These natural and apparently adequate means all failing, what will convince them?  This, and this only:  cease to call slavery wrong, and join them in calling it right.  And this must be done thoroughly—­done in acts as well as in words.  Silence will not be tolerated—­we must place ourselves avowedly with them.  Senator Douglas’s new sedition law must be enacted and enforced, suppressing all declarations that slavery is wrong, whether made in politics, in presses, in pulpits, or in private.  We must arrest and return their fugitive slaves with greedy pleasure.  We must pull down our Free-State constitutions.  The whole atmosphere must be disinfected from all taint of opposition to slavery, before they will cease to believe that all their troubles proceed from us.

I am quite aware they do not state their case precisely in this way.  Most of them would probably say to us, “Let us alone; do nothing to us, and say what you please about slavery.”  But we do let them alone,—­have never disturbed them,—­so that, after all, it is what we say which dissatisfies them.  They will continue to accuse us of doing, until we cease saying.

I am also aware they have not as yet in terms demanded the overthrow of our Free-State constitutions.  Yet those constitutions declare the wrong of slavery with more solemn emphasis than do all other sayings against it; and when all these other sayings shall have been silenced, the overthrow of these constitutions will be demanded, and nothing be left to resist the demand.  It is nothing to the contrary that they do not demand the whole of this just now.  Demanding what they do, and for the reason they do, they can voluntarily stop nowhere short of this consummation.  Holding, as they do, that slavery is morally right and socially elevating, they cannot cease to demand a full national recognition of it as a legal right and a social blessing.

Nor can we justifiably withhold this on any ground save our conviction that slavery is wrong.  If slavery is right, all words, acts, laws, and constitutions against it are themselves wrong, and should be silenced and swept away.  If it is right, we cannot justly object to its nationality—­its universality; if it is wrong, they cannot justly insist upon its extension—­its enlargement.  All they ask we could readily grant, if we thought slavery right; all we ask they could as readily grant, if they thought it wrong.  Their thinking it right and our thinking it wrong is the precise fact upon which depends the whole controversy.  Thinking it right, as they do, they are not to blame for desiring its full recognition as being right; but thinking it wrong, as we do, can we yield to them?  Can we cast our votes with their view, and against our own?  In view of our moral, social, and political responsibilities, can we do this?