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！
more likely to come off than it is。 And if this fight should
begin； is it likely to take a very peaceful； Union…saving turn？
Will not the first drop of blood so shed be the real knell of the
Union？
The Missouri Compromise ought to be restored。 For the sake of
the Union； it ought to be restored。 We ought to elect a House of
Representatives which will vote its restoration。 If by any means
we omit to do this； what follows？ Slavery may or may not be
established in Nebraska。 But whether it be or not； we shall have
repudiateddiscarded from the councils of the nationthe spirit
of compromise； for who； after this； will ever trust in a national
compromise？ The spirit of mutual concessionthat spirit which
first gave us the Constitution； and which has thrice saved the
Unionwe shall have strangled and cast from us forever。 And
what shall we have in lieu of it？ The South flushed with triumph
and tempted to excess； the North； betrayed as they believe；
brooding on wrong and burning for revenge。 One side will
provoke； the other resent。 The one will taunt； the other defy；
one aggresses； the other retaliates。 Already a few in the North
defy all constitutional restraints； resist the execution of the
Fugitive Slave law； and even menace the institution of slavery in
the States where it exists。 Already a few in the South claim the
constitutional right to take and to hold slaves in the free
States； demand the revival of the slave trade； and demand a
treaty with Great Britain by which fugitive slaves may be
reclaimed from Canada。 As yet they are but few on either side。
It is a grave question for lovers of the union whether the final
destruction of the Missouri Compromise； and with it the spirit of
all compromise； will or will not embolden and embitter each of
these； and fatally increase the number of both。
But restore the compromise； and what then？ We thereby restore
the national faith； the national confidence； the national feeling
of brotherhood。 We thereby reinstate the spirit of concession
and compromise； that spirit which has never failed us in past
perils； and which may be safely trusted for all the future。 The
South ought to join in doing this。 The peace of the nation is as
dear to them as to us。 In memories of the past and hopes of the
future； they share as largely as we。 It would be on their part a
great actgreat in its spirit； and great in its effect。 It
would be worth to the nation a hundred years purchase of peace
and prosperity。 And what of sacrifice would they make？ They
only surrender to us what they gave us for a consideration long；
long ago； what they have not now asked for； struggled or cared
for； what has been thrust upon them； not less to their
astonishment than to ours。
But it is said we cannot restore it； that though we elect every
member of the lower House； the Senate is still against us。 It is
quite true that of the senators who passed the Nebraska Bill a
majority of the whole Senate will retain their seats in spite of
the elections of this and the next year。 But if at these
elections their several constituencies shall clearly express
their will against Nebraska； will these senators disregard their
will？ Will they neither obey nor make room for those who will？
But even if we fail to technically restore the compromise； it is
still a great point to carry a popular vote in favor of the
restoration。 The moral weight of such a vote cannot be estimated
too highly。 The authors of Nebraska are not at all satisfied
with the destruction of the compromisean indorsement of this
principle they proclaim to be the great object。 With them；
Nebraska alone is a small matterto establish a principle for
future use is what they particularly desire。
The future use is to be the planting of slavery wherever in the
wide world local and unorganized opposition cannot prevent it。
Now； if you wish to give them this indorsement； if you wish to
establish this principle； do so。 I shall regret it； but it is
your right。 On the contrary； if you are opposed to the
principle；intend to give it no such indorsement； let no
wheedling； no sophistry； divert you from throwing a direct vote
against it。
Some men； mostly Whigs； who condemn the repeal of the Missouri
Compromise； nevertheless hesitate to go for its restoration； lest
they be thrown in company with the abolitionists。 Will they
allow me； as an old Whig； to tell them； good…humoredly； that I
think this is very silly？ Stand with anybody that stands right。
Stand with him while he is right； and part with him when he goes
wrong。 Stand with the abolitionist in restoring the Missouri
Compromise； and stand against him when he attempts to repeal the
Fugitive Slave law。 In the latter case you stand with the
Southern disunionist。 What of that？ You are still right。 In
both cases you are right。 In both cases you oppose the dangerous
extremes。 In both you stand on middle ground； and hold the
ship level and steady。 In both you are national； and nothing
less than national。 This is the good old Whig ground。 To desert
such ground because of any company is to be less than a Whig
less than a manless than an American。
I particularly object to the new position which the avowed
principle of this Nebraska law gives to slavery in the body
politic。 I object to it because it assumes that there can be
moral right in the enslaving of one man by another。 I object to
it as a dangerous dalliance for a free peoplea sad evidence
that； feeling prosperity； we forget right； that liberty； as a
principle； we have ceased to revere。 I object to it because the
fathers of the republic eschewed and rejected it。 The argument
of 〃necessity〃 was the only argument they ever admitted in favor
of slavery； and so far； and so far only； as it carried them did
they ever go。 They found the institution existing among us；
which they could not help； and they cast blame upon the British
king for having permitted its introduction。
The royally appointed Governor of Georgia in the early 1700's was
threatened by the King with removal if he continued to oppose
slavery in his colonyat that time the King of England made a
small profit on every slave imported to the colonies。 The later
British criticism of the United States for not eradicating
slavery in the early 1800's； combined with their tacit support of
the 'Confederacy' during the Civil War is a prime example of the
irony and hypocracy of politics： that self…interest will ever
overpower right。
Before the Constitution they prohibited its introduction into the
Northwestern Territory； the only country we owned then free from
it。 At the framing and adoption of the Constitution； they
forbore to so much as mention the word 〃slave〃 or 〃slavery〃 in
the whole instrument。 In the provision for the recovery of
fugitives； the slave is spoken of as a 〃person held to service or
labor。〃 In that prohibiting the abolition of