林肯竞选总统的演讲稿

美国总统林肯演讲稿

inaugural speech by abraham lincoln

march 4th 1861

speech

：

i do not consider it necessary at present for me to discuss those matters of

administration about which there is no special anxiety or excitement.

apprehension

seems

to exist

among the people of

the southern states that by the

accession

of

a

republican

administration

their

property

and

their

peace

and

personal

security are to be endangered. there has never been any reasonable cause for such

apprehension. indeed, the most ample evidence to the contrary has all the while

existed and been open to their inspection. it is found in nearly all the published

speeches

of

him

who

now

addresses

you.

i

do

but

quote

from

one

of

those

speeches

when

i declare that:

i

have

no

purpose,

directly

or

indirectly,

to

interfere

with

the

institution

of

slavery in the states where it exists. i believe i have no lawful right to do so,

and i have no inclination to do so.

those who nominated and elected me did so with full knowledge that i had made

this

and

many similar declarations and had never recanted them; and

more than this,

they

placed

in

the

platform

for

my

acceptance,

and

as

a

law

to

themselves

and

to

me,

the clear and emphatic resolution which i now read:

resolved,

that

the

maintenance

inviolate

of

the

rights

of

the

states,

and

especially

the

right

of

each

state

to

order

and

control

its

own

domestic

institutions

according to

its

own judgment exclusively, is essential to that balance

of power

on

which the perfection and endurance of our political fabric depend; and we denounce

the

lawless

invasion

by

armed

force

of

the

soil

of

any

state

or

territory,

no

matter

what pretext, as among the gravest of crimes.

i now reiterate these sentiments, and in doing so i only press upon the public

attention the most conclusive evidence of which the case is

there is much controversy about the delivering up of fugitives from service or

labour.

the

clause

i

now

read

is

as

plainly

written

in

the

constitution

as

any

other

of its provisions:

no

person

held

to

service

or

labour

in

one

state,

under

the

laws

thereof,

escaping

into another, shall in consequence of any law or regulation therein be discharged

from

such

service

or

labour,

but

shall

be

delivered

up

on

claim

of

the

party

to

whom

such service or labour may be due.

there is some difference of opinion whether this clause should be enforced by

national or by state authority, but surely that difference is not a very material

one. if the slave is to be surrendered, it can be of but little consequence to him

or

to

others

by

which

authority

it

is

done.

and

should

anyone

in

any

case

be

content

that his oath shall go un-kept on a merely unsubstantial controversy as to how it

shall be kept?

again:

in

any

law

upon

this

subject

ought

not

all

the

safeguards

of

liberty

known

in civilized and humane jurisprudence to be introduced, so that a free man be not

in

any

case

surrendered

as

a

slave?

and

might

it

not

be

well

at

the

same

time

to

provide

by law for the enforcement of that clause in the constitution which guarantees that

the citizens of each state shall be entitled to all privileges and immunities of

citizens in the several states?

i take the official

oath

to-day with

no

mental reservations and with no purpose

to construe the constitution or laws by any hypercritical rules; and while i do not

choose now to specify particular acts of congress as proper to be enforced, i do

suggest that it will be much safer for all,

both

in

official

and

private

stations,

to

conform

to

and

abide

by

all

those

acts

which

stand

un- repealed

than

to

violate

any

of

them

trusting

to

find

impunity

in

having

them held to be unconstitutional.

i hold that in contemplation

of universal law and of the constitution the union

of

these states

is

perpetual.

perpetuity

is implied, if

not

expressed, in

the

fundamental

law

of

all

national

governments.

it

is

safe

to

assert

that

no

government

proper ever had a provision in its organic law for its own termination. continue to

execute

all

the

express

provisions

of

our

national

constitution,

and

the

union

will

endure

forever,

it

being

impossible

to

destroy

it

except

by

some

action

not

provided

for in the instrument itself.

again: if the united states be not a government proper, but an association of

states in the nature of contract merely, can it, as a contract, be peaceably unmade

by less than all the parties who made it? one party to a contract may violate it -

break it, so to speak - but does it not require all to lawfully rescind it?

descending

from

these

general

principles,

we

find

the

proposition

that

in

legal

contemplation the union is perpetual confirmed by the history of the union itself.

the

union

is

much

older

than

the

constitution.

it

was

formed,

in

fact,

by

the

articles

of

association

in

1774.

it

was

matured

and

continued

by

the

declaration

of

independence

in

1776.

it

was

further

matured,

and

the

faith

of

all

the

then

thirteen

states expressly plighted and engaged that it should be perpetual, by the articles

of confederation in 1778. and finally, in 1787, one of the declared objects for

ordaining and establishing the constitution was to form a more perfect union.

but

if

destruction

of

the

union

by

one

or

by

a

part

only

of

the

states

be

lawfully

possible, the union is less perfect than before the constitution, having lost the

vital element of perpetuity.

it follows from these views that no state upon its own mere motion can

lawfully get out of the union; that resolves and ordinances to that effect are

legally void, and that acts of violence within any state or states against the

authority of the united states are insurrectionary or revolutionary, according to

circumstances.

i therefore consider that in view of the constitution and the laws the union is

unbroken, and to the extent of my ability, i shall take care, as the constitution

itself expressly

enjoins upon me, that

the

laws of the

union be faithfully executed

in

all

the

states.

doing

this

i

deem

to

be

only

a

simple

duty

on

my

part,

and

i

shall

perform it so far as practicable unless my rightful masters, the american people,

shall

withhold

the

requisite

means

or

in

some

authoritative

manner

direct

the

contrary.

i trust this will not be regarded as a menace, but only as the declared purpose of