the life of stephen a. douglas-第15部分

按键盘上方向键 ← 或 → 可快速上下翻页，按键盘上的 Enter 键可回到本书目录页，按键盘上方向键 ↑ 可回到本页顶部！
————未阅读完？加入书签已便下次继续阅读！



Douglas　was　not　inactive　during　the　campaign；　being　deeply　interested；　not　only　in　the　election　of　Buchanan；　but　in　restoring　Democratic　supremacy　in　Illinois。　　He　sold　a　hundred　acres　of　land　on　the　western　limit　of　Chicago　for　a　hundred　thousand　dollars　and　contributed　with　great　liberality　to　the　campaign　fund；　not　only　of　his　own　State；　but　also　of　Pennsylvania。　　The　Democrats　won　both　States；　which；　with　the　entire　vote　of　the　South；　elected　Buchanan。

Millard　Fillmore；　a　rather　ghostly　reminiscence　of　other　days；　had　been　nominated　by　the　American　and　Whig　parties　and　carried　Maryland。　　The　combined　vote　of　Fremont　and　Fillmore　exceeded　that　of　Buchanan　by　nearly　half　a　million。　　The　Democrats　were　evidently　approaching　a　crisis；　and　harmony；　never　so　imperatively　needed　as　now；　was　never　so　hopelessly　unattainable。





Chapter　X。　　Popular　Sovereignty　in　the　Supreme　Court。




The　anger　of　the　world　was　rising　against　American　slavery。　　It　was　confessedly　a　shocking　anomaly　in　our　system　of　universal　freedom　and　democratic　equality。　　The　people　of　the　slave　States　were　inflexibly　resolved　to　maintain　and　extend　it　in　defiance　of　the　rising　sentiment　of　the　age。　　For　many　years　they　had　succeeded　in　holding　their　ground　and　stifling　the　anti…slavery　agitation。　They　had　vigilantly　kept　control　of　the　Government。　　During　sixty　of　the　first　sixty…eight　years　the　presidential　chair　had　been　occupied　by　Southern　men　or　their　dependents。　　The　Senate　had　uniformly；　and　the　House　usually；　been　under　their　sway。　　The　Supreme　Court　had　also　been　composed　of　Southern　men。　　Now　that　slavery　was　forced　to　fight　for　its　life；　the　South　with　increased　energy　sought　the　active　support　of　all　the　departments　of　Government。　　Pierce　was　its　humble　servant。　　The　efficient　and　imperious　Douglas　was　serving　it　in　the　Senate；　and　Cass　was　an　eager　rival。　　The　Northern　Democracy　followed　their　lead。　　A　majority　of　the　Supreme　Court　were　zealous　advocates　of　slavery。　　It　was　unfortunate　for　the　South；　and　for　Douglas；　that　the　champions　of　Southern　rights　on　the　bench　and　their　advocates　in　Congress　could　not　have　understood　each　other　in　advance。　　They　were　seeking　to　plant　slavery　on　a　safe　foundation　and　gird　it　round　with　impregnable　defenses。　　Douglas　had　promulgated　the　doctrine　of　squatter　sovereignty　with　which　the　South　was　not　satisfied。　　It　was　possible　for　the　Court　to　devise　a　safer　remedy　for　the　threatened　dangers。

In　1834；　there　was　an　army　surgeon　named　Dr。　Emmerson　living　in　Missouri　who　owned　a　slave　named　Dred　Scott。　　He　was　transferred　to　Fort　Snelling　in　the　Territory　of　Wisconsin　and　took　his　slave　with　him；　but　in　1838　he　returned　with　him　to　his　former　home。　　He　then　sold　Scott　to　a　man　named　Sanford；　who　resided　in　New　York；　but　kept　his　slaves　in　Missouri。　　In　1854　the　slave　brought　an　action　in　the　United　States　Circuit　Court　of　Missouri　to　recover　his　freedom；　on　the　ground　that　he　had　been　voluntarily　taken　into　the　Territory　of　Wisconsin；　where；　by　the　act　of　Congress　known　as　the　Missouri　Compromise；　slavery　was　prohibited。　　His　case　rested　upon　the　rule　that　slavery；　being　the　creature　of　positive　municipal　law；　had　no　legal　existence　beyond　the　limits　of　the　sovereignty　creating　or　recognizing　it。　　The　law　of　Missouri　establishing　slavery　was　of　no　efficacy　in　Wisconsin。　　Hence；　it　was　urged；　when　Dred　was　taken　to　that　Territory；　the　relation　of　master　and　slave　ended　and　he　became　a　free　man。

Upon　its　merit　the　case　presented　but　one　question：　　Was　slavery　forbidden　in　Wisconsin？　　There　rose；　however；　a　preliminary　question　of　great　importance。　　To　give　the　Federal　Court　jurisdiction　it　was　necessary　to　show　that　the　plaintiff　and　defendant　were　citizens　of　different　States。　　Scott　alleged　that　he　was　a　citizen　of　Missouri　and　Sanford　a　citizen　of　New　York。　　The　answer　denied　the　jurisdiction　of　the　Court　for　the　reason　that　Scott　was　not　a　citizen　of　any　State；　being　a　negro　slave；　and　hence　not　entitled　to　maintain　his　action。　　The　Circuit　Court　overruled　this　plea；　but　held　Scott　to　be　still　a　slave；　notwithstanding　his　sojourn　in　Wisconsin；　and　awarded　him　to　Sandford。　　The　case　was　taken　to　the　Supreme　Court　and　there　argued　by　lawyers　of　great　ability　and　learning。　　The　Court　found　unusual　difficulties　in　it；　held　it　under　advisement　during　the　exciting　summer　of　1856；　and　directed　a　re…argument　at　the　December　term。　　On　March　6th；　1857；　two　days　after　the　inauguration　of　Buchanan；　the　Judges　delivered　their　memorable　opinions。

At　this　time　the　Court　consisted　of　five　Southern　Democrats；　two　Northern　Democrats；　one　Whig　and　one　Republican。　　Chief　Justice　Taney　wrote　the　opinion　of　the　Court；　and　did　it　in　a　manner　likely　to　preserve　his　name　from　early　oblivion。　　Judges　McLean　and　Curtis　filed　dissenting　opinions。

The　Court；　after　holding　that　Scott　could　not　maintain　his　action　for　want　of　citizenship；　decided　among　other　things　that：　　〃Whatever　the　General　Government　acquires　it　acquires　for　the　benefit　of　the　people　of　the　several　States　who　created　it。　　It　is　their　trustee；　acting　for　them　and　charged　with　the　duty　of　promoting　the　interests　of　the　whole　people　of　the　Union。　　*　*　*　*　The　right　of　property　in　a　slave　is　distinctly　and　expressly　affirmed　in　the　Constitution。　The　right　to　traffic　in　it；　like　an　ordinary　article　of　merchandise　and　property；　is　guaranteed　to　the　citizens　of　the　United　States。　*　*　*　*　The　Government　*　*　*　is　pledged　to　protect　it　in　all　future　time。　*　*　*　*　The　act　of　Congress　which　prohibits　a　citizen　from　holding　and　owning　property　of　this　kind　in　the　territory　of　the　United　States　north　of　the　line　mentioned　（36　degrees　30　minutes）　is　not　warranted　by　the　Constitution　and　is　therefore　void。　*　*　*　*　*　If　Congress　cannot　do　this　it　will　be　admitted　that　it　could　not　authorize　a　territorial　legislature　to　do　it。〃

Thousands　of　copies　of　the　opinion　of　Judge　Taney　were　printed　and　distributed　among　the　people　by　the　Democrats　who；　at　first；　were　so　elated　over　the　blow　dealt　to　the　Republican　fanatics　that　they　overlooked　the　fact　that　the　decision　was　even　more　fatal　to　the　favorite　doctrine　of　the　Northern　wing　of　their　own　party。

The　dissenting　opinions　were　printed　in　enormous　numbers　by　Republican　committees　and　distributed　among　the　anti…slavery　people　of　the　Northern　and　Middle　States。　　Far　from　settling　the　controversy；　the　powerful　conflicting　opinions　confirmed　the　already　inveterate　prejudices　and　disclosed　with　scientific　clearness　the　fact；　long　dimly　felt；　that　there　existed　two　fundamentally　different　and　irreconcilably　hostile　theories　of　government　among　the　people　which　must　sooner　or　later　grapple　for　the　mastery。　　Naturally　among　Northern　Democrats　the　first　emotion　on　hearing　of　the　decision　was　exultation　over　the　disastrous　reverse　suffered　by　the　Republicans；　whose　whole　political　creed　seemed　annihilated。　　They　had　declared　in　sounding　phrase　that　it　was　the　duty　of　Congress　to　wipe　from　the　Territories　those　twin　relics　of　barbarism；　slavery　and　polygamy；　and　promptly　the　Supreme　Court　had　decided　that　Congress　had　no　such　power。　　But　it　soon　grew　uncomfortably　clear　to　them　that　while　the　decision　upset　the　favorite　dogma　of　the　Republicans；　it　was　utterly　inconsistent　with　the　doctrine　of　popular　sovereignty；　the　fundamental　tenet　of　Northern　Democratic　faith。　　The　decision　was　not　only　a　victory　of　the　Democrats　over　the　Republicans；　but　a　complete　victory　of　the　Southern　slave…holding　Democracy　over　that　of　the　free　North。

To　Douglas　the　situation　in　which　this　left　his　party　was　disastrous。　Restlessly　active　and　efficient　as　he　had　been　in　the　practical　management　of　political　affairs；　his　distinctive　achievement　had　been　the　powerful　advocacy　of　the　doctrine　of　popular　sovereignty；　of　which；　if　not　the　original　author；　he　was　at　least　the　chief　sponsor。　　With　this　doctrine　his　fame　as　a　statesman　was　indissolubly　linked。　　On　its　success　the　unity　of　the　Northern　wing　of　his　party　depended；　on　which　hung　his　hopes　of　victory。

Two　days　before　the　opinion　was　announced　President　Buchanan　in　his　inaugural　address　reminded　the　people　that　the　great　question　which　had　agitated　them　so　long　would　soon　be　settled　by　the　Supreme　court　and　bespoke　general　acquiescence　in　its　decision。　This　unhappy　allusion　gave　rise　to　the　unpleasant　suspicion　that　the　relation　between　the　new　President　and　the　Supreme　Court　in　their　common　service　of　the　South　was　unduly　intimate。

Had　Douglas　been　great　enough　to　sink　the　politician　in　the　statesman；　he　would　now　have　broken　with　the　Southern　wing　of　his　party；　which　had　contemptuously　repudiated　his　entire　system　of　political　doctrines；　he　would　have　rejected　the　new　dogma　imposed　upon　his　party　by　the　Southern　dictators　and　led　the　assault　upon　this　new　creed；　which　was　not　only　fatal　to　himself　as　a　National　statesman；　but　could　not　fail　ultimately　to　prove　fatal　to　his　party　and　involve　his　country　in　the　horrors　of　civil　war。　　His　squatter　sovereignty　was　pitiful　enough。　　But　this　new　doctrine；　announced　by　the　Supreme　Court；　and　approved　by　the　President　and　his　party；　stripped　the　settlers　in　the　Territories　of　all　semblance　of　sovereignty　and　planted　slavery　among　them　by　the　self…acting　energy　of　the　Constitution；　in　utter　disregard　of　their　wishes。　On　the　most　important　question　then　pending　his　party　had　reached　a　conclusion　which　he　believed　to　be　utterly　wrong。　　But　it　was　his　opinion　that　moral　ideas　had　no　place　in　politics。　　He　could　not　break　with　the　powerful　party　which　he　had　led　so　long。　　He　could　not　unqualifiedly　endorse　the　new　doctrine　without　stultifying　himself。　　He　attempted　the　impossible　task　of　reconciling　the　new　creed　with　that　which　he　had　preached　in　the　past。

The　United　States　Grand　Jury　at　Springfield　invited　him　to　address　the　people　of　that　city　on　the　questions　of　the　time。　　He　spoke　on　the　12th　of　June；　1857；　to　a　large　and　enthusiastic　audience。　　He　assured　the　people　that　he　cordially　accepted　the　decision　and　that　it　was　in　perfect　harmony　with　his　favorite　doctrine　of　squatter　sovereignty。　　The　master's　right　to　his　slave　in　the　Territories　he　admitted　was　guaranteed　by　the　Constitution　and　neither　Congress　nor　the　legislature　could　interfere　wi