become　one　thing　or　all　the　other；　I　am　in　favor　of　bringing
  about　a　dead　uniformity　in　the　various　States；　in　all　their
  institutions；　he　argues　erroneously。　　The　great　variety　of　the
  local　institutions　in　the　States；　springing　from　differences　in
  the　soil；　differences　in　the　face　of　the　country；　and　in　the
  climate；　are　bonds　of　Union。　　They　do　not　make　〃a　house　divided
  against　itself；〃　but　they　make　a　house　united。　　If　they　produce
  in　one　section　of　the　country　what　is　called　for；　by　the　wants　of
  another　section；　and　this　other　section　can　supply　the　wants　of
  the　first；　they　are　not　matters　of　discord；　but　bonds　of　union；
  true　bonds　of　union。　　But　can　this　question　of　slavery　be
  considered　as　among　these　varieties　in　the　institutions　of　the
  country？　　I　leave　it　to　you　to　say　whether；　in　the　history　of　our
  government；　this　institution　of　slavery　has　not　always　failed　to
  be　a　bond　of　union；　and；　on　the　contrary；　been　an　apple　of
  discord　and　an　element　of　division　in　the　house。　　I　ask　you　to
  consider　whether；　so　long　as　the　moral　constitution　of　men's
  minds　shall　continue　to　be　the　same；　after　this　generation　and
  assemblage　shall　sink　into　the　grave；　and　another　race　shall
  arise；　with　the　same　moral　and　intellectual　development　we　have；
  whether；　if　that　institution　is　standing　in　the　same　irritating
  position　in　which　it　now　is；　it　will　not　continue　an　element　of
  division？　　If　so；　then　I　have　a　right　to　say　that；　in　regard　to
  this　question；　the　Union　is　a　house　divided　against　itself；　and
  when　the　Judge　reminds　me　that　I　have　often　said　to　him　that　the
  institution　of　slavery　has　existed　for　eighty　years　in　some
  States；　and　yet　it　does　not　exist　in　some　others；　I　agree　to　the
  fact；　and　I　account　for　it　by　looking　at　the　position　in　which
  our　fathers　originally　placed　itrestricting　it　from　the　new
  Territories　where　it　had　not　gone；　and　legislating　to　cut　off　its
  source　by　the　abrogation　of　the　slave　trade；　thus　putting　the
  seal　of　legislation　against　its　spread。　　The　public　mind　did　rest
  in　the　belief　that　it　was　in　the　course　of　ultimate　extinction。
  But　lately；　I　thinkand　in　this　I　charge　nothing　on　the　Judge's
  motiveslately；　I　think　that　he；　and　those　acting　with　him；　have
  placed　that　institution　on　a　new　basis；　which　looks　to　the
  perpetuity　and　nationalization　of　slavery。　　And　while　it　is
  placed　upon　this　new　basis；　I　say；　and　I　have　said；　that　I
  believe　we　shall　not　have　peace　upon　the　question　until　the
  opponents　of　slavery　arrest　the　further　spread　of　it；　and　place
  it　where　the　public　mind　shall　rest　in　the　belief　that　it　is　in
  the　course　of　ultimate　extinction；　or；　on　the　other　hand；　that
  its　advocates　will　push　it　forward　until　it　shall　become　alike
  lawful　in　all　the　States；　old　as　well　as　new；　North　as　well　as
  South。　　Now；　I　believe　if　we　could　arrest　the　spread；　and　place
  it　where　Washington　and　Jefferson　and　Madison　placed　it；　it　would
  be　in　the　course　of　ultimate　extinction；　and　the　public　mind
  would；　as　for　eighty　years　past；　believe　that　it　was　in　the
  course　of　ultimate　extinction。　　The　crisis　would　be　past；　and　the
  institution　might　be　let　alone　for　a　hundred　years；　if　it　should
  live　so　long；　in　the　States　where　it　exists；　yet　it　would　be
  going　out　of　existence　in　the　way　best　for　both　the　black　and　the
  white　races。
  ＇A　voice：　〃Then　do　you　repudiate　popular　sovereignty？〃＇
  Well；　then；　let　us　talk　about　popular　sovereignty！　　what　is
  popular　sovereignty？　　Is　it　the　right　of　the　people　to　have
  slavery　or　not　have　it；　as　they　see　fit；　in　the　Territories？　　I
  will　stateand　I　have　an　able　man　to　watch　memy　understanding
  is　that　popular　sovereignty；　as　now　applied　to　the　question　of
  slavery；　does　allow　the　people　of　a　Territory　to　have　slavery　if
  they　want　to；　but　does　not　allow　them　not　to　have　it　if　they　do
  not　want　it。　　I　do　not　mean　that　if　this　vast　concourse　of　people
  were　in　a　Territory　of　the　United　States；　any　one　of　them　would
  be　obliged　to　have　a　slave　if　he　did　not　want　one；　but　I　do　say
  that；　as　I　understand　the　Dred　Scott　decision；　if　any　one　man
  wants　slaves；　all　the　rest　have　no　way　of　keeping　that　one　man
  from　holding　them。
  When　I　made　my　speech　at　Springfield；　of　which　the　Judge
  complains；　and　from　which　he　quotes；　I　really　was　not　thinking　of
  the　things　which　he　ascribes　to　me　at　all。　　I　had　no　thought　in
  the　world　that　I　was　doing　anything　to　bring　about　a　war　between
  the　free　and　slave　states。　　I　had　no　thought　in　the　world　that　I
  was　doing　anything　to　bring　about　a　political　and　social　equality
  of　the　black　and　white　races。　　It　never　occurred　to　me　that　I　was
  doing　anything　or　favoring　anything　to　reduce　to　a　dead
  uniformity　all　the　local　institutions　of　the　various　States。　　But
  I　must　say；　in　all　fairness　to　him；　if　he　thinks　I　am　doing
  something　which　leads　to　these　bad　results；　it　is　none　the　better
  that　I　did　not　mean　it。　　It　is　just　as　fatal　to　the　country；　if　I
  have　any　influence　in　producing　it；　whether　I　intend　it　or　not。
  But　can　it　be　true　that　placing　this　institution　upon　the
  original　basisthe　basis　upon　which　our　fathers　placed　itcan
  have　any　tendency　to　set　the　Northern　and　the　Southern　States　at
  war　with　one　another；　or　that　it　can　have　any　tendency　to　make
  the　people　of　Vermont　raise　sugar…cane；　because　they　raise　it　in
  Louisiana；　or　that　it　can　compel　the　people　of　Illinois　to　cut
  pine　logs　on　the　Grand　Prairie；　where　they　will　not　grow；　because
  they　cut　pine　logs　in　Maine；　where　they　do　grow？　　The　Judge　says
  this　is　a　new　principle　started　in　regard　to　this　question。　　Does
  the　Judge　claim　that　he　is　working　on　the　plan　of　the　founders　of
  government？　　I　think　he　says　in　some　of　his　speeches　indeed；　I
  have　one　here　nowthat　he　saw　evidence　of　a　policy　to　allow
  slavery　to　be　south　of　a　certain　line；　while　north　of　it　it
  should　be　excluded；　and　he　saw　an　indisposition　on　the　part　of
  the　country　to　stand　upon　that　policy；　and　therefore　he　set　about
  studying　the　subject　upon　original　principles；　and　upon　original
  principles　he　got　up　the　Nebraska　Bill！　　I　am　fighting　it　upon
  these　〃original　principles；　fighting　it　in　the　Jeffersonian；
  Washingtonian；　and　Madisonian　fashion。
  Now；　my　friends；　I　wish　you　to　attend　for　a　little　while　to　one
  or　two　other　things　in　that　Springfield　speech。　　My　main　object
  was　to　show；　so　far　as　my　humble　ability　was　capable　of　showing；
  to　the　people　of　this　country　what　I　believed　was　the　truth；
  that　there　was　a　tendency；　if　not　a　conspiracy；　among　those　who
  have　engineered　this　slavery　question　for　the　last　four　or　five
  years；　to　make　slavery　perpetual　and　universal　in　this　nation。
  Having　made　that　speech　principally　for　that　object；　after
  arranging　the　evidences　that　I　thought　tended　to　prove　my
  proposition；　I　concluded　with　this　bit　of　comment：
  〃We　cannot　absolutely　know　that　these　exact　adaptations　are　the
  result　of　preconcert；　but　when　we　see　a　lot　of　framed　timbers；
  different　portions　of　which　we　know　have　been　gotten　out　at
  different　times　and　places；　and　by　different　workmenStephen；
  Franklin；　Roger；　and　James；　for　instance；and　when　we　see　these
  timbers　joined　together；　and　see　they　exactly　make　the　frame　of　a
  house　or　a　mill；　all　the　tenons　and　mortises　exactly　fitting；　and
  all　the　lengths　and　proportions　of　the　different　pieces　exactly
  adapted　to　their　respective　places；　and　not　a　piece　too　many　or
  too　few；not　omitting　even　the　scaffolding；or　if　a　single
  piece　be　lacking；　we　see　the　place　in　the　frame　exactly　fitted
  and　prepared　yet　to　bring　such　piece　in；in　such　a　case　we　feel
  it　impossible　not　to　believe　that　Stephen　and　Franklin　and　Roger
  and　James　all　understood　one　another　from　the　beginning；　and　all
  worked　upon　a　common　plan　or　draft　drawn　before　the　first　blow
  was　struck。〃
  When　my　friend　Judge　Douglas　came　to　Chicago　on　the　9th　of　July；
  this　speech　having　been　delivered　on　the　16th　of　June；　he　made　an
  harangue　there；　in　which　he　took　hold　of　this　speech　of　mine；
  showing　that　he　had　carefully　read　it；　and　while　he　paid　no
  attention　to　this　matter　at　all；　but　complimented　me　as　being　a
  〃kind；　amiable；　and　intelligent　gentleman；〃　notwithstanding　I　had
  said　this；　he　goes　on　and　eliminates；　or　draws　out；　from　my
  speech　this　tendency　of　mine　to　set　the　States　at　war　with　one
  another；　to　make　all　the　institutions　uniform；　and　set　the
  niggers　and　white　people　to　marrying　together。　　Then；　as　the
  Judge　had　complimented　me　with　these　pleasant　titles　（I　must
  confess　to　my　weakness）；　I　was　a　little　〃taken；〃　for　it　came　from
  a　great　man。　　I　was　not　very　much　accustomed　to　flattery；　and　it
  came　the　sweeter　to　me。　　I　was　rather　like　the　Hoosier；　with　the
  gingerbread；　when　he　said　he　reckoned　he　loved　it　better　than　any
  other　man；　and　got　less　of　it。　　As　the　Judge　had　so　flattered　me；
  I　could　not　make　up　my　mind　that　he　meant　to　deal　unfairly　with
  me；　so　I　went　to　work　to　show　him　that　he　misunderstood　the　whole
  scope　of　my　speech；　and