Year: 1859

not be possible that this great principle ha


been squelched out in this extraordinary
way. II might be, if it were not for th,


extraordinary consequence of spelling my


humbug." Cheers and laughter.


| Another feature of the Judges argu


ment about the Dred Scott case is, an eff


fort to show that that the decision deals al


together in declarations of negatives; tia


the Constitution does not affirm anything


as expounded by the Dred Scott decision


but it only declares want of powers


total absence of power, in reference to the


territories. 1t seems to be bis purpose tc


make the whole Of that decision to result


in mere negative declaration of want


of power in Congress TO do anything in


relation to this matter in the territories


| know the opinion of the Judges states,


that there is total absence of power; but


that is unfortunately not all it states; for


the Judges add that the of property in


a slave is distinctly and expressly affirmed


in the constitution. 1t does not stop at


saying that the right of property in slave


is recognized in the constitution, is declar-


ed to exist somewhere in the constitution,


but says it is affirmed in the constitution.


1t is language equivalent to saying that it


is embodied and so woven into that instru-


ment that it cannot be detached without


breaking the constitution itself. In word


it is part of the constitution.


The Judge is singularly unfortunate in


his effort to make out that decision to be


altogether negative, when the express Ian


guagc at the vital part is that this is dis


tinctly affirmed in the Constitution.


think myself, and l repeat it here, that


this decision does not merely carry slavery


into the territories, but by its logical con-
clusions it carries it into the States in
which we live. One provision of that con-
stitution, is that it shall be the supreme
law of the land-I do not quote the Ian
guage-any constitution or law of any
State to the contrary Notwithstanding
This Dred Scott decision says that the
right of property in slave is affirmed in
that constitution which is the supreme law
of the land, any State constitution or law
to the contrary notwithstanding. Then l
say that to destroy a thing which is dis
tinctly affirmed and supported by the SUI
preme law of the land, even by State
constitution or law, is violation of that
supreme law and there is no escape from
it.


In my judgement there is no avoiding
that result, save that the American people
shall see that constitutions are better con-
strued than our constitution is construed in
that decision. They must take care that
it is more faithfully and truly carried out
than il is there expounded.


l must hasten to conclusion. Near
the beginning of my remarks to you, l said
that this insiduous Douglas popular sover-
eighty is the measure that now most
threatens the purpose of the republican
party, to prevent slavery from being ma
tionalized in the United States. l propose
to ask your attention for little while to
some propositions in affirmance of that
statement. Take it just as it stands and
apply as a principle elsewhere and consid-
er where it will lead you. l now put this
that Judge Douglas popular
sovereignty applied will reopen the Afri-
can slave trade; and I will demonstrate that
by any variety of ways in which you can
turn the subject or look at it.


The Judge says that the people of the
territories have the right, by his principle
to have slaves, if they want them. Then
say that the people of Georgia have the
right to buy slaves in Africa, if they want
them, and l defy any man on earth to
show a distinction between the two things |
to show that the one is either more |
wicked or more unlawful to show no origin |
al principles, that one is better or worse
than the other, or to show, by the consti-
tuition, that one differs whit from the 9th
err. He will tell me, doubtless, that there
is no constitutional provision against people
taking slaves into the new territories, and
[ tell him there is equally no constitutional
provision against buying slaves in Africa.
He will tell you that people, in the exer-
Else of popular sovereignty, ought to do
as about that thing, and have slaves if
they want them; and l tell you that the
people of Georgia are as much entitled to
popular sovereignty and TO buy slaves in
Africa, if they want them, as the people
Of the territory are TO have slaves if they
want them. ask any man, dealing hon.
estly with himself, TO point out the distisc-
lion.


PREPARE TO REVIVE THE SLAVE TRADE.


Isay that if this principle is established,
here is no wrong in slavery, and whoever
wants it has right to have it, that it is
matter of dollars and cents, a sort of ques-
lion, but that at the South the question is
between the negro and the crocodile. That
s all. 1t is a mere matter of policy, there
S perfect right according to interest to
10 just as you please-wheu this is done,
when this doctrine prevails, the miners and
'appers will have formed public opinion
or the slave trade. Then they will be
-eady for jeff Davis and Tombs and other
eaders of that company, to sound the bu-
gle for the revival of the slave trade, for
he second Dred Scott decision, for the
lood of slavery to be poured over the free
States, while we shall be here tied down
md helpless and rushed over like sheep.


1t is to be part and parcel of this same
dea, TO say to men who want to adhere to
he democratic party, who have always be-
onged to that party, and are only looking
,hout for snme eycuse IN stick IN n hut