sense of the people alone. [Loud and prolonged applause.] For this, I say, this nation would have to be ashamed, were it not that this necessity was welcomed by the majority of the people with eager joy, for the desire to accomplish the great act was alive in their hearts, not waiting for a reason, but longing for an opportunity. [Repeated applause.] But will you, Democrats, expose yourselves to the terrible charge that even necessity found you unwilling to obey the commands of justice and humanity? that you would rather risk the Union and the blessings of free institutions, than wipe out the curse and abomination of slavery?
I repeat, I have appealed only to your selfishness. Let me hope that it would be unjust to you if I should stop here. I ask you to look for a moment beyond the limits of your own immediate interests. Sixteen years ago I was among those who, with the ardor of youthful hearts, plunged into the great struggle for Liberty in the Old World. I will not discuss here the correctness of our views and the practicability of our plans; but I will call up before you one feature of that contest which has a direct bearing upon the issues of our present struggle. We were at once met by the advocates of despotic power with the question: “Do you not know that in all times democratic government was a mere synonym with weakness and instability? Can you show us one in the history of the world, which, after having expanded beyond the limits of a single city or a small territory, was not at once either obliged to yield helplessly to the shock of foreign invasion or torn to pieces by the struggle of factions within?” We had to admit it, for neither Greece nor Rome, nor the Italian Republics, and still less republican France, could be adduced as examples to prove the contrary. The practicability of republican institutions on a great scale was yet to be proved. Then we pointed with
