Douglas replied to these deadly attacks. He reminded them that when
they repealed the Missouri Compromise they had agreed to leave all
these questions to the people of the Territories and the decision of
the Supreme Court. This was the true Democratic doctrine. Davis
and Mason had both said that no man holding his views could receive
the support of the South for the Presidency. Yet this was the
doctrine of Cass when candidate for President, but the whole South
gave him their votes. When did this change of creed occur?
Davis answered briefly, regretting that Douglas had not denied or
explained any of his Illinois speeches, and said he was now satisfied
that he was as full of heresy as he once was of the true theory of
popular sovereignty. He declared that this doctrine was "offensive
to every idea of conservatism and sound government; a thing offensive
to every idea of the supremacy of the laws of the United States,"
and announced plainly that the South would not support him for
President. He persistently pressed him to say whether he meant to
abide by the Dred Scott decision.
The Court, answered Douglas, had decided that neither Congress nor
the territorial legislature could prohibit the settler from bringing
his slaves to a Territory. "In other words, the right of transit
is clear, the right of entry is clear. * * * You have the same
right to hold them as other property, subject to such local laws as
the legislature may constitutionally enact. If those laws render
it impracticable to HOLD your property, whether it be your horse
or your slave, why, it is your misfortune."
He had reached the brink of the abyss. The South was preparing
for treason and rebellion. Its mood was altogether too tragic to
be even amused by his philosophic refinements. It rejected them now,
not with contempt, but with horror. The North, too, was in stern
mood. Its abhorrence of slavery had intensified with constant
agitation. It was grimly earnest in its resolve to resist all further
extension of it and resented the indifference of the statesman who
did not care whether the burning crime of the ages was voted up or
voted down.
Douglas, who regarded the ethics of this question with indifference
and who supremely desired to conciliate the South without alienating
the North, blundered in plunging into this debate. The Southern
Senators were unanswerably right. Since the Dred Scott decision
his position was so clearly untenable that to insist upon it amid
conditions so threatening seemed to them the most intolerable
trifling. The Republicans looked on as pleased spectators while
the battle raged between Northern and Southern Democrats and the
party was hopelessly torn asunder. It was clear the part of prudence
to restrain his impulsive pugnacity for the remaining weeks of
the session. But when challenged to defend himself his impatient
eagerness to speak was uncontrollable.
Chapter XVII. Seeking Reconciliation.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account