Does he really think so? But if it is,
how can he resist it? For years he has labored to prove it a sacred
right of white men to take negro slaves into the new Territories. Can he
possibly show that it is less a sacred right to buy them where they can
be bought cheapest? And unquestionably they can be bought cheaper in
Africa than in Virginia. He has done all in his power to reduce the
whole question of slavery to one of a mere right of property; and, as
such, how can he oppose the foreign slave-trade--how can he refuse that
trade in that "property" shall be "perfectly free"--unless he does it as
a protection to the home production? And as the home producers will
probably not ask the protection, he will be wholly without a ground of
opposition.
Senator Douglas holds, we know, that a man may rightfully be wiser
to-day than he was yesterday; that he may rightfully change when he
finds himself wrong. But can we, for that reason, run ahead, and infer
that he will make any particular change, of which he himself has given
no intimation? Can we safely base our action upon any such vague
inference? Now, as ever, I wish not to misrepresent Judge Douglas's
position, question his motives, or do aught that can be personally
offensive to him.
Pages:
560
561
562
563
564
565
566
567
568
569
570
571
572
573
574
575
576
577
578
579
580
581
582
583
584