the writings-5-第19部分

快捷操作: 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! 如果本书没有阅读完，想下次继续接着阅读，可使用上方 "收藏到我的浏览器" 功能 和 "加入书签" 功能！


cease　to　be　under　obligations　to　do　anything　for　you；　how　much　better

off　do　you　think　you　will　be？　　Will　you　make　war　upon　us　and　kill　us

all？　　Why；　gentlemen；　I　think　you　are　as　gallant　and　as　brave　men　as

live；　that　you　can　fight　as　bravely　in　a　good　cause；　man　for　man；　as

any　other　people　living；　that　you　have　shown　yourselves　capable　of

this　upon　various　occasions：　but；　man　for　man；　you　are　not　better

than　we　are；　and　there　are　not　so　many　of　you　as　there　are　of　us。　You

will　never　make　much　of　a　hand　at　whipping　us。　　If　we　were　fewer　in

numbers　than　you；　I　think　that　you　could　whip　us；　if　we　were　equal；

it　would　likely　be　a　drawn　battle；　but　being　inferior　in　numbers；　you

will　make　nothing　by　attempting　to　master　us。



But　perhaps　I　have　addressed　myself　as　long；　or　longer；　to　the

Kentuckians　than　I　ought　to　have　done；　inasmuch　as　I　have　said　that

whatever　course　you　take　we　intend　in　the　end　to　beat　you。　　I　propose

to　address　a　few　remarks　to　our　friends；　by　way　of　discussing　with

them　the　best　means　of　keeping　that　promise　that　I　have　in　good　faith

made。



It　may　appear　a　little　episodical　for　me　to　mention　the　topic　of

which　I　will　speak　now。　It　is　a　favorite　position　of　Douglas's　that

the　interference　of　the　General　Government；　through　the　Ordinance　of

'87；　or　through　any　other　act　of　the　General　Government　never　has

made　or　ever　can　make　a　free　State；　the　Ordinance　of　'87　did　not　make

free　States　of　Ohio；　Indiana；　or　Illinois；　that　these　States　are　free

upon　his　〃great　principle〃　of　popular　sovereignty；　because　the　people

of　those　several　States　have　chosen　to　make　them　so。　　At　Columbus；

and　probably　here；　he　undertook　to　compliment　the　people　that　they

themselves　have　made　the　State　of　Ohio　free；　and　that　the　Ordinance

of　'87　was　not　entitled　in　any　degree　to　divide　the　honor　with　them。

I　have　no　doubt　that　the　people　of　the　State　of　Ohio　did　make　her

free　according　to　their　own　will　and　judgment；　but　let　the　facts　be

remembered。



In　1802；　I　believe；　it　was　you　who　made　your　first　constitution；　with

the　clause　prohibiting　slavery；　and　you　did　it；　I　suppose；　very

nearly　unanimously；　but　you　should　bear　in　mind　that　youspeaking　of

you　as　one　peoplethat　you　did　so　unembarrassed　by　the　actual

presence　of　the；　institution　amongst　you；　that　you　made　it　a　free

State　not　with　the　embarrassment　upon　you　of　already　having　among　you

many　slaves；　which　if　they　had　been　here；　and　you　had　sought　to　make

a　free　State；　you　would　not　know　what　to　do　with。　　If　they　had　been

among　you；　embarrassing　difficulties；　most　probably；　would　have

induced　you　to　tolerate　a　slave　constitution　instead　of　a　free　one；

as　indeed　these　very　difficulties　have　constrained　every　people　on

this　continent　who　have　adopted　slavery。



Pray　what　was　it　that　made　you　free？　　What　kept　you　free？　　Did　you

not　find　your　country　free　when　you　came　to　decide　that　Ohio　should

be　a　free　State？　　It　is　important　to　inquire　by　what　reason　you　found

it　so。　　Let　us　take　an　illustration　between　the　States　of　Ohio　and

Kentucky。　　Kentucky　is　separated　by　this　River　Ohio；　not　a　mile　wide。

A　portion　of　Kentucky；　by　reason　of　the　course　of　the　Ohio；　is

farther　north　than　this　portion　of　Ohio；　in　which　we　now　stand。

Kentucky　is　entirely　covered　with　slavery；　Ohio　is　entirely　free　from

it：　What　made　that　difference？　　Was　it　climate？　　No。　　A　portion　of

Kentucky　was　farther　north　than　this　portion　of　Ohio。　　Was　it　soil？

No。　　There　is　nothing　in　the　soil　of　the　one　more　favorable　to　slave

than　the　other。　It　was　not　climate　or　soil　that　mused　one　side　of　the

line　to　be　entirely　covered　with　slavery；　and　the　other　side　free　of

it。　　What　was　it？　　Study　over　it。　　Tell　us；　if　you　can；　in　all　the

range　of　conjecture；　if　there　be　anything　you　can　conceive　of　that

made　that　difference；　other　than　that　there　was　no　law　of　any　sort

keeping　it　out　of　Kentucky；　while　the　Ordinance　of　'87　kept　it　out　of

Ohio。　　If　there　is　any　other　reason　than　this；　I　confess　that　it　is

wholly　beyond　my　power　to　conceive　of　it。　　This；　then；　I　offer　to

combat　the　idea　that　that　Ordinance　has　never　made　any　State　free。



I　don't　stop　at　this　illustration。　I　come　to　the　State　of　Indiana；

and　what　I　have　said　as　between　Kentucky　and　Ohio；　I　repeat　as

between　Indiana　and　Kentucky：　it　is　equally　applicable。　One

additional　argument　is　applicable　also　to　Indiana。　　In　her

Territorial　condition　she　more　than　once　petitioned　Congress　to

abrogate　the　Ordinance　entirely；　or　at　least　so　far　as　to　suspend　its

operation　for　a；　time；　in　order　that　they　should　exercise　the

〃popular　sovereignty〃　of　having　slaves　if　they　wanted　them。　The　men

then　controlling　the　General　Government；　imitating　the　men　of　the

Revolution；　refused　Indiana　that　privilege。　　And　so　we　have　the

evidence　that　Indiana　supposed　she　could　have　slaves；　if　it　were　not

for　that　Ordinance；　that　she　besought　Congress　to　put　that　barrier

out　of　the　way；　that　Congress　refused　to　do　so；　and　it　all　ended　at

last　in　Indiana　being　a　free　State。　　Tell　me　not　then　that　the

Ordinance　of　'87　had　nothing　to　do　with　making　Indiana　a　free　State；

when　we　find　some　men　chafing　against；　and　only　restrained　by；　that

barrier。



Come　down　again　to　our　State　of　Illinois。　　The　great　Northwest

Territory；　including　Ohio；　Indiana；　Illinois；　Michigan；　and

Wisconsin；　was　acquired　first；　I　believe；　by　the　British　Government；

in　part　at　least；　from　the　French。　　Before　the　establishment　of　our

independence　it　became　a　part　of　Virginia；　enabling　Virginia

afterward　to　transfer　it　to　the　General　Government。　　There　were

French　settlements　in　what　is　now　Illinois；　and　at　the　same　time

there　were　French　settlements　in　what　is　now　Missouri；　in　the　tract

of　country　that　was　not　purchased　till　about　1803。　　In　these　French

settlements　negro　slavery　had　existed　for　many　years；　perhaps　more

than　a　hundred；　if　not　as　much　as　two　hundred　years；at　Kaskaskia；

in　Illinois；　and　at　St。　Genevieve；　or　Cape　Girardeau；　perhaps；　in

Missouri。　　The　number　of　slaves　was　not　very　great；　but　there　was

about　the　same　number　in　each　place。　　They　were　there　when　we

acquired　the　Territory。　　There　was　no　effort　made　to　break　up　the

relation　of　master　and　slave；　and　even　the　Ordinance　of　1787　was　not

so　enforced　as　to　destroy　that　slavery　in　Illinois；　nor　did　the

Ordinance　apply　to　Missouri　at　all。



What　I　want　to　ask　your　attention　to；　at　this　point；　is　that　Illinois

and　Missouri　came　into　the　Union　about　the　same　time；　Illinois　in　the

latter　part　of　1818；　and　Missouri；　after　a　struggle；　I　believe

sometime　in　1820。　　They　had　been　filling　up　with　American　people

about　the　same　period　of　time；　their　progress　enabling　them　to　come

into　the　Union　about　the　same　time。　　At　the　end　of　that　ten　years；　in

which　they　had　been　so　preparing　（for　it　was　about　that　period　of

time）；　the　number　of　slaves　in　Illinois　had　actually　decreased；　while

in　Missouri；　beginning　with　very　few；　at　the　end　of　that　ten　years

there　were　about　ten　thousand。　　This　being　so；　and　it　being

remembered　that　Missouri　and　Illinois　are；　to　a　certain　extent；　in

the　same　parallel　of　latitude；　that　the　northern　half　of　Missouri　and

the　southern　half　of　Illinois　are　in　the　same　parallel　of　latitude；

so　that　climate　would　have　the　same　effect　upon　one　as　upon　the

other；　and　that　in　the　soil　there　is　no　material　difference　so　far　as

bears　upon　the　question　of　slavery　being　settled　upon　one　or　the

other；there　being　none　of　those　natural　causes　to　produce　a

difference　in　filling　them；　and　yet　there　being　a　broad　difference　to

their　filling　up；　we　are　led　again　to　inquire　what　was　the　cause　of

that　difference。



It　is　most　natural　to　say　that　in　Missouri　there　was　no　law　to　keep

that　country　from　filling　up　with　slaves；　while　in　Illinois　there　was

the　Ordinance　of　The　Ordinance　being　there；　slavery　decreased　during

that　ten　years；　the　Ordinance　not　being　in　the　other；　it　increased

from　a　few　to　ten　thousand。　Can　anybody　doubt　the　reason　of　the

difference？



I　think　all　these　facts　most　abundantly　prove　that　my　friend　Judge

Douglas's　proposition；　that　the　Ordinance　of　'87；　or　the　national

restriction　of　slavery；　never　had　a　tendency　to　make　a　free　State；　is

a　fallacy；a　proposition　without　the　shadow　or　substance　of　truth

about　it。



Douglas　sometimes　says　that　all　the　States　（and　it　is　part　of　this

same　proposition　I　have　been　discussing）　that　have　become　free　have

become　so　upon　his　〃great　principle〃；　that　the　State　of　Illinois

itself　came　into　the　Union　as　a　slave　State；　and　that　the　people；

upon　the　〃great　principle〃　of　popular　sovereignty；　have　since　made　it

a　free　State。　　Allow　me　but　a　little　while　to　state　to　you　what　facts

there　are　to　justify　him　in　saying　that　Illinois　came　into　the　Union

as　a　slave　State。



I　have　mentioned　to　you　that　there　were　a　few　old　French　slaves

there。　　They　numbered；　I　think；　one　or　two　hundred。　　Besides　that；

there　ha