Page images
PDF
EPUB

tions, we dread thought; we shrink behind something; we acknowledge ourselves unequal to the sublime faith of our fathers; and the exhibition of the last twenty years and of the present state of public affairs is, that Americans dread to look their real position in the face.

They have no idea of absolute right. They were born since 1787, and absolute right means the truth diluted by a strong decoction of the Constitution of 1789. They breathe that atmosphere. They do not want to sail outside of it; they do not attempt to reason outside of it. Poisoned with printer's ink, or choked with cotton dust, they stare at absolute right, as the dream of madmen. For the last twenty years, there has been going on, more or less heeded and understood in various states, an insurrection of ideas against the limited, cribbed, cabined, isolated American civilization interfering to restor absolute right. . . Thank God, I am not a citizen. You will remember, all of you, citizens of the United States, that there was not a Virginia gun fired at John Brown. . You shot him. Sixteen marines to whom you pay $8 a month-your own representatives, sixteen men, with the Vulture of the Union above them-your representatives! It was the covenant with death and agreement with hell which you call the Union of the States, that took the old man by the throat with a private hand. . . .-Redpath, Echoes.

Let us hear LINCOLN Speak:

If we would first know where we are, and whither we are tending, we could better judge what to do, and how to do it. We are now far into the fifth year since a policy [Kansas-Nebraska bill] was initiated with the avowed object and confident promise of putting an end to slavery agitation. Under the operation of that policy, that agitation has not only not ceased, but has constantly augmented. In my opinion, it will not cease until a crisis shall have been reached and passed. "A house divided against itself cannot stand." I believe this government cannot endure permanently half slave and half free. I do not expect the Union to be dissolved I do not expect the house to fall-but I do expect it will cease to be divided. It will become all one thing, or all the other. -Lincoln, Works, I.,

0. 240.

[ocr errors]

The Lincoln-Douglas debate, 1858:

[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]

I do not question Mr. Lincoln's conscientious belief that the negro was made his equal, and hence is his brother, but for my own part I do not regard the negro as my equal, and positively deny that he is my brother or any kin to me whatever. He [Lincoln] holds that the negro was born his equal and yours, and that he was endowed with equality by the Almighty, and that no human law can deprive him of these rights which were guaranteed to him by the Supreme Ruler of the universe. Now, I do not believe that the Almighty ever intended the negro to be the equal of the white man. He belongs to an inferior race, and must occupy an inferior position. I do not hold that because the negro is our inferior, therefore he ought to be a slave. By no means can such a conclusion be drawn from what I have said. On the contrary, I hold that humanity and Christianity both require that the negro shall have and enjoy every right, every privilege, and every immunity consistent with the safety of the society in which he lives.

Douglas, in the Lincoln-Douglas Debates, Works, Lincoln, I., p. 284.

While I was at the hotel to-day, an elderly gentleman called upon me to know whether I was really in favor of producing a perfect equality between the negroes and white people. . . I will say then that I am not, nor ever have been, in favor of bringing about in any way the social and political equality of the white and black races-that I am not, nor ever have been, in favor of making voters or jurors of negroes, nor of qualifying them to hold office, nor to intermarry with white people; and I will say in addition to this that there is a physical difference between the white and black races which I believe will forever forbid the two races living together on terms of social and political equality. And inasmuch as they cannot so live, while they do remain together there must be the position of superior and inferior, and I as much as any other man am in favor of having the superior position assigned to the white race.-Lincoln, in Lincoln-Douglas Debates, Lincoln's Works, 1, p. 369.

QUESTIONS.

1. What did J. Q. Adams think of slavery? 2. What did he expect to be necessary in order to secure its abolition? 3. Was his plan statesmanlike? 4. Were his predictions in part fulfilled? 5. Did he attempt in later years the work he here lays out for some man? 6. How did Hayne differ from Adams? 7. Did he see danger in the questions? 8. What remedy did he pro pose? 9. How do you explain the different positions? 10. Investigate to see whether Hayne had a constitutional foundation for his position. 11. Why did the northern slave states desire the continuance of the system? 12. What profit came to Virginia from the system? 13. Would Virginia naturally favor or oppose the slave trade?

1. What is meant by "incendiary documents"? 2. How were they disposed of in the south? 3. Was such a method right, constitutional? 4. What requests did the south make of northern states regarding these documents? 5. Were they right in demanding their suppression? 6. How did President Jackson propose to deal with the question? 7. Would his plan have been constitutional? 8. What was the real difficulty?

1. Find out what the constitution says in regard to the right of petition. 2. Find out the nature of the petitions sent to Congress. 3. What did Mr. King think of the petitions? 4. What mistake did the south make in opposing the reception of petitions? 5. Name points in Calhoun's argument. 6. What view does he take in regard to slavery? 7. Had the south always held the same views? 8. Did he hold slavery in the abstract to be a good? 9. What prediction did he make? 10. Have his predictions been fulfilled? 11. What objection, if any, to the "gag" rule? 12. What conclusion can you draw from the various votes on the "gag" rules?

1. How did Garrison regard the constitution? Why? 2. Was he a secessionist? 3. How does the Buffalo Platform differ in theory from Garrison and Phillips? 4. How did the Democratic Review believe slavery would end? 5. What theories are given in various extracts in regard to method of control or government of the territories? 6. How did Webster hold the character of the institutions of the territories had been fixed? 7. How did Seward regard compromises? 8. Was he right? 9. If so what do you say of the men who made the constitution? 10. What end did A. H. Stephens predict for the Union? 11. Compare views of Stephens and Phillips and Garrison. 12. How explain their views?

1. Did the north and the south understand each other? 2. What qualities did the south believe characterized the people of the north? 3. What did the north think of the southern people? 4. Why was Cuba wished? 5. Did the south believe slavery right? 6.

What arguments given to prove their view? 7. What did Wendell Phillips think of the character of the American people in 1859? 8. Was he right? 9. What difference in tone between Lincoln and Phillips? 10. How did Lincoln hope to end slavery? 11. How did Lincoln regard the negro? 12. How Douglas? 13. What difference in view between the two?

1. Make an outline covering this whole period. 2. Write an essay on the reasons for the contradictory views of the northern and southern statesmen.

THE CIVIL WAR AND RECONSTRUCTION

Civil War, 1861-65. Slaves freed by thirteenth
amendment, 1865. Citizenship defined in four-
teenth amendment, 1868; and suffrage granted
to the negroes by the fifteenth, 1870. Tennessee
reconstructed, 1865; other seceded states fully
restored to Union by 1870. "Carpet Bag"
governments, 1866-77. Ku Klux Klan, 1866-72.
States again in control of whites by 1877..
Struggle between Congress and President
Johnson, 1866-69. Impeachment of the Presi-
dent, 1868.
Grant elected President, 1868.
Troops withdrawn from south by President
Hayes, 1877.

« PreviousContinue »