Belmont chronicle. [volume] (St. Clairsville, Ohio) 1855-1973, 1860-06-14
.GintoIn' s@reat sPeetB
SPEECEI OF
ABRAHAM LINCOLN,
Or ILLINOIS.
DELIVERED AT COOPER INSTITUTE
NEW YORK,
MONDAY, FEBRUARY 9TH, 1860.

MR. PPrsIDEST AND FELLow CrTIzEH
OF New YoRK:-The facts with which
shall deal this evening are mainly old an
familiar; nor is there anything new 10 tn
general use shall make Of them. If ther
shall be any novelty, 1t will be in :he mod
of presenting the facts, and the inference e
and observations following that presenta
tion.
In his speech last autumn, at Columbus
Ohio, as reported in the New York Times
Senator Douglas said: ..... s.
"Our fathers, when they framed the Gov
ernment under which we live, understoo,
this question just as we'll, aud even better
than we do now" a... 2. .'...
fully indprse this, and I adopt il as a
text .or this discourse. l so adopt It be-
cause It furnishes q precise and agree,
starting point for discussion between Re
pub!icans and that wing OF Democracy head
ed b. Senator Douglas. II simply leave,
the inquiry: "What was the understa pding
those fathers had of the question mentioned! |!
"What is The frame of Government undeI
which we live"
The answer must be: "The Constitution
of the United States" That Constitution
constitution consists of the original, framed
in 1897 land under which the present Gov
errment first went into operation,) and IA
subsequently, framed amendments, the first
ten of which were framed in 1889.
Who were the fathers that framed the
Constitution! suppose the "thrty mine"
who signed the original instrument may be
fairly called our fathers who framed that
part Of the present Government. 1t is
almost exactly true to say they framed it,
pnd 1t is altogether true to say they fairly
represented the opinion and sentiments Of
the whole nation at that time. Their names
beihg familiar to nearly all, and ucsessib le
to quite all, need not now be repeated.
I take these "thirty-nine," for the present
as Seins "o9r fathers who framed the Gov.
ernment under which we ive."
What is the question which, according to
the text; those fathers understood Just as
we II, and even better than we do know!
II is this: Does the proper division of
local from federal authority, or snything in
the CONSTITUTION, forbid our Federal Gov.
ernment to cOntroi ns IL slavery in our Fed
ersL Territories!
Upon this, Douglas holds the affirmative,
and Rrpubl iqrns the negative. The affirm
ative and dehisI.. form oh issue; and this
issue--tbis question MS precis isely what the
text declares our fathefs understood better
than we. -.
Let Us how enquire whether the "thirty-
nine" or any Of them, ever acted upon this
question; and if they did, how they acted
upon it-how they expressed their better
understanding.
In l7S4+-,hree yeats before the Constitu.
tion--the United States then owning the
North. Western tsrri,pry, snd no other--the
Congress Of the Confederation had be.
fore them the question OF prohibiting sla.
very in that Territoryi and four of the 'thirty
nine who afterwsrd framed the Constitution
we're in that Congress, and voted on that
question. OF these. Roger Sherman. Thos.
Mitfiin, and Hugh Williamson voted for the
prohibition--thus showing that, in their un-
derstandng, no line dividing local from fed
ersl authority, nor anything else, properly
forbade The Federal Government to control
as to slavery in federal territory. The other
Of the lour-James McHenry- voted against
the prohibition. showing that for some cause
he thought il improper to, vote for il.
10 1857, still before the Constitation, but
while the Convention was In session framing
l., and while the North estern Territory
eth was the only Territory owned BY the
United States-the same question OF pro-
hibiting slavery In the territory again came
the Congress Of the COME ederaiion, and three
more Of the "thirty-nins" who stterward
signed the Consultation, were in Congress
and voted on the question. They we're Will
liam Blount, William Few and Abraham
Baldwin; and they all voted for the prohihi.
tion--thus showing thsts In their under
standing, no line dividing local from Fed
eral authority. nor anything else, properly
forbids the Federal Government to control
as to slavery in federal authority. This
time the prohibition. became a .sw. being
part of what 10 now well known as the OrdI-
nance Of 'S7. !
The question OF federal control of slavery
In the territories, seems not TO have been
directly before the Convention which framed
the original CONSTITUTION; and hence it Il
not recorded that the "thirly.nine" or any
of them. while engaged on that instrument
expressed any opinion on that precise ques'
tton. T. u JIrTfJ f.rql YI9BDTIJf 2
| oIp, 1859, BY the irsl Congress which sal
under the Constitution, an. act was passed
20 enforce the Ordinance Of '87. including
1.-The prohibition Of slavery in the North Wes
terf Territory. The bill Tor this sci wasrs
! Pst,sd bS One of the "lhirly-nine,"s = Thoms
/ lFiizinmRlsa then q memhef .of the Hous
4 Of presentstives from Penhsylvania. ]
want .thrOash, lLi,syt,ges without = .wop
lofoppysition; and finally passed both, brsn
ches without eas and nsys, which IA equiv
Il