co…sovereign　with　themselves。〃
  Thus　we　see　the　power　claimed　for　the　Supreme　Court　by　Judge
  Douglas；　Mr。　Jefferson　holds；　would　reduce　us　to　the　despotism　of
  an　oligarchy。
  Now；　I　have　said　no　more　than　this；in　fact；　never　quite　so　much
  as　this；　at　least　I　am　sustained　by　Mr。　Jefferson。
  Let　us　go　a　little　further。　　You　remember　we　once　had　a　National
  Bank。　　Some　one　owed　the　bank　a　debt；　he　was　sued；　and　sought　to
  avoid　payment　on　the　ground　that　the　bank　was　unconstitutional。
  The　case　went　to　the　Supreme　Court；　and　therein　it　was　decided
  that　the　bank　was　constitutional。　　The　whole　Democratic　party
  revolted　against　that　decision。　　General　Jackson　himself　asserted
  that　he；　as　President；　would　not　be　bound　to　hold　a　National　Bank
  to　be　constitutional；　even　though　the　court　had　decided　it　to　be
  so。　　He　fell　in　precisely　with　the　view　of　Mr。　Jefferson；　and
  acted　upon　it　under　his　official　oath；　in　vetoing　a　charter　for　a
  National　Bank。　　The　declaration　that　Congress　does　not　possess
  this　constitutional　power　to　charter　a　bank　has　gone　into　the
  Democratic　platform；　at　their　National　Conventions；　and　was
  brought　forward　and　reaffirmed　in　their　last　Convention　at
  Cincinnati。　　They　have　contended　for　that　declaration；　in　the
  very　teeth　of　the　Supreme　Court；　for　more　than　a　quarter　of　a
  century。　　In　fact；　they　have　reduced　the　decision　to　an　absolute
  nullity。　　That　decision；　I　repeat；　is　repudiated　in　the
  Cincinnati　platform；　and　still；　as　if　to　show　that　effrontery　can
  go　no　further；　Judge　Douglas　vaunts　in　the　very　speeches　in　which
  he　denounces　me　for　opposing　the　Dred　Scott　decision　that　he
  stands　on　the　Cincinnati　platform。
  Now；　I　wish　to　know　what　the　Judge　can　charge　upon　me；　with
  respect　to　decisions　of　the　Supreme　Court；　which　does　not　lie　in
  all　its　length；　breadth；　and　proportions　at　his　own　door。　　The
  plain　truth　is　simply　this：　Judge　Douglas　is　for　Supreme　Court
  decisions　when　he　likes　and　against　them　when　he　does　not　like
  them。　　He　is　for　the　Dred　Scott　decision　because　it　tends　to
  nationalize　slavery；　because　it　is　part　of　the　original
  combination　for　that　object。　　It　so　happens；　singularly　enough；
  that　I　never　stood　opposed　to　a　decision　of　the　Supreme　Court
  till　this；　on　the　contrary；　I　have　no　recollection　that　he　was
  ever　particularly　in　favor　of　one　till　this。　　He　never　was　in
  favor　of　any　nor　opposed　to　any；　till　the　present　one；　which
  helps　to　nationalize　slavery。
  Free　men　of　Sangamon；　free　men　of　Illinois；　free　men　everywhere；
  judge　ye　between　him　and　me　upon　this　issue。
  He　says　this　Dred　Scott　case　is　a　very　small　matter　at　most；
  that　it　has　no　practical　effect；　that　at　best；　or　rather；　I
  suppose；　at　worst；　it　is　but　an　abstraction。　　I　submit　that　the
  proposition　that　the　thing　which　determines　whether　a　man　is　free
  or　a　slave　is　rather　concrete　than　abstract。　　I　think　you　would
  conclude　that　it　was；　if　your　liberty　depended　upon　it；　and　so
  would　Judge　Douglas；　if　his　liberty　depended　upon　it。　　But
  suppose　it　was　on　the　question　of　spreading　slavery　over　the　new
  Territories　that　he　considers　it　as　being　merely　an　abstract
  matter；　and　one　of　no　practical　importance。　　How　has　the　planting
  of　slavery　in　new　countries　always　been　effected？　　It　has　now
  been　decided　that　slavery　cannot　be　kept　out　of　our　new
  Territories　by　any　legal　means。　　In　what　do　our　new　Territories
  now　differ　in　this　respect　from　the　old　Colonies　when　slavery　was
  first　planted　within　them？　　It　was　planted；　as　Mr。　Clay　once
  declared；　and　as　history　proves　true；　by　individual　men；　in　spite
  of　the　wishes　of　the　people；　the　Mother　Government　refusing　to
  prohibit　it；　and　withholding　from　the　people　of　the　Colonies　the
  authority　to　prohibit　it　for　themselves。　　Mr。　Clay　says　this　was
  one　of　the　great　and　just　causes　of　complaint　against　Great
  Britain　by　the　Colonies；　and　the　best　apology　we　can　now　make　for
  having　the　institution　amongst　us。　　In　that　precise　condition　our
  Nebraska　politicians　have　at　last　succeeded　in　placing　our　own
  new　Territories；　the　government　will　not　prohibit　slavery　within
  them；　nor　allow　the　people　to　prohibit　it。
  I　defy　any　man　to　find　any　difference　between　the　policy　which
  originally　planted　slavery　in　these　Colonies　and　that　policy
  which　now　prevails　in　our　new　Territories。　　If　it　does　not　go
  into　them；　it　is　only　because　no　individual　wishes　it　to　go。　　The
  Judge　indulged　himself　doubtless　to…day　with　the　question　as　to
  what　I　am　going　to　do　with　or　about　the　Dred　Scott　decision。
  Well；　Judge；　will　you　please　tell　me　what　you　did　about　the　bank
  decision？　　Will　you　not　graciously　allow　us　to　do　with　the　Dred
  Scott　decision　precisely　as　you　did　with　the　bank　decision？　　You
  succeeded　in　breaking　down　the　moral　effect　of　that　decision：　did
  you　find　it　necessary　to　amend　the　Constitution；　or　to　set　up　a
  court　of　negroes　in　order　to　do　it？
  There　is　one　other　point。　　Judge　Douglas　has　a　very　affectionate
  leaning　toward　the　Americans　and　Old　Whigs。　　Last　evening；　in　a
  sort　of　weeping　tone；　he　described　to　us　a　death…bed　scene。　　He
  had　been　called　to　the　side　of　Mr。　Clay；　in　his　last　moments；　in
  order　that　the　genius　of　〃popular　sovereignty〃　might　duly　descend
  from　the　dying　man　and　settle　upon　him；　the　living　and　most
  worthy　successor。　　He　could　do　no　less　than　promise　that　he　would
  devote　the　remainder　of　his　life　to　〃popular　sovereignty〃；　and
  then　the　great　statesman　departs　in　peace。　　By　this　part　of　the
  〃plan　of　the　campaign〃　the　Judge　has　evidently　promised　himself
  that　tears　shall　be　drawn　down　the　cheeks　of　all　Old　Whigs；　as
  large　as　half…grown　apples。
  Mr。　Webster；　too；　was　mentioned；　but　it　did　not　quite　come　to　a
  death…bed　scene　as　to　him。　　It　would　be　amusing；　if　it　were　not
  disgusting；　to　see　how　quick　these　compromise…breakers　administer
  on　the　political　effects　of　their　dead　adversaries；　trumping　up
  claims　never　before　heard　of；　and　dividing　the　assets　among
  themselves。　　If　I　should　be　found　dead　to…morrow　morning；　nothing
  but　my　insignificance　could　prevent　a　speech　being　made　on　my
  authority；　before　the　end　of　next　week。　　It　so　happens　that　in
  that　〃popular　sovereignty〃　with　which　Mr。　Clay　was　identified；
  the　Missouri　Compromise　was　expressly　reversed；　and　it　was　a
  little　singular　if　Mr。　Clay　cast　his　mantle　upon　Judge　Douglas　on
  purpose　to　have　that　compromise　repealed。
  Again；　the　Judge　did　not　keep　faith　with　Mr。　Clay　when　he　first
  brought　in　his　Nebraska　Bill。　　He　left　the　Missouri　Compromise
  unrepealed；　and　in　his　report　accompanying　the　bill　he　told　the
  world　he　did　it　on　purpose。　　The　manes　of　Mr。　Clay　must　have　been
  in　great　agony　till　thirty　days　later；　when　〃popular　sovereignty〃
  stood　forth　in　all　its　glory。
  One　more　thing。　　Last　night　Judge　Douglas　tormented　himself　with
  horrors　about　my　disposition　to　make　negroes　perfectly　equal　with
  white　men　in　social　and　political　relations。　　He　did　not　stop　to
  show　that　I　have　said　any　such　thing；　or　that　it　legitimately
  follows　from　anything　I　have　said；　but　he　rushes　on　with　his
  assertions。　　I　adhere　to　the　Declaration　of　Independence。　　If
  Judge　Douglas　and　his　friends　are　not　willing　to　stand　by　it；　let
  them　come　up　and　amend　it。　　Let　them　make　it　read　that　all　men
  are　created　equal　except　negroes。　　Let　us　have　it　decided　whether
  the　Declaration　of　Independence；　in　this　blessed　year　of　1858；
  shall　be　thus　amended。　　In　his　construction　of　the　Declaration
  last　year；　he　said　it　only　meant　that　Americans　in　America　were
  equal　to　Englishmen　in　England。　　Then；　when　I　pointed　out　to　him
  that　by　that　rule　he　excludes　the　Germans；　the　Irish；　the
  Portuguese；　and　all　the　other　people　who　have　come　among　us　since
  the　revolution；　he　reconstructs　his　construction。　　In　his　last
  speech　he　tells　us　it　meant　Europeans。
  I　press　him　a　little　further；　and　ask　if　it　meant　to　include　the
  Russians　in　Asia；　or　does　he　mean　to　exclude　that　vast　population
  from　the　principles　of　our　Declaration　of　Independence？　　I　expect
  ere　long　he　will　introduce　another　amendment　to　his　definition。
  He　is　not　at　all　particular。　　He　is　satisfied　with　anything　which
  does　not　endanger　the　nationalizing　of　negro　slavery。　　It　may
  draw　white　men　down；　but　it　must　not　lift　negroes　up。
  Who　shall　say；　〃I　am　the　superior；　and　you　are　the　inferior〃？
  My　declarations　upon　this　subject　of　negro　slavery　may　be
  misrepresented；　but　cannot　be　misunderstood。　　I　have　said　that　I
  do　not　understand　the　Declaration　to　mean　that　all　men　were
  created　equal　in　all　respects。　　They　are　not　our　equal　in　color；
  but　I　suppose　that　it　does　mean　to　declare　that　all　men　are　equal
  in　some　respects；　they　are　equal　in　their　right　to　〃life；
  liberty；　and　the　pursuit　of　happiness。〃　　Certainly　the　negro　is
  not　our　equal　in　color；　perhaps　not　in　many　other　respects；
  still；　in　the　right　to　put　into　his　mouth　the　bread　that　his　own
  hands　have　earned；　he　is　the　equal　of　every　oth