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 effrontry can go no farther, Judge Douglas
vaunts in the very speeches in which he denounces me for opposing the Dred Scott
decision, that he stands on the Cincinnati
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
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 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 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.
I submit that the proposition that the thing which determines whether a man is free or a slave, is rather concrete
. I think you would conclude that it was, if your liberty depended upon it, and so would Judge Douglas
if his liberty depended upon it. But suppose it was on the question of spreading slavery over the new Territories
that he considers it as being merely an abstract matter, and one of no practical importance.
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 menus.
In what does 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.
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.
I defy any man to find any difference between the policy which originally planted slavery in these Colonies and that policy which now prevails in our new Territories.
If it does not go into them, it is only because no individual wishes it to go. The Judge
indulged himself, doubtless to-day, with the question as to what I am going to do with or about the Dred Scott
, will you please tell me what you did about the bank decision?
Will you not graciously allow us to do with the Dred Scott
decision precisely as you did with the bank decision?
You succeeded in breaking down the moral effect of that decision ; did you find it necessary to amend the Constitution
or to set up a court of negroes in order to do it?
There is one other point.
has a very affectionate leaning toward the Americans
arid Old Whigs.
Last evening, in a sort of weeping tone, he described to us a death-bed scene.
He had been called to the side of Mr. Clay
, in his last moments, in order that the genius of “popular sovereignty” might duly descend from the dying man and settle upon him, the living and most worthy successor.
He could do no less than promise that he would devote the remainder of his life to “popular sovereignty ;” and then the great statesman departs in peace.
By this part of the