贝壳电子书 > 英文原著电子书 > the writings-5 >

第34章

the writings-5-第34章

小说: the writings-5 字数: 每页4000字

按键盘上方向键 ← 或 → 可快速上下翻页,按键盘上的 Enter 键可回到本书目录页,按键盘上方向键 ↑ 可回到本页顶部!
————未阅读完?加入书签已便下次继续阅读!






Perhaps you will plead that if the people of the slave States should

themselves set on foot an effort for emancipation; you would wish

them success; and bid them God…speed。  Let us test that: In 1858 the

emancipation party of Missouri; with Frank Blair at their head; tried

to get up a movement for that purpose; and having started a party

contested the State。  Blair was beaten; apparently if not truly; and

when the news came to Connecticut; you; who knew that Frank Blair was

taking hold of this thing by the right end; and doing the only thing

that you say can properly be done to remove this wrongdid you bow

your heads in sorrow because of that defeat? Do you; any of you; know

one single Democrat that showed sorrow over that result? Not one! On

the contrary every man threw up his hat; and hallooed at the top of

his lungs; 〃Hooray for Democracy!〃



Now; gentlemen; the Republicans desire to place this great question

of slavery on the very basis on which our fathers placed it; and no

other。  It is easy to demonstrate that 〃our fathers; who framed this

Government under which we live;〃 looked on slavery as wrong; and so

framed it and everything about it as to square with the idea that it

was wrong; so far as the necessities arising from its existence

permitted。  In forming the Constitution they found the slave trade

existing; capital invested in it; fields depending upon it for labor;

and the whole system resting upon the importation of slave labor。

They therefore did not prohibit the slave trade at once; but they

gave the power to prohibit it after twenty years。  Why was this? What

other foreign trade did they treat in that way? Would they have done

this if they had not thought slavery wrong?



Another thing was done by some of the same men who framed the

Constitution; and afterwards adopted as their own the act by the

first Congress held under that Constitution; of which many of the

framers were members; that prohibited the spread of slavery into

Territories。  Thus the same men; the framers of the Constitution; cut

off the supply and prohibited the spread of slavery; and both acts

show conclusively that they considered that the thing was wrong。



If additional proof is wanted it can be found in the phraseology of

the Constitution。  When men are framing a supreme law and chart of

government; to secure blessings and prosperity to untold generations

yet to come; they use language as short and direct and plain as can

be found; to express their meaning  In all matters but this of

slavery the framers of the Constitution used the very clearest;

shortest; and most direct language。  But the Constitution alludes to

slavery three times without mentioning it once  The language used

becomes ambiguous; roundabout; and mystical。  They speak of the

〃immigration of persons;〃 and mean the importation of slaves; but do

not say so。  In establishing a basis of representation they say 〃all

other persons;〃 when they mean to say slaveswhy did they not use

the shortest phrase? In providing for the return of fugitives they

say 〃persons held to service or labor。〃 If they had said slaves it

would have been plainer; and less liable to misconstruction。  Why did

n't they do it? We cannot doubt that it was done on purpose。  Only

one reason is possible; and that is supplied us by one of the framers

of the Constitutionand it is not possible for man to conceive of

any otherthey expected and desired that the system would come to an

end; and meant that when it did; the Constitution should not show

that there ever had been a slave in this good free country of ours。



I will dwell on that no longer。  I see the signs of approaching

triumph of the Republicans in the bearing of their political

adversaries。   A great deal of their war with us nowadays is mere

bushwhacking。  At the battle of Waterloo; when Napoleon's cavalry had

charged again and again upon the unbroken squares of British

infantry; at last they were giving up the attempt; and going off in

disorder; when some of the officers in mere vexation and complete

despair fired their pistols at those solid squares。  The Democrats

are in that sort of extreme desperation; it is nothing else。  I will

take up a few of these arguments。



There is 〃the irrepressible conflict。〃  How they rail at Seward for

that saying! They repeat it constantly; and; although the proof has

been thrust under their noses again and again that almost every good

man since the formation of our Government has uttered that same

sentiment; from General Washington; who 〃trusted that we should yet

have a confederacy of free States;〃 with Jefferson; Jay; Monroe; down

to the latest days; yet they refuse to notice that at all; and

persist in railing at Seward for saying it。  Even Roger A。 Pryor;

editor of the Richmond Enquirer; uttered the same sentiment in almost

the same language; and yet so little offence did it give the

Democrats that he was sent for to Washington to edit the Statesthe

Douglas organ therewhile Douglas goes into hydrophobia and spasms

of rage because Seward dared to repeat it。  This is what I call

bushwhacking; a sort of argument that they must know any child can

see through。



Another is John Brown: 〃You stir up insurrections; you invade the

South; John Brown! Harper's Ferry!〃  Why; John Brown was not a

Republican!  You have never implicated a single Republican in that

Harper's Ferry enterprise。  We tell you that if any member of the

Republican party is guilty in that matter; you know it or you do not

know it。  If you do know it; you are inexcusable not to designate the

man and prove the fact。  If you do not know it; you are inexcusable

to assert it; and especially to persist in the assertion after you

have tried and failed to make the proof。  You need not be told that

persisting in a charge which one does not know to be true is simply

malicious slander。  Some of you admit that no Republican designedly

aided or encouraged the Harper's Ferry affair; but still insist that

our doctrines and declarations necessarily lead to such results。  We

do not believe it。  We know we hold to no doctrines; and make no

declarations; which were not held to and made by our fathers who

framed the Government 'under which we live; and we cannot see how

declarations that were patriotic when they made them are villainous

when we make them。  You never dealt fairly by us in relation to that

affairand I will say frankly that I know of nothing in your

character that should lead us to suppose that you would。  You had

just been soundly thrashed in elections in several States; and others

were soon to come。  You rejoiced at the occasion; and only were

troubled that there were not three times as many killed in the

affair。  You were in evident glee; there was no sorrow for the killed

nor for the peace of Virginia disturbed; you were rejoicing that by

charging Republicans with this thing you might get an advantage of us

in New York; and the other States。  You pulled that string as tightly

as you could; but your very generous and worthy expectations were not

quite fulfilled。  Each Republican knew that the charge was a slander

as to himself at least; and was not inclined by it to cast his vote

in your favor。  It was mere bushwhacking; because you had nothing

else to do。  You are still on that track; and I say; go on! If you

think you can slander a woman into loving you or a man into voting

for you; try it till you are satisfied!



Another specimen of this bushwhacking; that 〃shoe strike。〃 Now be it

understood that I do not pretend to know all about the matter。  I am

merely going to speculate a little about some of its phases。  And at

the outset; I am glad to see that a system of labor prevails in New

England under which laborers can strike when they want to; where they

are not obliged to work under all circumstances; and are not tied

down and obliged to labor whether you pay them or not! I like the

system wh

返回目录 上一页 下一页 回到顶部 0 0

你可能喜欢的