hide Matching Documents

The documents where this entity occurs most often are shown below. Click on a document to open it.

Document Max. Freq Min. Freq
Abraham Lincoln, Stephen A. Douglas, Debates of Lincoln and Douglas: Carefully Prepared by the Reporters of Each Party at the times of their Delivery. 118 0 Browse Search
Horace Greeley, The American Conflict: A History of the Great Rebellion in the United States of America, 1860-65: its Causes, Incidents, and Results: Intended to exhibit especially its moral and political phases with the drift and progress of American opinion respecting human slavery from 1776 to the close of the War for the Union. Volume I. 113 1 Browse Search
Harper's Encyclopedia of United States History (ed. Benson Lossing) 64 0 Browse Search
John G. Nicolay, A Short Life of Abraham Lincoln, condensed from Nicolay and Hayes' Abraham Lincoln: A History 52 0 Browse Search
Edward Alfred Pollard, The lost cause; a new Southern history of the War of the Confederates ... Drawn from official sources and approved by the most distinguished Confederate leaders. 38 0 Browse Search
Jefferson Davis, The Rise and Fall of the Confederate Government 34 0 Browse Search
Southern Historical Society Papers, Volume 14. (ed. Reverend J. William Jones) 26 0 Browse Search
John Harrison Wilson, The life of Charles Henry Dana 24 0 Browse Search
Edward L. Pierce, Memoir and letters of Charles Sumner: volume 3 22 0 Browse Search
William Alexander Linn, Horace Greeley Founder and Editor of The New York Tribune 14 0 Browse Search
View all matching documents...

Browsing named entities in Abraham Lincoln, Stephen A. Douglas, Debates of Lincoln and Douglas: Carefully Prepared by the Reporters of Each Party at the times of their Delivery.. You can also browse the collection for Dred Scott or search for Dred Scott in all documents.

Your search returned 59 results in 13 document sections:

1 2
Abraham Lincoln, Stephen A. Douglas, Debates of Lincoln and Douglas: Carefully Prepared by the Reporters of Each Party at the times of their Delivery., Speech of Hon. Abraham Lincoln, at Springfield June 17, 1858. (search)
rcuit Court for the District of Missouri ; and both Nebraska bill and law suit, were brought to a decision in the same month of May, 1554. The negro's name was Dred Scott, which name now designates the decision finally made in the case. Before the then next Presidential election, the law case came to, and was argued in, the Suprbe pressed immediately; but, if acquiesced in for awhile, and apparently indorsed by the people at an election, then to sustain the logical conclusion that what Dred Scott's master might lawfully do with Dred Scott, in the free State of Illinois, every other master may lawfully do with any other one, or one thousand slaves, in IllDred Scott, in the free State of Illinois, every other master may lawfully do with any other one, or one thousand slaves, in Illinois, or in any other free State. Auxiliary to all this, and working hand in hand with it, the Nebraska doctrine, or what is left of it, is to educate and mould public opinion, at least Northern public opinion, not to care whether slavery is voted down or voted up. This shows exactly where we now are ; and partially, also, wh
Abraham Lincoln, Stephen A. Douglas, Debates of Lincoln and Douglas: Carefully Prepared by the Reporters of Each Party at the times of their Delivery., chapter 3 (search)
k your indulgence while I do so. What is fairly implied by the term Judge Douglas has used, resistance to the decision? I do not resist it. If I wanted to take Dred Scott from his master, I would be interfering with property, and that terrible difficulty that Judge Douglas speaks of, of interfering with property would arise. Butof courts? They have two uses. As rules of property they have two uses. First--they decide upon the question before the court. They decide in this case that Dred Scott is a slave. Nobody resists that. Not only that, but they Say to everybody else, that persons standing just as Dred Scott stands, as he is. That is, they say tDred Scott stands, as he is. That is, they say that when a question comes up upon another person, it will be so decided again, unless the court decides in another way, unless the court overrules its decision. Well, we mean to do what we can to have the court decide the other way. That is one thing we mean to try to do. The sacredness that Judge Douglas throws around this d
Abraham Lincoln, Stephen A. Douglas, Debates of Lincoln and Douglas: Carefully Prepared by the Reporters of Each Party at the times of their Delivery., chapter 4 (search)
l the territory West. of the Mississippi and North of the Missouri line of thirty-six degrees and thirty minutes, that Dred Scott, a slave in Missouri, was taken by his master to Fort Snelling in the present State of Minnesota situated on the West bthe Mississippi river, and consequently in the Territory where slavery was prohibited by the Act of 1820, and that when Dred Scott appealed for his freedom in consequence of having been taken into a free Territory, the Supreme Court of the United States decided that Dred Scott did not become free by being taken into that Territory, but that having been carried back to Missouri, was yet a slave. Mr. Lincoln is going to appeal from that decision and reverse it. He does not intend to reverse it as to Dred Scott. Oh, no! But he will reverse it so that it shall not stand as a rule in the future. How will he do it? He says that if he is elected to the Senate, he will introduce and pass a law just like the Missouri Compromise, prohibiting sla
Abraham Lincoln, Stephen A. Douglas, Debates of Lincoln and Douglas: Carefully Prepared by the Reporters of Each Party at the times of their Delivery., Speech of Senator Douglas, delivered July 17, 1858, at Springfield, III (Mr. Lincoln was not present.) (search)
nly for having expressed my acquiesence in that decision, but to charge me with being a conspirator with that court in devising that decision three years before Dred Scott ever thought of commencing a suit for his freedom. The object of his speech was to convey the idea to the people that the court could not be trusted, that the ght into that Territory. And he will not submit to that decision. He says that he will not fight the Judges or the United States Marshals in order to liberate Dred Scott, but that he will not respect that decision, as a rule of law binding on this country, in the future. Why not? Because, he says, it is unjust. How is he goinibunal appointed by the Constitution to make it; it was a point within their jurisdiction, and I am bound by it. But, my friends, Mr. Lincoln says that this Dred Scott decision destroys the doctrine of popular sovereignty, for the reason that the court has decided that Congress had no power to prohibit slavery in the Territori
Abraham Lincoln, Stephen A. Douglas, Debates of Lincoln and Douglas: Carefully Prepared by the Reporters of Each Party at the times of their Delivery., chapter 6 (search)
an of the campaign. I am opposed to that decision in a certain sense, but not in the sense which he puts on it. I say that in so far as it decided in favor of Dred Scott's master, and against Dred Scott and his family, I do not propose to disturb or resist the decision. I never have proposed to do any such thing. I think, tDred Scott and his family, I do not propose to disturb or resist the decision. I never have proposed to do any such thing. I think, that in respect for judicial authority, my humble history would not suffer in comparison with that of Judge Douglas. He would have the citizen conform his vote to that decision ; the member of Congress, his ; the President, his use of the veto power. He would make, it a rule of political action for the people and all the departmeelps 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 th
Abraham Lincoln, Stephen A. Douglas, Debates of Lincoln and Douglas: Carefully Prepared by the Reporters of Each Party at the times of their Delivery., First joint debate, at Ottawa, August 21, 1858. (search)
r, simple, amiable, intelligent gentlemen, as though the niche was left as a place to put that Dred Scott decision in — a niche which would have been spoiled by adopting the amendment. And now, I saycott decision, which holds that the people cannot exclude slavery from a Territory, if another Dred Scott decision shall come, holding that they cannot exclude it from a State, we shall discover that upon them. Then what is necessary for the nationalization of slavery? It is simply the next Dred Scott decision. It is merely for the Supreme Court to decide that no State under the Constitution cll adhere to all other decisions of the same court. A Hibernian--Give us something besides Dred Scott. Mr. Lincoln-Yes; no doubt you want to hear something that don't hurt. Now, having spoken say all that he says on these mighty questions-then it needs only the formality of the second Dred Scott decision, which he indorses in advance, to make slavery alike lawful in all the States-old as
Abraham Lincoln, Stephen A. Douglas, Debates of Lincoln and Douglas: Carefully Prepared by the Reporters of Each Party at the times of their Delivery., Second joint debate, at Freeport, August 27, 1858. (search)
at bill in the exact shape they wanted. If there was a rule preventing their amending it at the time, they could pass that, and then Chase's amendment being merged, put it in the shape they wanted. They did not choose to do so, but they went into a quibble with Chase to get him to add what they knew he would not add, and because he would not, they stand upon that flimsy pretext for voting down what they argued was the meaning and intent of their own bill. They left room thereby for this Dred Scott decision, which goes very far to make slavery national throughout the United States. I pass one or two points I have because my time will very soon expire, but I must be allowed to say that Judge Douglas recurs again, as he did upon one or two other occasions, to the enormity of Lincoln — an insignificant individual like Lincoln-upon his ipse dixit charging a conspiracy upon a large number of members of Congress, the Supreme Court and two Presidents, to nationalize slavery. I want to
Abraham Lincoln, Stephen A. Douglas, Debates of Lincoln and Douglas: Carefully Prepared by the Reporters of Each Party at the times of their Delivery., Third joint debate, at Jonesboro, September 15, 1858. (search)
nd under any circumstances ; yet, inasmuch as the Supreme Court have decided in the celebrated Dred Scott case that a State has a right to confer the privilege of voting upon free negroes, I am not go constituents of Illinois were no better than negroes, or we would be sure to quarrel. The Dred Scott decision covers the whole question, and declares that each State has the right to settle this ed in that compromise. I recollect in the Presidential election which followed, when we had General Scott up for the Presidency, Judge Douglas was around berating us Whigs as Abolitionists, precisely for the actual establishment of it. Not only so, but is there not another fact-how came this Dred Scott decision to be made? It was made upon the case of a negro being taken and actually held in slm because the act of Congress prohibited his being so held there. Will the Judge pretend that Dred Scott was not held there without police regulations? There is at least one matter of record as to hi
Abraham Lincoln, Stephen A. Douglas, Debates of Lincoln and Douglas: Carefully Prepared by the Reporters of Each Party at the times of their Delivery., Fourth joint debate, at Charleston, September 18, 1858. (search)
ll was introduced, there was no such case as the Dred Scott case pending in the Supreme Court, nor was it broan understanding between the Democratic owners of Dred Scott and the Judges of the Supreme Court and other parn demanded to know who these Democratic owners of Dred Scott were. He could not or would not tell ; he did noow. In truth, there mere no Democratic owners of Dred Scott on the face of the land. Dred Scott was owned atDred Scott was owned at that time by the Rev. Dr. Chaffee, an Abolition member of Congress from Springfield, Massachusetts, and his wife ; and Mr. Lincoln ought to have known that Dred Scott was so owned, for the reason that as soon as the decthe time the case was taken to the Supreme Court, Dred Scott was owned by an Abolition member of Congress, a fn National Convention for the last time, to nominate Scott for the Presidency, they adopted as a part of their itution of the United States if they choose. The Dred Scott decision decides that they have not that power.
Abraham Lincoln, Stephen A. Douglas, Debates of Lincoln and Douglas: Carefully Prepared by the Reporters of Each Party at the times of their Delivery., Fifth joint debate, at Galesburgh, October 7, 1858. (search)
n of one very humble man; but it is my opinion that the Dred Scott decision, as it is, never would have been made in its present form if the party that made it had not been sustained previously by the elections. My own opinion is, that the new Dred Scott decision, deciding against the right of the people of the States to exclude slavery, will never be made, if that party is not sustained by the elections. I believe, further, that it is just as sure to be made as to-morrow is to come, if that party shall be sustained. I have said, upon a former occasion, and I repeat it now, that the course of argument that Judge Douglas makes use of upon this subject (I charge not his motives in this), is preparing the public mind for that new Dred Scott decision. I have asked him again to point out to me the reasons for his first adherence to the Dred Scott decision as it is. I have turned his attention to the fact that General Jackson differed with him in regard to the political obligation of a S
1 2