Randolph County journal. [volume] (Winchester, Randolph County, Ind.) 1855-1862, 1859-09-29

In Kentucky perhaps, in many OF the
Slave States certainly, you are trying
to establish the rightfulness of Slavery
by reference to the Bible. You are
trying TO show that Slavery existed in
the Bible times by Divine ordinance.
Now Douglas is wiser than you, for
your own benefit, upon that subject
Douglas knows that whenever Won es-
tablish that Slavery was right by the
Bible, that that Slavery was the Slave
ry OF the white man, of men without
reference to color, and he knows very
we'll that you may entertain that idea
in Kentucky as much as you please,
but You will never win any Northern
support on that argument. lie makes
a wiser argument for you; he makes
the argument that the Slavery of the
black man. the Slavery Of the man who
has skin of different color from
your own, is right. He thereby brings
to your support Northern voters who
could not for moment be brought by
your own argument of the Bible-right
of Slavery. Will you not give him
credit for that? VIII You not say that
in this matter he is more wisely for
you than You are for yourselves.
Now having established with his
entire party this doctrine, ] suppose
it is now part of the examination; it
is one of the test questions of getting
into the Douglas party, for candidate
to be able to say and believe most po-
tently that the Declaration of indie
pendence never meant negroes. He
has been entirely successful in that
branch of his efforts in your bchalf;
now he is ready for another.
At this same meeting at Memphis,
he declared that while in 'ail contests
between the negro and the white man,
he was for the white man but
that in all contests between the ne
gro and the crocodile he was for the
negro lie did not make that declar
alton accidently at Memphis. He had
made it great many times in the
canvass in Illinois last year Though |
don't know that it was reported in any
of his speeches there, but he frequently
made it. i believe he repeated it at
Columbus. and | should not wonder if
he repeated it here. 1t is, then, a de-
libe:atc way of expressing himself on
that subject. 1t is matter of mature
deliberation with him thus to express
himself upon that point of his case. 1t
therefore requires deliberate attention.
The first inference seems TO be that
if you do not enslavc the negro you
are wronging the white man in some
way or other, and that whoever is OPP
posed to the negro being enslaved is
in some way or other against the white
man. Is not that a falsehood? IL
there were a necessary conflict between
the white man and the negro, l should
he for the white man as much as
Judge Douglas; but | say there is no
such necessary conflict. say that
there is room enough for us all to be
free, and that it not only does not
wrong the white man that the negro
should be free, but it positively wrongs
the mass of the white men that the ne
gro should be cnslaved; that the mass
of white men are really injured by the
effect of slave labor in the vicinity of
the fields of their own labor
But | do not desire to dwell upon
this branch of the question more than
to say that this assumption of his is
false, and do hope that that fallacy
will not long prevail in the minds of
intelligent white men. At all events,
you Kentuckians ought to thank Judge
Douglas for it. 1t is for you it is made.
1t is for your benefit.
The other branch of it is, that in
struggle between the negro and the
crocodile, that then he is for the negro.
Well, | don't know that there is any
struggle between the negro and the
crocodile, either. ] suppose if a croc-
odile { or as we Ohio river boatmen
used to call them-alligators) should
come across white man, he would eat
him if he could, and so he would ne
gro. But what, at least, is this prop
osition? l believe it is sort of prop
osition in proportion-I am not very
much of n scholar-as the negro is to
the white man, so is the crocodile to
the negro, and as the negro may right
fully treat the crocodile as beast or
reptile, so the white man may right
fully treat the negro as beast or rep
tile. That is really the 'knib' Of all
that argument of his.
Now, my brother Kentuckians, who
believe in that, You ought to thank
Judge Douglas for having put that in
a much more taking way than any of
yourselves have done.
Again, Douglass great principle,
Popular Sovereignty as he calls it,
gives you, by natural consequence, the
revival of the slave trade whenever
you want it. If you question that,
listen awhile, consider awhile, what /
shall advance in support of that prop
osition.
He says that it is the sacred right
of the man who goes into the Terrific
ries, to have Slavery if he wants it.
Grant that for arguments sake. Is it
not the sacred right of the man that
don't go there equally to buy slaves in
Africa, if he wants them? Can you
point out the difference? The man
who goes into the Territories of Kan
sas and Nebraska. or any other new
Territory, with the sacred right of
taking slave there which belongs to
him, would certainly have no more
right to take one there than / would
who own no slave, hut who would de-
sire to buy one and take him there
y on will not sav-vOu the friends ot