按键盘上方向键 ← 或 → 可快速上下翻页，按键盘上的 Enter 键可回到本书目录页，按键盘上方向键 ↑ 可回到本页顶部！
————未阅读完？加入书签已便下次继续阅读！
abused for mentioning。 The two ideas conflict； and must conflict。
Again； in its political aspect； does anything in any way endanger the
perpetuity of this Union but that single thing； slavery？ Many of our
adversaries are anxious to claim that they are specially devoted to
the Union； and take pains to charge upon us hostility to the Union。
Now we claim that we are the only true Union men； and we put to them
this one proposition： Whatever endangers this Union； save and except
slavery？ Did any other thing ever cause a moment's fear？ All men
must agree that this thing alone has ever endangered the perpetuity
of the Union。 But if it was threatened by any other influence； would
not all men say that the best thing that could be done； if we could
not or ought not to destroy it； would be at least to keep it from
growing any larger？ Can any man believe； that the way to save the
Union is to extend and increase the only thing that threatens the
Union； and to suffer it to grow bigger and bigger？
Whenever this question shall be settled； it must be settled on some
philosophical basis。 No policy that does not rest upon some
philosophical opinion can be permanently maintained。 And hence there
are but two policies in regard to slavery that can be at all
maintained。 The first； based on the property view that slavery is
right； conforms to that idea throughout； and demands that we shall do
everything for it that we ought to do if it were right。 We must
sweep away all opposition； for opposition to the right is wrong； we
must agree that slavery is right； and we must adopt the idea that
property has persuaded the owner to believe that slavery is morally
right and socially elevating。 This gives a philosophical basis for a
permanent policy of encouragement。
The other policy is one that squares with the idea that slavery is
wrong； and it consists in doing everything that we ought to do if it
is wrong。 Now； I don't wish to be misunderstood； nor to leave a gap
down to be misrepresented； even。 I don't mean that we ought to
attack it where it exists。 To me it seems that if we were to form a
government anew； in view of the actual presence of slavery we should
find it necessary to frame just such a government as our fathers did…
…giving to the slaveholder the entire control where the system was
established； while we possessed the power to restrain it from going
outside those limits。 From the necessities of the case we should be
compelled to form just such a government as our blessed fathers gave
us； and； surely； if they have so made it； that adds another reason
why we should let slavery alone where it exists。
If I saw a venomous snake crawling in the road； any man would say I
might seize the nearest stick and kill it； but if I found that snake
in bed with my children； that would be another question。 I might
hurt the children more than the snake； and it might bite them。 Much
more if I found it in bed with my neighbor's children； and I had
bound myself by a solemn compact not to meddle with his children
under any circumstances； it would become me to let that particular
mode of getting rid of the gentleman alone。 But if there was a bed
newly made up； to which the children were to be taken； and it was
proposed to take a batch of young snakes and put them there with
them； I take it no man would say there was any question how I ought
to decide！
That is just the case。 The new Territories are the newly made bed to
which our children are to go； and it lies with the nation to say
whether they shall have snakes mixed up with them or not。 It does
not seem as if there could be much hesitation what our policy should
be！
Now I have spoken of a policy based on the idea that slavery is
wrong； and a policy based on the idea that it is right。 But an
effort has been made for a policy that shall treat it as neither
right nor wrong。 It is based upon utter indifference。 Its leading
advocate ＇Douglas＇ has said； 〃I don't care whether it be voted up or
down。〃 〃It is merely a matter of dollars and cents。〃 〃The Almighty
has drawn a line across this continent； on one side of which all soil
must forever be cultivated by slave labor； and on the other by free。〃
〃When the struggle is between the white man and the negro； I am for
the white man； when it is between the negro and the crocodile； I am
for the negro。〃 Its central idea is indifference。 It holds that it
makes no more difference to us whether the Territories become free or
slave States than whether my neighbor stocks his farm with horned
cattle or puts in tobacco。 All recognize this policy； the plausible
sugar…coated name of which is 〃popular sovereignty。〃
This policy chiefly stands in the way of a permanent settlement of
the question。 I believe there is no danger of its becoming the
permanent policy of the country； for it is based on a public
indifference。 There is nobody that 〃don't care。〃 All the people do
care one way or the other！ I do not charge that its author； when he
says he 〃don't care；〃 states his individual opinion； he only
expresses his policy for the government。 I understand that he has
never said as an individual whether he thought slavery right or
wrongand he is the only man in the nation that has not！ Now such a
policy may have a temporary run； it may spring up as necessary to the
political prospects of some gentleman； but it is utterly baseless：
the people are not indifferent； and it can therefore have no
durability or permanence。
But suppose it could： Then it could be maintained only by a public
opinion that shall say； 〃We don't care。〃 There must be a change in
public opinion； the public mind must be so far debauched as to square
with this policy of caring not at all。 The people must come to
consider this as 〃merely a question of dollars and cents；〃 and to
believe that in some places the Almighty has made slavery necessarily
eternal。 This policy can be brought to prevail if the people can be
brought round to say honestly； 〃We don't care〃； if not； it can never
be maintained。 It is for you to say whether that can be done。
You are ready to say it cannot； but be not too fast！ Remember what a
long stride has been taken since the repeal of the Missouri
Compromise！ Do you know of any Democrat； of either branch of the
partydo you know one who declares that he believes that the
Declaration of Independence has any application to the negro？ Judge
Taney declares that it has not； and Judge Douglas even vilifies me
personally and scolds me roundly for saying that the Declaration
applies to all men； and that negroes are men。 Is there a Democrat
here who does not deny that the Declaration applies to the negro？ Do
any of you know of one？ Well； I have tried before perhaps fifty
audiences； some larger and some smaller than this； to find one such
Democrat； and never yet have I found one who said I did not place him
right in that。 I must assume that Democrats hold that； and now； not
one of these Democrats can show that he said that five years ago！ I
venture to defy the whole party to produce one man that ever uttered
the belief that the Declaration did not apply to negroes； before the
repeal of the Missouri Compromise！ Four or five years ago we all
thought negroes were men； and that when 〃all men〃 were named； negroes
were included。 But the whole Democratic party has deliberately taken
negroes from the class of men and put them in the class of brutes。
Turn it as you will it is simply the truth！ Don't be too hasty； then；
in saying that the people cannot be brought to this new doctrine； but
note that long stride。 One more as long completes the journey from
where negroes are estimated as men to where they are estimated as
mere brutesas rightful property！
That saying 〃In the struggle between white men and the negro；〃 etc。；
which I know came from the same source as this policythat saying
marks another step。 There is a falsehood wrapped up in that
statement。 〃In the struggle between the white man and the negro〃
assumes that there is a struggle； in which either the white man must
enslave the negro or the negro must enslave the white。 There is no
such struggle！ It is merely the ingenious falsehood to degrade and
brutalize the negro。 Let each let the other alone； and there is no
struggle about it。 If it was like two wrecked seamen on a narrow
plank； when each must push the other off or drown himself； I would
push the negro off or a white man either； but it is not； the plank is
large enough for both。 This good earth is plenty broad enough for
white man and negro both； and there is no need of either pushing the
other off。
So that saying； 〃In the struggle between the negro and the
crocodile；〃 etc。； is made up from the idea that down where the
crocodile inhabits； a white man can't labor； it must be nothing else
but crocodile or negro； if the negro does not the crocodile must