask our Northern friends to give us all our

rights, and take off the ruthless restrictions which cut off the supply

of Slaves from foreign lands. * * * I tell you, fellow Democrats, that

the African Slave Trader is the true Union man (cheers and laughter). I

tell you that the Slave Trading of Virginia is more immoral, more

unchristian in every possible point of view, than that African Slave

Trade which goes to Africa and brings a heathen and worthless man here,

makes him a useful man, Christianizes him, and sends him and his

posterity down the stream of Time, to enjoy the blessings of

civilization. (Cheers and laughter.) * * * I come from the first

Congressional District of Georgia. I represent the African Slave Trade

interest of that Section. (Applause.) I am proud of the position I

occupy in that respect. I believe that the African Slave Trader is a

true missionary, and a true Christian. (Applause.) * * * Are you

prepared to go back to first principles, and take off your

unconstitutional restrictions, and leave this question to be settled by

each State? Now, do this, fellow citizens, and you will have Peace in

the Country. * * * I advocate the repeal of the laws prohibiting the

African Slave Trade, because I believe it to be the true Union movement.

* * * I believe that by re-opening this Trade and giving us Negroes to

populate the Territories, the equilibrium of the two Sections will be

maintained."

After the withdrawal of the bolting delegates at Baltimore, the

Convention proceeded to ballot for President, and at the end of the

second ballot, Mr. Douglas having received "two-thirds of all votes

given in the Convention" (183) was declared the "regular nominee of the

Democratic Party, for the office of President of the United States."

An additional resolution was subsequently adopted as a part of the

platform, declaring that "it is in accordance with the true

interpretation of the Cincinnati platform, that, during the existence of

the Territorial Governments, the measure of restriction, whatever it may

be, imposed by the Federal Constitution on the power of the Territorial

Legislatures over the subject of the domestic relations, as the same has

been, or shall hereafter be, finally determined by the Supreme Court of

the United States, should be respected by all good citizens, and

enforced with promptness and fidelity by every branch of the General

Government."

On the 11th of June, pursuant to adjournment, the Democratic Bolters'

Convention met at Richmond, and, after adjourning to meet at Baltimore,

finally met there on the 28th of that month--twenty-one States being, in

whole or in part, represented. This Convention unanimously readopted

the Southern-wing platform it had previously adopted at Charleston, and,

upon the first ballot, chose, without dissent, John C. Breckinridge of

Kentucky, as its candidate for the Presidential office.

In the meantime, however, the National Conventions of other Parties had

been held, viz.: that of the Republican Party at Chicago, which, with a

session of three days, May 16-18, had nominated Abraham Lincoln of

Illinois and Hannibal Hamlin of Maine, for President and Vice-President

respectively; and that of the "Constitutional Union" (or Native

American) Party which had severally nominated (May 19) for such

positions, John Bell of Tennessee, and Edward Everett of Massachusetts.

The material portion of the Republican National platform, adopted with

entire unanimity by their Convention, was, so far as the Slavery and

Disunion questions were concerned, comprised in these declarations:

First, That the history of the nation, during the last four years, has

fully established the propriety and necessity of the organization and

perpetuation of the Republican Party; and that the causes which called

it into existence are permanent in their nature, and now, more than ever

before, demand its peaceful and Constitutional triumph.

Second, That the maintenance of the principle, promulgated in the

Declaration of Independence, and embodied in the Federal Constitution,

"that all men are created equal; that they are endowed by their Creator

with certain inalienable rights; that among these are Life, Liberty and

the pursuit of Happiness; that to secure these rights, governments are

instituted among men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the

governed," is essential to the preservation of our Republican

institutions; and that the Federal Constitution, the Rights of the

States, and the Union of the States must and shall be preserved.

Third, That to the Union of the States, this Nation owes its

unprecedented increase in population, its surprising development of

material resources, its rapid augmentation of wealth, its happiness at

home, and its honor abroad; and we hold in abhorrence all schemes for

Disunion, come from whatever source they may: And we congratulate the

Country that no Republican member of Congress has uttered or

countenanced the threats of Disunion, so often made by Democratic

members, without rebuke, and with applause, from their political

associates; and we denounce those threats of Disunion, in case of a

popular overthrow of their ascendancy, as denying the vital principles

of a free Government, and as an avowal of contemplated Treason, which it

is the imperative duty of an indignant People, sternly to rebuke and

forever silence.

Fourth, That the maintenance inviolate of the rights of the States, and

especially the right of each State, to order and control its own

domestic institutions according to its own judgment exclusively, is

essential to that balance of powers on which the perfection and

endurance of our political fabric depend; and we denounce the lawless

invasion, by armed force, of any State or Territory, no matter under

what pretext, as among the gravest of crimes.

Fifth, That the present Democratic Administration has far exceeded our

worst apprehensions, in its measureless subserviency to the exactions of

a Sectional interest, as especially evinced in its desperate exertions

to force the infamous Lecompton Constitution upon the protesting people

of Kansas; in construing the personal relation between master and

servant to involve an unqualified property in persons; in its attempted

enforcement, everywhere, on land and sea, through the intervention of

Congress and of the Federal Courts, of the extreme pretensions of a

purely local interest; and in its general and unvarying abuse of the

power intrusted to it by a confiding People.

* * * * * * *

Seventh, That the new dogma that the Constitution, of its own force,

carries Slavery into any or all of the Territories of the United States,

is a dangerous political heresy, at variance with the explicit

provisions of that instrument itself, with contemporaneous exposition,

and with legislation and judicial precedent; is revolutionary in its

tendency and subversive of the peace and harmony of the Country.

Eighth, That the normal condition of all the territory of the United

States is that of Freedom; that as our Republican fathers, when they had

abolished Slavery in all our National Territory, ordained that "No

person should be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due

process of law," it becomes our duty, by legislation, whenever such

legislation is necessary, to maintain this provision of the Constitution

against all attempts to violate it; and we deny the authority of

Congress, of a Territorial Legislature, or of any individuals, to give

legal existence to Slavery in any Territory of the United States.

Ninth, That we brand the recent re-opening of the African Slave-trade

under the cover of our National flag, aided by perversions of judicial

power, as a crime against humanity and a burning shame to our Country

and Age; and we call upon Congress to take prompt and efficient measures

for the total and final suppression of that execrable traffic.

Tenth, That in the recent vetoes, by their Federal Governors, of the

acts of the Legislatures of Kansas and Nebraska, prohibiting Slavery in

those Territories, we find a practical illustration of the boasted

Democratic principle of Non-Intervention and Popular Sovereignty

embodied in the Kansas-Nebraska Bill, and a demonstration of the

deception and fraud involved therein.

Eleventh, That Kansas should, of right, be immediately admitted as a

State, under the Constitution recently formed and adopted by the House

of Representatives.

* * * * * * * * * *

The National platform of the "Constitutional Union" Party, was adopted,

unanimously, in these words:

"Whereas, experience has demonstrated that platforms adopted by the

partisan Conventions of the Country have had the effect to mislead and

deceive the People, and at the same time to widen the political

divisions of the Country, by the creation and encouragement of

geographical and Sectional parties; therefore,

"Resolved, That it is both the part of patriotism and of

duty to recognize no political principle other than the Constitution of

the Country, the Union of the States, and the Enforcement of the Laws,

and that, as representatives of the Constitutional Union men of the

Country, in National Convention assembled, we hereby pledge ourselves to

maintain, protect, and defend, separately and unitedly, these great

principles of public liberty and national safety, against all enemies,

at home and abroad; believing that thereby peace may once more be

restored to the Country, the rights of the people and of the States

re-established, and the Government again placed in that condition of

justice, fraternity, and equality which, under the example and

Constitution of our fathers, has solemnly bound every citizen of the

United States to maintain a more perfect Union, establish justice,

insure domestic tranquillity, provide for the common defense, promote

the general welfare, and secure the blessings of liberty to ourselves

and our posterity."

Thus, by the last of June, 1860, the four National Parties with their

platforms and candidates were all in the political field prepared for

the onset.

Briefly, the attitude of the standard-bearers representing the

platform-principles of their several Parties, was this:

Lincoln, representing the Republicans, held that Slavery is a wrong, to

be tolerated in the States where it exists, but which must be excluded

from the Territories, which are all normally Free and must be kept Free

by Congressional legislation, if necessary; and that neither Congress,

nor the Territorial Legislature, nor any individual, has power to give

to it legal existence in such Territories.

Breckinridge, representing the Pro-Slavery wing of the Democracy, held

that Slavery is a right, which, when transplanted from the Slave-States

into the Territories, neither Congressional nor Territorial legislation

can destroy or impair, but which, on the contrary, must, when necessary,

be protected everywhere by Congress and all other departments of the

Government.

Douglas, representing the Anti-Lecompton wing of Democracy, held that

whether Slavery be right or wrong, the white inhabitants of the

Territories have the sole right to determine whether it shall or shall

not exist within their respective limits, subject to the Constitution

and Supreme Court decisions thereon; and that neither Congress nor any

State, nor any outside persons, must interfere with that right.

Bell, representing the remaining political elements, held that it was

all wrong to have any principles at all, except "the Constitution of the

Country, the Union of the States, and the Enforcement of the Laws"--a

platform which Horace Greeley well described as "meaning anything in

general, and nothing in particular."

The canvass that ensued was terribly exciting--Douglas alone, of all the

Presidential candidates, bravely taking the field, both North and South,

in person, in the hope that the magnetism of his personal presence and

powerful intellect might win what, from the start--owing to the adverse

machinations, in the Northern States, of the Administration or

Breckinridge-Democratic wing--seemed an almost hopeless fight. In the

South, the Democracy was almost a unit in opposition to Douglas,

holding, as they did, that "Douglas Free-Soilism" was "far more

dangerous to the South than the election of Lincoln; because it seeks to

create a Free-Soil Party there; while, if Lincoln triumphs, the result

cannot fail to be a South united in her own defense;" while the old Whig

element of the South was as unitedly for Bell. In the North, the

Democracy were split in twain, three-fourths of them upholding Douglas,

and the balance, powerful beyond their numbers in the possession of

Federal Offices, bitterly hostile to him, and anxious to beat him, even

at the expense of securing the election of Lincoln.

Douglas's fight was that the candidacy and platform of Bell were

meaningless, those of both Lincoln and Breckinridge, Sectional, and that

he alone bore aloft the standard of the entire Union; while, on the

other hand, the supporters of Lincoln, his chief antagonist, claimed

that--as the burden of the song from the lips of Douglas men, Bell men,

and Breckinridge men alike, was the expression of a "fear that," in the

language of Mr. Seward, "if the people elected Mr. Lincoln to the

Presidency, they would wake up and find that they had no Country for him

to preside over"--"therefore, all three of the parties opposing Mr.

Lincoln were in the same boat, and hence the only true Union party, was

the party which made no threats of Disunion, to wit, the Republican

party."

The October elections of 1860 made it plain that Mr. Lincoln would be

elected. South Carolina began to "feel good" over the almost certainty

that the pretext for Secession for which her leaders had been hoping in

vain for thirty years, was at hand. On the 25th of October, at Augusta,

South Carolina, the Governor, the Congressional delegation, and other

leading South Carolinians, met, and decided that in the event of Mr.

Lincoln's election, that State would secede. Similar meetings, to the

same end, were also held about the same time, in others of the Southern

States. On the 5th of November--the day before the Presidential

election--the Legislature of South Carolina met at the special call of

Governor Gist, and, having organized, received a Message from the

Governor, in which, after stating that he had convened that Body in

order that they might on the morrow "appoint the number of electors of

President and Vice-President to which this State is entitled," he

proceeded to suggest "that the Legislature remain in session, and take

such action as will prepare the State for any emergency that may arise."

He went on to "earnestly recommend that, in the event of Abraham

Lincoln's election to the Presidency, a Convention of the people of this

State be immediately called, to consider and determine for themselves

the mode and measure of redress," and, he continued: "I am constrained

to say that the only alternative left, in my judgment, is the Secession

of South Carolina from the Federal Union. The indications from many of

the Southern States justify the conclusion that the Secession of South

Carolina will be immediately followed, if not adopted simultaneously, by

them, and ultimately by the entire South. The long-desired cooperation

of the other States having similar institutions, for which so many of

our citizens have been waiting, seems to be near at hand; and, if we are

true to ourselves, will soon be realized. The State has, with great

unanimity declared that she has the right peaceably to Secede, and no

power on earth can rightfully prevent it."

[Referring to the Ordinance of Nullification adopted by the people

of South Carolina, November 24, 1832, growing out of the Tariff Act

of 1832--wherein it was declared that, in the event of the Federal

Government undertaking to enforce the provisions of that Act: "The

people of this State will thenceforth hold themselves absolved from

all further obligation to maintain or preserve their political

connection with the people of the other States, and will forthwith

proceed to organize a separate government, and do all other acts

and things which Sovereign and independent States may of right

do."]

He proceeded to say that "If, in the exercise of arbitrary power, and

forgetful of the lessons of history, the Government of the United States

should attempt coercion, it will become our solemn duty to meet force by

force"--and promised that the decision of the aforesaid Convention

"representing the Sovereignty of the State, and amenable to no earthly

tribunal," should be, by him, "carried out to the letter." He

recommended the thorough reorganization of the Militia; the arming of

every man in the State between the ages of eighteen and forty-five; and

the immediate enrollment of ten thousand volunteers officered by

themselves; and concluded with a confident "appeal to the Disposer of

all human events," in whose keeping the "Cause" was to be entrusted.

That same evening (November 5), being the eve of the election, at

Augusta, South Carolina, in response to a serenade, United States

Senator Chestnut made a speech of like import, in which, after

predicting the election of Mr. Lincoln, he said: "Would the South submit

to a Black Republican President, and a Black Republican Congress, which

will claim the right to construe the Constitution of the Country, and

administer the Government in their own hands, not by the law of the

instrument itself, nor by that of the fathers of the Country, nor by the

practices of those who administered seventy years ago, but by rules

drawn from their own blind consciences and crazy brains? * * * The

People now must choose whether they would be governed by enemies, or

govern themselves."

He declared that the Secession of South Carolina was an "undoubted

right," a "duty," and their "only safety" and as to himself, he would

"unfurl the Palmetto flag, fling it to the breeze, and, with the spirit

of a brave man, live and die as became" his "glorious ancestors, and

ring the clarion notes of defiance in the ears of an insolent foe!"

So also, in Columbia, South Carolina, Representative Boyce of that

State, and other prominent politicians, harangued an enthusiastic crowd

that night--Mr. Boyce declaring: "I think the only policy for us is to

arm, as soon as we receive authentic intelligence of the election of

Lincoln. It is for South Carolina, in the quickest manner, and by the

most direct means, to withdraw from the Union. Then we will not submit,

whether the other Southern States will act with us or with our enemies.

They cannot take sides with our enemies; they must take sides with us.

When an ancient philosopher wished to inaugurate a great revolution, his

motto was to dare! to dare!"