duty, we possibly can. Judging by all they say and do, and by the subject and nature of their controversy with us, let us determine, if we can, what will satisfy them.

Will they be satisfied if the territories be unconditionally surrendered to them? We know they will not. In all their present complaints against us, the territories are scarcely mentioned. Invasions and insurrections are the rage now. Will it satisfy them if, in the future, we have nothing to do with invasions and insurrections? We know it will not. We so know because we know we never had anything to do with invasions and insurrections; and yet this total abstaining does not exempt us from the charge and the denunciation.

The question recurs, what will satisfy them? Simply this: We must not only let them alone, but we must, somehow, convince them that we do let them alone. This we know by experience is no easy task. We have been so trying to couvince them from the very beginning of our organization, but with no success. In all our platform and speeches, we have constantly protested our purpose to let them alone; but this has had no tendency to convince them. Alike unavailing to convince them is the fact that they have never detected a man of us in any attempt to disturb them.

These natural and apparently adequate means all failing, what will convince them? This, and this only: Cease to call slavery wrong, and join them in calling it right. And this must be done thoroughly-done in acts as well as words. Silence will not be tolerated-we must place ourselves avowedly with them. Douglas' new sedition law must be enacted, and enforced, suppressing all declarations that slavery is wrong, whether made in

politics, in presses, in pulpits, or in private. We must arrest and return their fugitive slaves with greedy pleas ure. We must pull down our Free State Constitutions. The whole atmosphere must be disinfected from all taint of opposition to slavery, before they will cease to believe that all their troubles proceed from us.

I am quite aware they do not state their case precisely in this way. Most of them would probably say to us, "Let us alone, do nothing to us, and say what you please about slavery." But we do let them alone-have never disturbed them-so that, after all, it is what we say which dissatisfies them. They will continue to accuse us of doing until we cease saying.

I am also aware they have not, as yet, in terms, demanded the overthrow of our Free State Constitntions. Yet those constitutions declare the wrong of slavery with more solemn emphasis than do all other sayings against it; and when all other sayings shall have been silenced, the overthrow of these constitutions will be demanded, and nothing be left to resist the demand. It is nothing to the contrary that they do not demand the whole of this just now. Demanding what they do, and for the reason they do, they can voluntary stop nowhere short of this consummation. Holding as they do, that slavery is morally right and socially elevating, they can not cease to demand a full national recognition of it, as a legal right and a social blessing.

Nor can we justifiably withhold this on any ground, save our conviction that slavery is wrong. If slavery is right, all words, acts, laws and constitutions against it, are themselves wrong, and should be silenced and swept away. If it is right, we can not justly object to its na

r

tionality-its universality, if, it is wrong, they can not justly insist upon its extension-its enlargement. All they ask we could readily grant, if they thought slavery right; all we ask they could readily grant, if they thought it wrong.

Their thinking it right, and our thinking it wrong, is the precise fact upon which depends the whole controversy. Thinking it right, as they do, they are not to blame for desiring its full recognition, as being right; but thinking it wrong, as we do, can we yield to them? Can we cast our votes with their view and against our own? in view of our moral, social and political responsibility, can we do this?

Wrong as we may think slavery is, we can yet afford to let it alone where it is, because that much is due to the necessity arising from its actual presence in the nation; but can we, while our votes will prevent it, allow it to spread into the national territories, and to overrun here in these free states?

us

If our sense of duty forbids this, then let us stand by our duty fearlessly and effectively. Let us be diverted by none of those sophistical contrivances wherewith we are so industriously plied and belabored-contrivances, such as groping for some middle ground between the right and the wrong, vain as the search for a man who should be neither a living man nor a dead man—such as Union appeals, beseeching true Union men to yield to disunionist, reversing the Divine rule, and calling, not the sinners, but the righteous to repentance—such as invocations of Washington-imploring men to unsay what Washington said—and undo what Washington did.

Neither let us be slandered from our duty by false ac-. cusations against us, nor frightened from it by menaces. of destruction to the government, nor of dungeons to ourselves.

Let us have faith that right makes might; and in that faith let us, to the end dare do our duty as we understand it.

:0:

LINCOLN'S RAIL SPLITTING SPEECH.

[Delivered at the Republican State Convention in Decutur, Ill., May 9, 1860. Mr. Lincoln had been carried bodily upon the stage, and soon "Old John Hanks" (a democrat) came into the midst of the assemblage bearing on his shoulders "two small triangular heart rails" surmounted by a banner with this inscription:

Two rails from a lot made by Abraham Lincoln and John Hanks, in the Sangamon bottom, in the year 1830." It is said that Lincoln blushed, but seemed to shake with inward laughter. Great were the shouts and calls for Lincoln.]

Gentlemen: I suppose you want to know something. about those things (pointing to old John and the rails). Well, the truth is, John Hanks and I did make rails in the Sangamon bottom. I don't know whether we made those rails or not; the fact is I don't think they are a credit to the maker (laughing as he spoke), but I do know this; I made rails then, and I think I could make better ones than these now.

FIRST TALK AFTER HIS NOMINATION. INATION.

[The telegram was received in the Journal office at Springfield. Immediately everybody wanted to shake his hand; and so long as he was willing, they continued to congratulate him. J

* *

GENTLEMEN: (with a twinkle in his eye) you had better come up and shake my hand while you can; honors elevate some men, you know. * Well, gentlemen, there is a little woman at our house who is proba bly more interested in this dispatch than I am; and if you will excuse me, I will take it up and let her see it.

·:0:

FIRST SPEECH AFTER HIS NOMINATION.

[To the Committee, Springfield, Ill., May 19, 1860.] MR. CHAIRMAN AND GENTLEMEN OF THE COMMITTEE:— I tender to you, and through you to the Republican National Convention, and all the people represented in it, my profoundest thanks for the high honor done me, which you now formally announce. Deeply and even painfully sensible of the great responsibility which I could wish had fallen upon some one of the far more eminent men and experienced statesmen whose distinguished names were before the convention, I shall by your leave consider more fully the resolutions of the Convention denominated the platform, and, without unnecessary and unreasonable delay, respond to you, Mr. Chairman, in writing, not doubting that the platform will be found satisfactory and the nomination gratefully accepted. And now I will not longer defer the pleasure of taking you, and each of you, by the hand.