FREE BOOKS

Author's List




PREV.   NEXT  
|<   535   536   537   538   539   540   541   542   543   544   545   546   547   548   549   550   551   552   553   554   555   556   557   558   559  
560   561   562   563   564   565   566   567   568   569   570   571   572   573   574   575   576   577   578   579   580   581   582   583   584   >>   >|  
as to whether he would or would not sustain such a decision if made. I give him his third chance to say yes or no. He is not obliged to do either, probably he will not do either; but I give him the third chance. I tried to show then that this result, this conclusion, inevitably followed from the point already decided by the court. The Judge, in his reply, again sneers at the thought of the court making any such decision, and in the course of his remarks upon this subject uses the language which I will now read. Speaking of me, the Judge says: "He goes on and insists that the Dred Scott decision would carry slavery into the free States, notwithstanding the decision itself says the contrary." And he adds: "Mr. Lincoln knows that there is no member of the Supreme Court that holds that doctrine. He knows that every one of them in their opinions held the reverse." I especially introduce this subject again for the purpose of saying that I have the Dred Scott decision here, and I will thank Judge Douglas to lay his finger upon the place in the entire opinions of the court where any one of them "says the contrary." It is very hard to affirm a negative with entire confidence. I say, however, that I have examined that decision with a good deal of care, as a lawyer examines a decision and, so far as I have been able to do so, the court has nowhere in its opinions said that the States have the power to exclude slavery, nor have they used other language substantially that, I also say, so far as I can find, not one of the concurring judges has said that the States can exclude slavery, nor said anything that was substantially that. The nearest approach that any one of them has made to it, so far as I can find, was by Judge Nelson, and the approach he made to it was exactly, in substance, the Nebraska Bill,--that the States had the exclusive power over the question of slavery, so far as they are not limited by the Constitution of the United States. I asked the question, therefore, if the non-concurring judges, McLean or Curtis, had asked to get an express declaration that the States could absolutely exclude slavery from their limits, what reason have we to believe that it would not have been voted down by the majority of the judges, just as Chase's amendment was voted down by Judge Douglas and his compeers when it was offered to the Nebraska Bill. Also, at Galesburgh, I said something in regard to those Springfield resolutions
PREV.   NEXT  
|<   535   536   537   538   539   540   541   542   543   544   545   546   547   548   549   550   551   552   553   554   555   556   557   558   559  
560   561   562   563   564   565   566   567   568   569   570   571   572   573   574   575   576   577   578   579   580   581   582   583   584   >>   >|  



Top keywords:
decision
 

States

 

slavery

 

judges

 

exclude

 

opinions

 
language
 

Douglas

 

subject

 

chance


approach

 

substantially

 

concurring

 

question

 

Nebraska

 

contrary

 

entire

 

substance

 

sustain

 
nearest

Nelson
 
amendment
 
compeers
 

majority

 

offered

 
Springfield
 

resolutions

 
regard
 

Galesburgh

 
reason

United

 
McLean
 
Constitution
 

limited

 
Curtis
 
absolutely
 

limits

 
declaration
 

express

 

exclusive


Speaking

 
insists
 

notwithstanding

 

remarks

 

inevitably

 

conclusion

 
result
 
decided
 

thought

 
making