Year: 1860

i
of slavery. This lack Of freedom Of speech
and freedom of debate is followed in slave
States by the necessary consequence, that
there is no freedom of suffrage. So that at
the last Presidential election--the first when
this question was ever distinctly brought be-
fore the American people--there were NO
slave States in which ballot box was open
for freedom, or where free men might cast
their ballots with safety. If one side only is
allowed to vote in State, it is very easy to
to see that that side must prevail. Laughter
and applause.


If the condition of civil society is such that
voting is not to be done safely few men will
vote. Every man who wishes to express his
choice is not expected to be martyr The
world produces but few men willing to be
martyrs, my friends, and such am sorry
have not been very numerous in our day
Nearly one half Of the United States, then
that is, all the slave States, are at once ar
rayed on the side of slavery, and behold them
They tell us that Republicanism, which in
vites them to discuss the subject, is sectional
and they arc national. But the slave States
are not willing to rest content with this ex-
clusion Of all freedom of suffrage, of speech
and of debate on the subject of slavery within
their own jurisdiction, but they require the
free States to accept the same system for
themselves. They insist that although they
may be able at home to keep down their
slaves, if we will be quiet, yet they cannot
tolerate discussion Of slavery in the free
States, as we thereby encourage the slaves in
the slave States to insurrection and sedition.
This argument might fail to reach and con-
vince us, inasmuch as we, ourselves, are safe
from any danger Of insurrection in the slave
States.


But they bring it home to our fears by de-
claring that their peace is of more importance
than the interest of the nation; that they
prefer slavery even to union, that If we will
not acquicsce in allowing them to maintain,
fortify and extend slavery on unequal terms,
then they dissolve the Union, and we will all
go down together, or we all suffer common
desolation. There are few men-and there
ought to be very fcw-whe would be so in
tent on the subject Of establishing freedom
that they would consent to a subycrsion Of
the Union to produce it, because the Union
is positive benefit, nay, an absolute neccs-
sity, and to save the Union, men may nat
urally dare to delay. Most men, therefore,
very chccrfully prefer to let the subject of
slavery rest for some better time-for some
better occasion-for some more fortunate
circumstances and they are content to keep
the Union with slavery if it cannot be kept
otherwise.


You see how this has worked in demorali-
zing the American people. Less than thirty
years ago the Governor Of Massachusetts,
that first and frcest of the States-actually
recommended the Legislature to pass laws
which would declare that, the meetings of
citizens held to discuss the subject of slavery,
should be deemed seditious, and should be
dissolved by the police! The Governor of
the State of New York who preceded me in
that high Office, during his administration.
and within your lifetime and mine, actually
made the same recommendation to the Legis-
lature of that State. What was recomman
ded, but not carried out in those States by
law, became custom and practice; for. as
you know, when the laws did not dissolve
the public assembly, there was q period of
near twenty years in which no public meet
ing Of men opposed to the extension or Jag
grandizement Of slavery, could be held with
out being dispersed by the mob, acting in
concert with the general opinion Of the coun-
try.


When the people of the free States were
thus demoralized, what wonder is 1t, that for
twelve years oil debate on the subject Of
slavery, or the presentation Of the subject by
the people, even in the form Of q petition.
was represscd and trampled under foot, and
there until John Quincy Adams at
last rallied party around him strong enough
to restore freedom of debate in the House oil
RAS& .}nxsve Al