The Writings of Abraham Lincoln, Complete

A >> Abraham Lincoln >> The Writings of Abraham Lincoln, Complete


Is not this change wrought in your minds a very important change? Public
opinion in this country is everything. In a nation like ours, this
popular sovereignty and squatter sovereignty have already wrought a
change in the public mind to the extent I have stated. There is no man in
this crowd who can contradict it.

Now, if you are opposed to slavery honestly, as much as anybody, I ask
you to note that fact, and the like of which is to follow, to be
plastered on, layer after layer, until very soon you are prepared to deal
with the negro every where as with the brute. If public sentiment has not
been debauched already to this point, a new turn of the screw in that
direction is all that is wanting; and this is constantly being done by
the teachers of this insidious popular sovereignty. You need but one or
two turns further, until your minds, now ripening under these teachings,
will be ready for all these things, and you will receive and support, or
submit to, the slave trade, revived with all its horrors, a slave code
enforced in our Territories, and a new Dred Scott decision to bring
slavery up into the very heart of the free North. This, I must say, is
but carrying out those words prophetically spoken by Mr. Clay,--many,
many years ago,--I believe more than thirty years, when he told an
audience that if they would repress all tendencies to liberty and
ultimate emancipation they must go back to the era of our independence,
and muzzle the cannon which thundered its annual joyous return on the
Fourth of July; they must blow out the moral lights around us; they must
penetrate the human soul, and eradicate the love of liberty: but until
they did these things, and others eloquently enumerated by him, they
could not repress all tendencies to ultimate emancipation.

I ask attention to the fact that in a pre-eminent degree these popular
sovereigns are at this work: blowing out the moral lights around us;
teaching that the negro is no longer a man, but a brute; that the
Declaration has nothing to do with him; that he ranks with the crocodile
and the reptile; that man, with body and soul, is a matter of dollars and
cents. I suggest to this portion of the Ohio Republicans, or Democrats,
if there be any present, the serious consideration of this fact that
there is now going on among you a steady process of debauching public
opinion on this subject. With this, my friends, I bid you adieu.




SPEECH AT CINCINNATI OHIO, SEPTEMBER 17, 1859

My Fellow-Citizens of the State of Ohio: This is the first time in my
life that I have appeared before an audience in so great a city as this:
I therefore--though I am no longer a young man--make this appearance
under some degree of embarrassment. But I have found that when one is
embarrassed, usually the shortest way to get through with it is to quit
talking or thinking about it, and go at something else.

I understand that you have had recently with you my very distinguished
friend Judge Douglas, of Illinois; and I understand, without having had
an opportunity (not greatly sought, to be sure) of seeing a report of the
speech that he made here, that he did me the honor to mention my humble
name. I suppose that he did so for the purpose of making some objection
to some sentiment at some time expressed by me. I should expect, it is
true, that judge Douglas had reminded you, or informed you, if you had
never before heard it, that I had once in my life declared it as my
opinion that this government cannot endure permanently, half slave and
half free; that a house divided against itself cannot stand, and, as I
had expressed it, I did not expect the house to fall, that I did not
expect the Union to be dissolved, but that I did expect that it would
cease to be divided, that it would become all one thing, or all the
other; that either the opponents of slavery would arrest the further
spread of it, and place it where the public mind would rest in the belief
that it was in the course of ultimate extinction, or the friends of
slavery will push it forward until it becomes alike lawful in all the
States, old or new, free as well as slave. I did, fifteen months ago,
express that opinion, and upon many occasions Judge Douglas has denounced
it, and has greatly, intentionally or unintentionally, misrepresented my
purpose in the expression of that opinion.

I presume, without having seen a report of his speech, that he did so
here. I presume that he alluded also to that opinion, in different
language, having been expressed at a subsequent time by Governor Seward
of New York, and that he took the two in a lump and denounced them; that
he tried to point out that there was something couched in this opinion
which led to the making of an entire uniformity of the local institutions
of the various States of the Union, in utter disregard of the different
States, which in their nature would seem to require a variety of
institutions and a variety of laws, conforming to the differences in the
nature of the different States.

Not only so: I presume he insisted that this was a declaration of war
between the free and slave States, that it was the sounding to the onset
of continual war between the different States, the slave and free States.

This charge, in this form, was made by Judge Douglas on, I believe, the
9th of July, 1858, in Chicago, in my hearing. On the next evening, I made
some reply to it. I informed him that many of the inferences he drew from
that expression of mine were altogether foreign to any purpose
entertained by me, and in so far as he should ascribe these inferences to
me, as my purpose, he was entirely mistaken; and in so far as he might
argue that, whatever might be my purpose, actions conforming to my views
would lead to these results, he might argue and establish if he could;
but, so far as purposes were concerned, he was totally mistaken as to me.

When I made that reply to him, I told him, on the question of declaring
war between the different States of the Union, that I had not said that I
did not expect any peace upon this question until slavery was
exterminated; that I had only said I expected peace when that institution
was put where the public mind should rest in the belief that it was in
course of ultimate extinction; that I believed, from the organization of
our government until a very recent period of time, the institution had
been placed and continued upon such a basis; that we had had comparative
peace upon that question through a portion of that period of time, only
because the public mind rested in that belief in regard to it, and that
when we returned to that position in relation to that matter, I supposed
we should again have peace as we previously had. I assured him, as I now,
assure you, that I neither then had, nor have, or ever had, any purpose
in any way of interfering with the institution of slavery, where it
exists. I believe we have no power, under the Constitution of the United
States, or rather under the form of government under which we live, to
interfere with the institution of slavery, or any other of the
institutions of our sister States, be they free or slave States. I
declared then, and I now re-declare, that I have as little inclination to
interfere with the institution of slavery where it now exists, through
the instrumentality of the General Government, or any other
instrumentality, as I believe we have no power to do so. I accidentally
used this expression: I had no purpose of entering into the slave States
to disturb the institution of slavery. So, upon the first occasion that
Judge Douglas got an opportunity to reply to me, he passed by the whole
body of what I had said upon that subject, and seized upon the particular
expression of mine that I had no purpose of entering into the slave
States to disturb the institution of slavery. "Oh, no," said he, "he
[Lincoln] won't enter into the slave States to disturb the institution of
slavery, he is too prudent a man to do such a thing as that; he only
means that he will go on to the line between the free and slave States,
and shoot over at them. This is all he means to do. He means to do them
all the harm he can, to disturb them all he can, in such a way as to keep
his own hide in perfect safety."

Well, now, I did not think, at that time, that that was either a very
dignified or very logical argument but so it was, I had to get along with
it as well as I could.

It has occurred to-me here to-night that if I ever do shoot over the line
at the people on the other side of the line into a slave State, and
purpose to do so, keeping my skin safe, that I have now about the best
chance I shall ever have. I should not wonder if there are some
Kentuckians about this audience--we are close to Kentucky; and whether
that be so or not, we are on elevated ground, and, by speaking
distinctly, I should not wonder if some of the Kentuckians would hear me
on the other side of the river. For that reason I propose to address a
portion of what I have to say to the Kentuckians.

I say, then, in the first place, to the Kentuckians, that I am what they
call, as I understand it, a "Black Republican." I think slavery is wrong,
morally and politically. I desire that it should be no further spread
in--these United States, and I should not object if it should gradually
terminate in the whole Union. While I say this for myself, I say to you
Kentuckians that I understand you differ radically with me upon this
proposition; that you believe slavery is a good thing; that slavery is
right; that it ought to be extended and perpetuated in this Union. Now,
there being this broad difference between us, I do not pretend, in
addressing myself to you Kentuckians, to attempt proselyting you; that
would be a vain effort. I do not enter upon it. I only propose to try to
show you that you ought to nominate for the next Presidency, at
Charleston, my distinguished friend Judge Douglas. In all that there is a
difference between you and him, I understand he is sincerely for you, and
more wisely for you than you are for yourselves. I will try to
demonstrate that proposition. Understand, now, I say that I believe he is
as sincerely for you, and more wisely for you, than you are for
yourselves.

What do you want more than anything else to make successful your views of
slavery,--to advance the outspread of it, and to secure and perpetuate
the nationality of it? What do you want more than anything else? What--is
needed absolutely? What is indispensable to you? Why, if I may, be
allowed to answer the question, it is to retain a hold upon the North, it
is to retain support and strength from the free States. If you can get
this support and strength from the free States, you can succeed. If you
do not get this support and this strength from the free States, you are
in the minority, and you are beaten at once.

If that proposition be admitted,--and it is undeniable,--then the next
thing I say to you is, that Douglas, of all the men in this nation, is
the only man that affords you any hold upon the free States; that no
other man can give you any strength in the free States. This being so, if
you doubt the other branch of the proposition, whether he is for
you--whether he is really for you, as I have expressed it,--I propose
asking your attention for a while to a few facts.

The issue between you and me, understand, is, that I think slavery is
wrong, and ought not to be outspread; and you think it is right, and
ought to be extended and perpetuated. [A voice, "Oh, Lord!"] That is my
Kentuckian I am talking to now.

I now proceed to try to show you that Douglas is as sincerely for you and
more wisely for you than you are for yourselves.

In the first place, we know that in a government like this, in a
government of the people, where the voice of all the men of the country,
substantially, enters into the execution--or administration, rather--of
the government, in such a government, what lies at the bottom of all of
it is public opinion. I lay down the proposition, that Judge Douglas is
not only the man that promises you in advance a hold upon the North, and
support in the North, but he constantly moulds public opinion to your
ends; that in every possible way he can he constantly moulds the public
opinion of the North to your ends; and if there are a few things in which
he seems to be against you,--a few things which he says that appear to
be against you, and a few that he forbears to say which you would like to
have him say you ought to remember that the saying of the one, or the
forbearing to say the other, would lose his hold upon the North, and, by
consequence, would lose his capacity to serve you.

Upon this subject of moulding public opinion I call your attention to the
fact--for a well established fact it is--that the Judge never says your
institution of slavery is wrong. There is not a public man in the United
States, I believe, with the exception of Senator Douglas, who has not, at
some time in his life, declared his opinion whether the thing is right or
wrong; but Senator Douglas never declares it is wrong. He leaves himself
at perfect liberty to do all in your favor which he would be hindered
from doing if he were to declare the thing to be wrong. On the contrary,
he takes all the chances that he has for inveigling the sentiment of the
North, opposed to slavery, into your support, by never saying it is
right. This you ought to set down to his credit: You ought to give him
full credit for this much; little though it be, in comparison to the
whole which he does for you.

Some other, things I will ask your attention to. He said upon the floor
of the United States Senate, and he has repeated it, as I understand, a
great many times, that he does not care whether slavery is "voted up or
voted down." This again shows you, or ought to show you, if you would
reason upon it, that he does not believe it to be wrong; for a man may
say when he sees nothing wrong in a thing; that he, dues not care whether
it be voted up or voted down but no man can logically say that he cares
not whether a thing goes up or goes down which to him appears to be
wrong. You therefore have a demonstration in this that to Judge Douglas's
mind your favorite institution, which you would have spread out and made
perpetual, is no wrong.

Another thing he tells you, in a speech made at Memphis in Tennessee,
shortly after the canvass in Illinois, last year. He there distinctly
told the people that there was a "line drawn by the Almighty across this
continent, on the one side of which the soil must always be cultivated by
slaves"; that he did not pretend to know exactly where that line was, but
that there was such a line. I want to ask your attention to that
proposition again; that there is one portion of this continent where the
Almighty has signed the soil shall always be cultivated by slaves; that
its being cultivated by slaves at that place is right; that it has the
direct sympathy and authority of the Almighty. Whenever you can get these
Northern audiences to adopt the opinion that slavery is right on the
other side of the Ohio, whenever you can get them, in pursuance of
Douglas's views, to adopt that sentiment, they will very readily make the
other argument, which is perfectly logical, that that which is right on
that side of the Ohio cannot be wrong on this, and that if you have that
property on that side of the Ohio, under the seal and stamp of the
Almighty, when by any means it escapes over here it is wrong to have
constitutions and laws "to devil" you about it. So Douglas is moulding
the public opinion of the North, first to say that the thing is right in
your State over the Ohio River, and hence to say that that which is right
there is not wrong here, and that all laws and constitutions here
recognizing it as being wrong are themselves wrong, and ought to be
repealed and abrogated. He will tell you, men of Ohio, that if you choose
here to have laws against slavery, it is in conformity to the idea that
your climate is not suited to it, that your climate is not suited to
slave labor, and therefore you have constitutions and laws against it.

Let us attend to that argument for a little while and see if it be sound.
You do not raise sugar-cane (except the new-fashioned sugar-cane, and you
won't raise that long), but they do raise it in Louisiana. You don't
raise it in Ohio, because you can't raise it profitably, because the
climate don't suit it. They do raise it in Louisiana, because there it is
profitable. Now, Douglas will tell you that is precisely the slavery
question: that they do have slaves there because they are profitable, and
you don't have them here because they are not profitable. If that is so,
then it leads to dealing with the one precisely as with the other. Is
there, then, anything in the constitution or laws of Ohio against raising
sugar-cane? Have you found it necessary to put any such provision in your
law? Surely not! No man desires to raise sugar-cane in Ohio, but if any
man did desire to do so, you would say it was a tyrannical law that
forbids his doing so; and whenever you shall agree with Douglas, whenever
your minds are brought to adopt his argument, as surely you will have
reached the conclusion that although it is not profitable in Ohio, if any
man wants it, is wrong to him not to let him have it.

In this matter Judge Douglas is preparing the public mind for you of
Kentucky to make perpetual that good thing in your estimation, about
which you and I differ.

In this connection, let me ask your attention to another thing. I believe
it is safe to assert that five years ago no living man had expressed the
opinion that the negro had no share in the Declaration of Independence.
Let me state that again: five years ago no living man had expressed the
opinion that the negro had no share in the Declaration of Independence.
If there is in this large audience any man who ever knew of that opinion
being put upon paper as much as five years ago, I will be obliged to him
now or at a subsequent time to show it.

If that be true I wish you then to note the next fact: that within the
space of five years Senator Douglas, in the argument of this question,
has got his entire party, so far as I know, without exception, in saying
that the negro has no share in the Declaration of Independence. If there
be now in all these United States one Douglas man that does not say this,
I have been unable upon any occasion to scare him up. Now, if none of you
said this five years ago, and all of you say it now, that is a matter
that you Kentuckians ought to note. That is a vast change in the Northern
public sentiment upon that question.

Of what tendency is that change? The tendency of that change is to bring
the public mind to the conclusion that when men are spoken of, the negro
is not meant; that when negroes are spoken of, brutes alone are
contemplated. That change in public sentiment has already degraded the
black man in the estimation of Douglas and his followers from the
condition of a man of some sort, and assigned him to the condition of a
brute. Now, you Kentuckians ought to give Douglas credit for this. That
is the largest possible stride that can be made in regard to the
perpetuation of your thing of slavery.

A voice: Speak to Ohio men, and not to Kentuckians!

Mr. LINCOLN: I beg permission to speak as I please.

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 you establish that slavery
was--right by the Bible, it will occur that that slavery was the slavery
of the white man, of men without reference to color; and he knows very
well that you may entertain that idea in Kentucky as much as you please,
but you will never win any Northern support upon it. He makes a wiser
argument for you: he makes the argument that the slavery of the black
man; the slavery of the man who has a skin of a different color from your
own, is right. He thereby brings to your support Northern voters who
could not for a moment be brought by your own argument of the Bible right
of slavery. Will you give him credit for that? Will 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, having been
entirely successful in that branch of his efforts in your behalf, he is
ready for another.

At this same meeting at Memphis he declared that in all contests between
the negro and the white man he was for the white man, but that in all
questions between the negro and the crocodile he was for the negro. He
did not make that declaration accidentally at Memphis. He made it a great
many times in the canvass in Illinois last year (though I 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 I should not wonder if he
repeated it here. It is, then, a deliberate way of expressing himself
upon that subject. It is a matter of mature deliberation with him thus to
express himself upon that point of his case. It therefore requires
deliberate attention.

The first inference seems to be that if you do not enslave the negro, you
are wronging the white man in some way or other, and that whoever is
opposed to the negro being enslaved, is, in some way or other, against
the white man. Is not that a falsehood? If there was a necessary conflict
between the white man and the negro, I should be for the white man as
much as Judge Douglas; but I say there is no such necessary conflict. I
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 negro should be
enslaved; that the mass of white men are really injured by the effects of
slave labor in the vicinity of the fields of their own labor.

But I do not desire to dwell upon this branch of the question more than
to say that this assumption of his is false, and I do hope that that
fallacy will not long prevail in the minds of intelligent white men. At
all events, you ought to thank Judge Douglas for it; it is for your
benefit it is made.

The other branch of it is, that in the struggle between the negro and the
crocodile; he is for the negro. Well, I don't know that there is any
struggle between the negro and the crocodile, either. I suppose that if a
crocodile (or, as we old Ohio River boatmen used to call them,
alligators) should come across a white man, he would kill him if he
could; and so he would a negro. But what, at last, is this proposition? I
believe it is a sort of proposition in proportion, which may be stated
thus: "As the negro is to the white man, so is the crocodile to the
negro; and as the negro may rightfully treat the crocodile as a beast or
reptile, so the white man may rightfully treat the negro as a beast or a
reptile." That is really the "knip" of all that argument of his.

Now, my brother Kentuckians, who believe in this, you ought to thank
Judge Douglas for having put that in a much more taking way than any of
yourselves have done.

Again, Douglas's 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 this, listen awhile, consider
awhile what I shall advance in support of that proposition.

He says that it is the sacred right of the man who goes into the
Territories to have slavery if he wants it. Grant that for argument's
sake. Is it not the sacred right of the man who 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 Kansas and Nebraska, or any
other new Territory, with the sacred right of taking a slave there which
belongs to him, would certainly have no more right to take one there than
I would, who own no slave, but who would desire to buy one and take him
there. You will not say you, the friends of Judge Douglas but that the
man who does not own a slave has an equal right to buy one and take him
to the Territory as the other does.

A voice: I want to ask a question. Don't foreign nations interfere with
the slave trade?

Mr. LINCOLN: Well! I understand it to be a principle of Democracy to whip
foreign nations whenever, they interfere with us.

Voice: I only asked for information. I am a Republican myself.

Mr. LINCOLN: You and I will be on the best terms in the world, but I do
not wish to be diverted from the point I was trying to press.

I say that Douglas's popular sovereignty, establishing his sacred right
in the people, if you please, if carried to its logical conclusion gives
equally the sacred right to the people of the States or the Territories
themselves to buy slaves wherever they can buy them cheapest; and if any
man can show a distinction, I should like to hear him try it. If any man
can show how the people of Kansas have a better right to slaves, because
they want them, than the people of Georgia have to buy them in Africa, I
want him to do it. I think it cannot be done. If it is "popular
sovereignty" for the people to have slaves because they want them, it is
popular sovereignty for them to buy them in Africa because they desire to
do so.