|
弗’’裏’’’’’斯
(FREDERICK DOUGLASS)
對’國反對奴隸’’’’’說
Speech to the American Anti-Slavery Society
’有’黑’有投票’’’奴隸’’’’’止’
’’方戰勝’方’成’局’’反對奴隸’’鬥’’’’’’勝’’1865’2月1日’國’批准’’止奴隸’’’憲’第’’’正’’’’’之內’個’批准’’正’’’有’個月’間’該’正’’’正式’’’’’’對’’獲’’由’黑’’’’樣’?有’’’’’’’’’證’們’’’’?誰’’’’’’’’’什麽情’’’國反奴隸’’’’’’’’’’論’’奴隸’’成爲歷’’那麽該’’有’有必’’’’1865’5月10日’弗’’裏’’’’’斯’’’說’敦’該’’不’解散’而’’續’種族’視’鬥’’由’’’’’難’歷’’’’’黑’’夠’’’懼’’’公民’’接’’’’完’’’之’’’們’’屬’’(不管把’種情’’’什麽都’樣)’’’續’’’
’’我不’’’’’毛’疵’’’’’那’’爲’’’’解散’個’’’’候’’’動機’我’有’疑那’’’本’’’’(’’’勞’’’’裏森)’’’贊成解散本’’’’生們’動機之’潔’’’’我堅’’樣’’種’’’’不管’個憲’’正’(第’’)’’’成爲’’’不管’’有足夠數’’’’批准該’正’’爲’’’我’爲’除奴隸’’’’’’有結’’’’’邦’個’都批准’那個’正’’當’方立’裏黑’還’“白”’個詞’對’’’我’’’我們’爲’奴’’’’’’還’有結’’’晚’我堅’’爲’方’’不友’’立’’’’我們’’由’照那個’’成爲’種幻’’’個’’’’個陷阱’我’’還’’’種’’’’’任’’個’’議’’’’’天’’’’不’接’黑’’證詞’那麽像’個’正’’樣’個’’對黑’’說’有什麽’’?那麽我們’’’’裡?任’’個’’都’’’’’個黑’’’’’’’暴’’’剛’’’暴’’有黑’’場’那’’’’’’’’[’’!’’’]不’對我說’方那’’’’’’’變’那麽公正誠實’’’’們不’’’那’剝奪黑’’’’’提’反對白’’證詞’’’’’’’喔’我們’方’’’’’’’伊’諾伊’’’’’’’亥’’’’’’’裏’’普’’斯’’’’’’中’黑’’’’排除’’’不讓’們’’’’證’’’’’個’方’’議’’天’’’項’’’’’黑’不’’任’’’’證’那麽’們’不’’反憲’’那個條款’’樣’’’’’’’方還’’’而’’據憲’’’個條款’’’’邦’任’’個’都不應有奴隸’’’’’勞’’’’’’’’’還’’’’’’
’有’黑’有投票’’’奴隸’’’’’止’’’’方’’議’還’’’’’白’’黑’之間’’’視’’’’’’’那麽奴隸’仍’還’’那’’’’[鼓’]正’’’’’’’說’’那樣’“’’’麻塞諸塞’’’’’’還有‘白’’個詞’麻塞諸塞’’’個’奴’’’’’麻塞諸塞’’把’個黑’’’車裏推’’’馬薩話塞’’’個’奴’’’’’’’’舊麻塞諸塞’’’個奴隸’麻塞諸塞’’’個’奴’”’那’我’’’’’’’’’’’’聽’’’’’’’’麽說’’我’’’有忘’’件’’’’’’’黑’’投票’’’’剝奪’’’’方’’議’’’剝奪黑’’’’攜’’器’’’’’’我那個’方’’們不讓黑’’手’走路’’們不讓五個’’’黑’’集’’’’’那麽我們’奴’’’’’’’’有結’’雖’’國憲’’條款’’’’’攜’’器’’’不應’剝奪’’黑’’’’有’’’攜’’器’’’’’據’個’正’’’’議’仍’還有’’’止’個’’’’們’’’續推’不友’’立’’’’’們’不’麽做嗎?’們’那’’麽’’’不’偏見嗎?難’’們’爲’爲’’’們’’’我們’’’’’’’’之’’而不’像’’那樣’’奴隸之中’’們’’改’’轍’嗎?我’’爾’’聽說’’誠’’’我’’’羅’’’聽說’’誠’’’’’那’值’個錢?
[“不’’’’’’”]
不’’’’’’我’謝我’’友’’’’’’當’們’’’’’黑’’’’著’’’’’’’們當中走’’’’們’’誠’’’[鼓’]’’’’’讓’方’’’’’’’那麽對黑’’舊偏見’敵視’’重’’’’’正’黑’’’用’擊敗’次’亂’’毀’邦’’’’’’標準’個’實’’’’們’有’仇’’’有’’’’’導’’們對’個階’’’’比’’任’’候都’’’’立’’[鼓’]’國’民有’務’’’’’們’’’’有’務(我’望’’’’’’’’少’’公正’’’’)給予黑’選’’’我本’說’國反奴隸’’’’’奴’’’應當有’務“’著不動’期’’’’’救”’’那項’’完成爲止’[鼓’]’友們’’’’國反奴隸’’’不支援黑’’那麽’們’’裡’’支援’[“’’’’’’”]當’個老資’’’奴’’’’個’’暴民攻擊’’’犧’’及’’’’’’’’鎮壓之’仍’’’’’’’’’’’’僅僅’’說憲’’’’’’正’’’’’個國’裏’’’’’不允’有奴隸’’不允’有’’’’奴’’那麽我們還’’’’期望’’’由喇’’’個’’’’音’?里’滿’奴隸’對那’’’裝黑’’’’成爲’由’爲由而反對’裝黑’’’說’什麽’?哼’’們說’“’個論’’’Ｔ’我們應當’’’黑’爲我們’戰’’’’當我們獲’’方’’’’’’’我們仍’’’們’’’’屬’’’”’’’’們’論’’而’’們’對’’’們本’’雇傭黑’爲’們’戰’而’當’們手中獲’剝奪黑’’’’’’’’’’’們’’’’黑’降’’’奴隸’樣’’’中’’們’不’把’種情’’’奴隸’’而’’’’’什麽’’’’給’’’’’方面’奴隸’’’’’有成’’’它曾’’’“’’’’”’“’’’’”’“障礙”’正’衛’’公’’’體’’’稱’那樣’它’’有’’’’’’而’’給它’’’’’個’’’’’我’我們’’最’’目’’’’’’個老妖’’’什麽’式’’’老’’’’什麽’皮’’’
[熱’鼓’]
I do not wish
to appear here in any fault finding spirit, or as an impugner of the motives of
those who believe that the time has come for this Society to disband. I am
conscious of no suspicion of the purity and excellence of the motives that
animate the President of this Society [William Lloyd Garrison], and other
gentlemen who are in favor of its disbandment. I take this ground; whether this
Constitutional Amendment [the thirteenth] is law or not, whether it has been
ratified by a sufficient number of States to make it law or not, I hold that the
work of Abolitionists is not done. Even if every State in the Union had ratified
that Amendment, while the black man is confronted in the legislation of the
South by the word "white," our work as Abolitionists, as I conceive it, is not
done. I took the ground, last night, that the South, by unfriendly legislation,
could make our liberty, under that provision, a delusion, a mockery, and a
snare, and I hold that ground now. What advantage is a provision like this
Amendment to the black man, if the Legislature of any State can to-morrow
declare that no black man's testimony shall be received in a court of law? Where
are we then? Any wretch may enter the house of a black man, and commit any
violence he pleases; if he happens to do it only in the presence of black
persons, he goes unwhipt of justice. ["Hear, hear."] And don't tell me that
those people down there have become so just and honest all at once that they
will not pass laws denying to black men the right to testify against white men
in the courts of law. Why, our Northern States have done it. Illinois, Indiana
and Ohio have done it. Here, in the midst of institutions that have gone forth
from old Plymouth Rock, the black man has been excluded from testifying in the
courts of law; and if the Legislature of every Southern State to-morrow pass a
law, declaring that no Negro shall testify in any courts of law, they will not
violate that provision of the Constitution. Such laws exist now at the South,
and they might exist under this provision of the Constitution, that there shall
be neither slavery not involuntary servitude in any State of the Union. . . .
Slavery
is not abolished until the black man has the ballot. While the Legislatures of
the South retain the right to pass laws making any discrimination between black
and white, slavery still lives there. [Applause.] As Edmund Quincy once said,
"While the word "white' is on the statute-book of Massachusetts, Massachusetts
is a slave State. While a black man can be turned out of a car in Massachusetts,
Massachusetts is a slave State. While a slave can be taken from old
Massachusetts, Massachusetts is a slave State." That is what I heard Edmund
Quincy say twenty-three or twenty-four years ago. I never forget such a thing.
Now, while the black man can be denied a vote, while the Legislatures of the
South can take from him the right to keep and bear arms, as they can－they
would not allow a Negro to walk with a cane where I came from, they would not
allow five of them to assemble together－the
work of the Abolitionists is not finished. Notwithstanding the provision in the
Constitution of the United States, that the right to keep and bear arms shall
not be abridged, the black man has never had the right either to keep or bear
arms; and the Legislatures of the States will still have the power to forbid it,
under this Amendment. They can carry on a system of unfriendly legislation, and
will they not do it? Have they not got prejudice there to do it with? Think you,
that because they are for the moment in the talons and beak of our glorious
eagle, instead of the slave being there, as formerly, that they are converted? I
hear of the loyalty at Wilmington, the loyalty at South Carolina－what
is it worth?
["Not a
straw."]
Not a
straw. I thank my friend for admitting it. They are loyal while they see 200,000
sable soldiers, with glistening bayonets, walking in their midst. [Applause.]
But let the civil power of the South be restored, and the old prejudices and
hostility to the Negro will revive. Aye, the very fact that the Negro has been
used to defeat this rebellion and strike down the standards of the Confederacy
will be a stimulus to all their hatred, to all their malice, and lead them to
legislate with greater stringency towards this class than ever before.
[Applause.] The American people are bound－bound
by their sense of honor (I hope by their sense of honor, at least, by a just
sense of honor), to extend the franchise to the Negro; and I was going to say,
that the Abolitionists of the American Anti-Slavery Society were bound to "stand
still, and see the salvation of God," until that work is done. [Applause.] Where
shall the black man look for support, my friends, if the American Anti-Slavery
Society fails him? ["Hear, hear."] From whence shall we expect a certain sound
from the trumpet of freedom, when the old pioneer, when this Society that has
survived mobs, and martyrdom, and the combined efforts of priest-craft and
state-craft to suppress it, shall all at once subside, on the mere intimation
that the Constitution has been amended, so that neither slavery not involuntary
servitude shall hereafter be allowed in this land? What did the slaveholders of
Richmond say to those who objected to arming the Negro, on the ground that it
would make him a freeman? Why, they said, "The argument is absurd. We may make
these Negroes fight for us; but while we retain the political power of the
South, we can keep them in their subordinate positions." That was the argument;
and they were right. They might have employed the Negro to fight for them, and
while they retained in their hands power to exclude him from political rights,
they could have reduced him to a condition similar to slavery. They would not
call it slavery, but some other name. Slavery has been fruitful in giving itself
names. It has been called "the peculiar institution," "the social system," and
the "impediment," as it was called by the General conference of the Methodist
Episcopal Church. It has been called by a great many names, and it will call
itself by yet another name; and you and I and all of us had better wait and see
what new form this old monster will assume, in what new skin this old snake will
come forth. [Loud applause. ]
’
’ |