下载文档原格式
林肯就职演讲稿全文----WORD文档，下载后可编辑修改----下面是小编收集整理的范本，欢迎您借鉴参考阅读和下载，侵删。
您的努力学习是为了更美好的未来！林肯就职演讲稿全文如下：At this second appearing to take the oath of the presidential office， there is less occasion for an extended address than there was at the first. Then a statement，somewhat in detail，of a course to be pursued，seemed fitting and proper. Now，at the expiration of four years，during which public declarations have been constantly called forth on every point and phase of the great contest which still absorbs the attention，and engrosses the energies of the nation，little that is new could be presented. The progress of our arms，upon which all else chiefly depends，is as well known to the public as to myself;and it is，I trust，reasonably satisfactory and encouraging to all. With high hope for the future，no prediction in regard to it is ventured. On the occasion corresponding to this four years ago，all thoughts were anxiously directed to an impending civil war. All dreaded it--all sought to avert it. While the inaugural address was being delivered from this place，devoted altogether to saving the Union without war，insurgent agentswere in the city seeking to destroy it without war--seeking to dissolve the Union，and divide effects，by negotiation. Both parties deprecated war;but one of them would make war rather than let the nation survive;and the other would accept war rather than let it perish. And the war came. One eighth of the whole population were colored slaves，not distributed generally over the Union，but localized in the Southern part of it. These slaves constituted a peculiar and powerful interest. All knew that this interest was，somehow，the cause of the war. To strengthen， perpetuate，and extend this interest was the object for which the insurgents would rend the Union，even by war;while the government claimed no right to do more than to restrict the territorial enlargement of it. Neither party expected for the war，the magnitude，or the duration，which it has already attained. Neither anticipated that the cause of the conflict might cease with，or even before，the conflict itself should cease. Each looked for an easier triumph，and a result less fundamental and astounding. Both read the same Bible，and astounding to the same God;and each invokes His aid against the other. It may seem strange that any men should dare to ask a just God's assistance in wringing their bread from the sweat of other men's faces;but let us judge not that we be not judged. The prayers of both could not be answered;that of neither has been answered fully. The Almighty has his own purposes. "Woe unto the world because of offence! for it must needs be that offence s come;but woe to that man by whom the offence cometh!"If we shall suppose that American Slavery is one of those offences which，in the providence of God，must needs come，but which，having continued through His appointed time，He now wills to remove， and that He gives to both North and South，this terrible war，as the woe due to those by whom the offence came，shall we discern therein any departure from those divine attributes which the believers in a Living God always ascribe to Him? Fondly do we hope--fervently do we pray--that this mighty scourge of war may speedily pass away. Yet， if God wills that it continue，until all the wealth piled by the bond-man's two hundred and fifty years of unrequited toil shall be sunk，and until every drop of blood drawn with the lash，shall be paid by another drawn with the sword，as was said three thousand yearsago，so still it must be said "the judgments of the Lord，are true and righteous altogether"With malice toward none;with charity for all;with firmness in the right，as God gives us to see the right，let us strive on to finish the work we are in;to bind up the nation's wounds;to care for him who shall have borne the battle，and for his widow，and his orphan--to do all which may achieve and cherish a just and lasting peace，among ourselves，and with all nations.林肯人物评价：亚伯拉罕-;林肯(Abraham Lincoln)(1809年02月12日--1865年04月15日)，是美国第16任总统，首位共和党籍总统，也是首位被暗杀的美国总统。
林肯第一次就职演讲稿林肯第一次就职演讲稿的安全，我们最好服从并遵守现在还没有废除的一切法令，而不要轻易相信可以指之为不合宪法，便可以逃脱罪责，而对它们公然违反。
自从第一任总统根据国家宪法宣誓就职以来，七十二年已经过去了。
在这期间，十五位十分杰出的公民相继主持过政府的行政部门。
他们引导着它度过了许多艰难险阻;一般都获得极大的成功。
然而，尽管有这么多可供参考的先例，我现在将在宪法所规定的短短四年任期中来担任这同一任务，却.面临着巨大的非同一般的困难。
在此以前，分裂联邦只是受到了威胁，而现在却是已出现力图分裂它的可怕行动了。
从一般法律和我们的宪法来仔细考虑，我坚信，我们各州组成的联邦是永久性的。
在一切国民政府的根本大法中永久性这一点，虽不一定写明，却是不言而喻的。
我们完全可以肯定说，没有一个名副其实的政府会在自己的根本法中定出一条，规定自己完结的期限。
继续执行我国宪法所明文规定的各项条文，联邦便将永远存在下去——除了采取并未见之于宪法的行动，谁也不可能毁灭掉联邦。
还有，就算合众国并不是个名副其实的政府，而只是依靠契约成立的一个各州的联合体，那既有契约的约束，若非参加这一契约的各方一致同意，我们能说取消就把它取消吗?参加订立契约的一方可以违约，或者说毁约;但如果合法地取消这一契约，岂能不需要大家一致同意吗?从这些总原则出发，我们发现，从法学观点来看，联邦具有永久性质的提法，是为联邦自身的历史所证实的。
联邦本身比宪法更为早得多。
事实上，它是由1774年，签订的《联合条款》建立的。
到1776年的《独立宣言》才使它进一步成熟和延续下来。
然后，通过1778年的“邦联条款”使它更臻成熟，当时参加的十三个州便已明确保证要使邦联永久存在下去。
最后，到1787年制订的宪法公开宣布的目的之一，便是“组建一个更为完美的联邦”。
但是，如果任何一个州，或几个州也可以合法地把联邦给取消掉，加这个联邦可是比它在宪法制订以前还更不完美了，因为它已失去了它的一个至关重要因素——永久性。
林肯总统在1861年的第一次就职演说--英文版there has never been any reasonable cause for such apprehension. indeed, the mostample evidence to the contrary has all the while existed and been open to theirinspection. it is found in nearly all the published speeches of him who now addressesyou. 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 stateswhere it exists. i believe i have no lawful right to do so, and i have no inclinationto do so. those who nominated and elected me did so with full knowledge that i hadmade this and many similar declarations and had never recanted them; and more thanthis, they placed in the platform for my acceptance, and as a law to themselves andto me, the clear and emphatic resolution which i now read: resolved, that themaintenance inviolate of the rights of the states, and especially the right of eachstate to order and control its own domestic institutions according to its own judgmentexclusively, is essential to that balance of power on which the perfection andendurance of our political fabric depend; and we denounce the lawless invasion byarmed force of the soil of any state or territory, no matter what pretext, as amongthe gravest of crimes.unanimity frame and pass a law by means of which to keep good that unanimous oath?there is some difference of opinion whether this clause should be enforced by nationalor by state authority, but surely that difference is not a very material one. if theslave is to be surrendered, it can be of but little consequence to him or to othersby which authority it is done. and should anyone in any case be content that his oathshall go unkept 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 knownin civilized and humane jurisprudence to be introduced, so that a free man be notin any case surrendered as a slave? and might it not be well at the same time to provideby law for the enforcement of that clause in the constitution which guarantees that the citizens of each state shall be entitled to all privilegesand immunities of citizens in the several states? i take the official oath to-daywith no mental reservations and with no purpose to construe the constitution or lawsby any hypercritical rules; and while i do not choose now to specify particular actsof congress as proper to be enforced, i do suggest that it will be much safer forall, both in official and private stations, to conform to and abide by all those actswhich stand unrepealed than to violate any of them trusting to find impunity in havingthem held to be unconstitutional. it is seventy-two years since the first inaugurationof a president under our national constitution. during that period fifteen differentand greatly distinguished citizens have in succession administered the executive branch of the government. they have conducted itthrough many perils, and generally with great success. yet, with all this scope of precedent, i now enter upon the same task for thebrief constitutional term of four years under great and peculiar difficulty. adisruption of the federal union, heretofore only menaced, is now formidably attempted. i hold that in contemplation of universal law and of the constitutionthe union of these states is perpetual. perpetuity is implied, if not expressed, inthe fundamental law of all national governments. it is safe to assert that nogovernment 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 theunion will endure forever, it being impossible to destroy it except by some actionnot provided for in the instrument itself. again: if the united states be not agovernment proper, but an association of states in the nature of contract merely,can it, as acontract, 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 requireall to lawfully rescind it? descending from these general principles, we find theproposition that in legal contemplation the union is perpetual confirmed by thehistory 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 maturedand 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 thatit should be perpetual, by the articles of confederation in 1778. and finally, in1787, one of the declared objects for ordaining and establishing the constitutionwas to form a more perfect union. but if destruction of the union by one or by a partonly of the states be lawfully possible, the union is less perfect than before theconstitution, having lost the vital element of perpetuity. it follows from these viewsthat no state upon its own mere motion can lawfully get out of the union; that resolvesand ordinances to that 林肯的第二任总统就职演说这篇演说的讲稿是人类历史上最伟大的演说词，永久地刻在了林肯纪念堂里，英文原文是：at this second appearing to take the oath of the presidential office，there isless occasion for an extended address than there was at the first. then a statement，somewhat in detail，of a course to be pursued，seemed fitting and proper. now，atthe expiration of four years，during which public declarations have been constantlycalled forth on every point and phase of the great contest which still absorbs theattention，and engrosses the energies of the nation，little that is new could bepresented. the progress of our arms，upon which all else chiefly depends，is as wellknown to the public as to myself; and it is，i trust，reasonably satisfactory andencouraging to all. with high hope for the future，no prediction in regard to it isventured. on the occasion corresponding to this four years ago，all thoughts were anxiouslydirected to an impending civil war. all dreaded it--all sought to avert it. whilethe inaugural address was being delivered from this place，devoted altogether tosaving the union without war，insurgent agents were in the city seeking to destroyit without war--seeking to dissolve the union，and divide effects，by negotiation.both parties deprecated war; but one of them would make war rather than let the nationsurvive; and the other would accept war rather than let it perish. and the war came. one eighth of the whole population were colored slaves，not distributed generally over the union，but localized in the southern part of it.these slaves constituted a peculiar and powerful interest. all knew that this interestwas，somehow，the cause of the war. to strengthen，perpetuate，and extend this interestwas the object for which theinsurgents would rend the union，even by war; while the government claimed noright to do more than to restrict the territorial enlargement of it. neither partyexpected for the war，the magnitude，or the duration，which it has already attained.neither anticipated that the cause of the conflict might cease with，or even before，the conflict itself should cease. each looked for an easier triumph，and a result less fundamental and astounding.both read the same bible，and astounding to the same god; and each invokes his aidagainst the other. it may seem strange that any men should dare to ask a just godsassistance in wringing their bread from with malice toward none; with charity for all; with firmness in the right，asgod gives us to see the right，let us strive on to finish the work we are in; to bindup the nations wounds; to care for him who shall have borne the battle，and for hiswidow，and his orphan--to do all which may achieve and cherish a just and lastingpeace，among ourselves，and with all nations.最后两段译文：(交战)每一方都在寻求一个快速的、不伤根本的胜利。
林肯就职演讲稿范文篇一：林肯总统就职演说林肯总统第一次就职演说(1861年3月4日)林肯[学术交流网按：林肯是美国人民和政治家推崇的伟大人物之一他的维护国家同意反对分裂的主张反对扩张奴隶制的主张尤其受到广泛赞扬自XX年3月1日起发布林肯总统有关维护国家统一、反对分裂的演说、信件、咨文的内容]合众国的同胞们：1861年3月4日按照一个和我们的政府一样古老的习惯我现在来到诸位的面前简单地讲几句话并在你们的面前遵照合众国宪法规定一个总统在他“到职视事之前”必须宣誓的仪式在大家面前宣誓我认为没有必要在这里来讨论并不特别令人忧虑和不安的行政方面的问题在南方各州人民中似乎存在着一种恐惧心理他们认为随着共和党政府的执政他们的财产他们的和平生活和人身安全都将遭到危险这种恐惧是从来没有任何事实根据的说实在的大量相反的证据倒是一直存在并随时可以供他们检查的那种证据几乎在现在对你们讲话的这个人公开发表的每一篇演说中都能找到这里我只想引用其中的一篇在那篇演说中我曾说“我完全无意对已经存在奴隶制的各州的这一制度进行直接或间接的干涉我深信我根本没有合法权利那样做而且我无此意图”那些提名我并选举我的人都完全知道我曾明确这么讲过并且还讲过许多类似的话而且从来也没有收回过我已讲过的这些话不仅如此他们还在纲领中写进了对他们和对我来说都具有法律效力的一项清楚明白、不容含糊的决议让我接受这里我来对大家谈谈这一决议：“决议保持各州的各种权利不受侵犯特别是各州完全凭自己的决断来安排和控制本州内部各种制度的权利不受侵犯乃是我们的政治结构赖以完善和得以持久的权力均衡的至为重要的因素；我们谴责使用武装力量非法入侵任何一个州或准州的土地这种入侵不论使用什么借口都是最严重的罪行”我现在重申这些观点：而在这样做的时候我只想提请公众注意最能对这一点提出确切证据的那就是全国任何一个地方的财产、和平生活和人身安全决不会在任何情况下由于即将上任的政府而遭到危险这里我还要补充说各州只要符合宪法和法律规定合法地提出保护要求政府便一定会乐于给予保护,不管是出于什么原因一一而且对任何一个地方都一视同仁有一个争论得很多的问题是关于逃避服务或引渡从劳役中逃走的人的问题我现在要宣读的条文也和任何有关其它问题的条款一样明明白白写在宪法之中：“凡根据一个州的法律应在该州于服务或从事劳役的人如逃到另一州一律不得按照这一州的法律或条例使其解除该项服务或劳役而必须按照有权享有该项服务或劳役当事人的要求将其引渡”毫无疑问按照制订这一条款的人的意图此项规定实际指的就是对我们所说的逃亡奴隶有权索回；而法律制订人的这一意图实际已成为法律国会的所有议员都曾宣誓遵守宪法中的一切条款——对这一条和其它各条并无两样因此关于适合这一条款规定的奴隶应“将其引渡”这一点他们的誓言是完全一致的那么现在如果他们心平气和地作一番努力他们难道不能以几乎同样完全一致的誓言制订一项法律以使他们的共同誓言得以实施?究竟这一条款应该由国家当局还是由州当局来执行大家的意见还不完全一致；但可以肯定地说这种分歧并不十分重要的问题只要奴隶能被交还那究竟由一个当局来交还对奴隶或对别的人来说没有什么关系任何人在任何情况下也决不会因为应以何种方式来实现他的誓言这样一个无关紧要的争执他便会认为完全可以不遵守自己的誓言吧?另外在任何有关这一问题的法律中应不应该把文明和人道法学中关于自由的各项保证都写上以防止在任何情况下使一个自由人被作为奴隶交出?同时宪法中还有一条规定明确保证“每一州的公民都享有其它各州公民所享有公民的一切特权和豁免权”我们用法律保证使这一条文得以执行那不是更好?我今天在这里正式宣誓思想上决无任何保留也决无意以任何过于挑剔的标准来解释宪法或法律条文我现在虽不打算详细指出国会的些法令必须要遵照执行；但我建议我们大家不论以个人身份还是以公职人员的身份为了有更多的安全我们最好服从并遵守现在还没有废除的一切法令而不要轻易相信可以指之为不合宪法便可以逃脱罪责而对它们公然违反自从第一任总统根据国家宪法宣誓就职以来七十二年已经过去了在这期间十五位十分杰出的公民相继主持过政府的行政部门他们引导着它度过了许多艰难险阻；一般都获得极大的成功然而尽管有这么多可供参考的先例我现在将在宪法所规定的短短四年任期中来担任这同一任务却．面临着巨大的非同一般的困难在此以前分裂联邦只是受到了威胁而现在却是已出现力图分裂它的可怕行动了从一般法律和我们的宪法来仔细考虑我坚信我们各州组成的联邦是永久性的在一切国民政府的根本大法中永久性这一点虽不一定写明却是不言而喻的我们完全可以肯定说没有一个名副其实的政府会在自己的根本法中定出一条规定自己完结的期限继续执行我国宪法所明文规定的各项条文联邦便将永远存在下去——除了采取并未见之于宪法的行动谁也不可能毁灭掉联邦还有就算合众国并不是个名副其实的政府而只是依靠契约成立的一个各州的联合体那既有契约的约束若非参加这一契约的各方一致同意我们能说取消就把它取消?参加订立契约的一方可以违约或者说毁约；但如果合法地取消这一契约岂能不需要大家一致同意?从这些总原则出发我们发现从法学观点来看联邦具有永久性质的提法是为联邦自身的历史所证实的联邦本身比宪法更为早得多事实上它是由1774年签订的《联合条款》建立的到1776年的《独立宣言》才使它进一步成熟和延续下来然后通过1778年的“邦联条款”使它更臻成熟当时参加的十三个州便已明确保证要使邦联永久存在下去最后到1787年制订的宪法公开宣布的目的之一便是“组建一个更为完美的联邦”但是如果任何一个州或几个州也可以合法地把联邦给取消掉加这个联邦可是比它在宪法制订以前还更不完美了因为它已失去了它的一个至关重要因素——永久性从这些观点我们可以认定任何一个州都不可能仅凭自己动议便能合法地退出联邦——而任何以此为目的的决议和法令在法律上都是无效的；至于任何一州或几州的反对合众国当局的暴力行为都可以依据具体情况视为叛乱或革命行为因此我认为,从宪法和法律的角度来看联邦是不容分裂的；我也将竭尽全力按照宪法明确赋于我的责任坚决负责让联邦的一切法令在所有各州得以贯彻执行这样做我认为只是履行我应负的简单职责；只要是可行的我就一定要履行它除非我的合法的主人美国人民收回赋予我的不可缺少的工具或行使他们的权威命令我采取相反的行动我相信我这话决不会被看成是一种恫吓而只会被看作实现联邦已公开宣布的目的它必将按照宪法保卫和维持它自己的存在要做到这一点并不需要流血或使用暴力除非有人把它强加于国家当局否则便决不会发生那种情况赋予我的权力将被用来保持、占有和掌管属于政府的一切财产和土地征收各种税款和关税；但除开为了这些目的确有必要这外决不会有什么入侵问题——决不会在任何地方对人民或在人民之间使用武力任何内地即使对联邦政府的敌对情绪已十分严重和普遍以致妨害有能力的当地公民执行联邦职务的时候政府也决不会强制派进令人厌恶的外来人去担任这些职务尽管按严格的法律规定政府有权强制履行这些职责但一定要那样做必然非常使人不愉快也几乎不切实际所以我认为最好还是暂时先把这些职责放一放邮政除非遭到拒收仍将在联邦全境运作在可能的情况下一定要让各地人民都享有完善的安全感这十分有利于冷静思索和反思我在这里所讲的这些方针必将奉行除非当前事态和实际经验表明修改或改变方针是合适的对任何一个事件和紧急问题我一定会根据当时出现的具体形势谨慎从事期望以和平手段解决国内纠纷力图恢复兄弟爱手足情至于说某些地方总有些人不顾一切一心想破坏联邦并不惜以任何借口图谋不轨我不打算肯定或否定；如果确有这样一些人我不必要再对他们讲什么但对那些真正热爱联邦的人,我不可以讲几句?在我们着手研究如此严重的一件事情之前那就是要把我们的国家组织连同它的一切利益一切记忆和一切希望全给消灭掉难道明智的做法不是先仔细研究一下那样做究竟是为了什么?当事实上极有可能你企图逃避的祸害并不存在的时候你还会不顾一切采取那种贻害无穷的步骤?或者你要逃避的灾祸虽确实存在而在你逃往的地方却有更大的灾祸在等着你；那你会往那里逃?你会冒险犯下如此可怕的一个错误?大家都说如果宪法中所规定的一切权利都确实得到执行那他也就会留在联邦里那么真有什么如宪法申明文规定的权利被否定了?我想没有很幸运人的头脑是这样构造出来的没有一个党敢于如此冒天下之大不韪如果可能请你们讲出怕是一个例子来说明有什么宪法中明文规定的条款是没有得到执行的如果多数派完全靠人数上的优势剥夺掉少数派宪法上明文规定的权利这件事从道义的角度来看也许可以说革命是正当的——如果被剥夺的是极为重要的权利那革命就肯定无疑是合理行动但我们的情况却并非如此少数派和个人的一切重要权利在宪法中通过肯定和否定、保证和禁令；都一一向他们作了明确保证,以致关于这类问题从来也没有引起过争论但是在制订基本法时却不可能对实际工作中出现的任何问题都一一写下可以立即加以应用的条文再高明的预见也不可能料定未来的一切任何长度适当的文件也不可能包容下针对一切可能发生的问题的条文逃避劳役的人到底应该由联邦政府交还还是由州政府交还呢?宪法上没有具体规定国会可以在准州禁止奴隶制?宪法没有具体规定国会必须保护准州的奴隶制?宪法也没有具体规定从这类问题中引出了我们对宪法问题的争端并因这类问题使我们分成了多数派和少数派如果少数派不肯默认多数派便必须默认否则政府便只好停止工作了再没有任何别的路可走；要让政府继续行使职权便必须要这一方或那一方默认在这种情况下如果一个少数派宁可脱离也决不默认那他们也就开创将来必会使他们分裂和毁灭的先例；因为当多数派拒绝接受这样一个少数派的控制的时候他们中的少数派便必会从他们之中再脱离出去比如说一个新的联盟的任何一部分在一两年之后为什么就不会像现在的联邦中的一些部分坚决要脱离出去一样执意要从从那个新联盟中脱离出去所有怀着分裂联邦思想的人现在都正接受着分裂思想的教育难道要组成一个新联邦的州它们的利益竟会是那样完全一致它们只会有和谐而不会再出现脱离行动?非常清楚脱离的中心思想实质就是无政府主义一个受着宪法的检查和限制的约束总是随着大众意见和情绪的慎重变化而及时改变的多数派是自由人民的唯一真正的统治者谁要想排斥他们便必然走向无政府主义或专制主义完全一致是根本不可能的；把少数派的统治作为一种长期安排是完全不能接受的所以一旦排斥了多数原则剩下的便只有某种形式的无政府主义或某专制主义了我没有忘记某些人的说法认为宪法问题应该由最高法院来裁决我也不否认这种裁决在任何情况下对诉讼各万以及诉讼目的完全具有约束力而且在类似的情况中—应受到政府的一切其它部门高度的尊重和重视尽管非常明显这类裁决在某一特定案例中都很可能会是错误的然而这样随之而来的恶果总只限于该特定案件同时裁决还有机会被驳回不致成为以后判案的先例那这种过失比起其它的过失来当然更让人容易忍受同时正直的公民必须承认如果政府在有关全体人民利害的重大问题的政策都得由最高法院的裁决作出决定那一旦对个人之间的一般诉讼作出裁决时人民便已不再是自己的主人而达到了将他们的政府交给那个高于一切的法庭的地步了我这样说决无意对法院或法官表示不满一件案子按正常程序送到他们面前对它作出正当裁决是他们的不可推卸的责任；如果别的人硬要把他们的判决用来达到政治目的那并不是他们的过错我国有一部分人相信奴隶制是正确的应该扩展而另一部分人又相信它是错误的不应该扩展这是唯一的实质性的争执宪法中有关逃亡奴隶的条款以及制止对外奴隶贸易的法律在一个人民的道德观念并不支持该法的社会里它们的执行情况也许不次于任何一项法律所能达到的程度在两种情况下绝大多数的人都遵守枯燥乏味的法律义务但又都有少数人不听那一套关于这一点我想要彻底解决是根本不可能的；如果寸巴两个地区分离以后情况只会更坏对外奴隶贸易现在并未能完全加以禁止最后在一个地区中必将全面恢复；对于逃亡奴隶在另一个地区现在送回的只是一部分将来会完全不肯交出来了就自然条件而言我们是不能分离的我们决不能把我们的各个地区相互搬开也不可能在它们之间修建起一道无法逾越的高墙一对夫妻可以离婚各走各的路彼此再不见面但我们国家的各部分可无法这么办它们只能面对面相处友好也罢仇视也罢他们仍必须彼此交往我们维道能有任何办法使得这种交往在分离之后比分离：之前更为有利更为令人满意?难道在外人之间订立条约比在朋友之间制订法律还更为容易?难道在外人之间履行条约比在朋友之间按法律办事还更忠实?就算你们决定诉诸战争你们总不能永远打下去吧；最后当两败俱伤而双方都一无所获时你们停止战斗那时依照什么条件相互交往这同一个老问题仍会照样摆在你们面前了这个国家连同它的各种机构都属于居住在这里的人民任何时候他们对现存政府感到厌倦了他们可以行使他们的宪法权利改革这个政府或者行使他们的革命权利解散它或者推翻它我当然知道现在就有许多尊贵的、爱国的公民极于想修订我们的宪法尽管我自己不会那么建议我却也完全承认他们在这个问题上的合法权利承认他们可以按照宪法所规定的两种方式中的任何一种来行使这种权利；而且在目前情况下我不但不反对而倒是赞成给人民一个公正的机会让他们去行动我还不禁要补充一点在我看来采取举行会议的方式似乎更好一些这样可以使修订方案完全由人民自己提出而不是只让他们去接受或拒绝一些并非特别为此目的而选出的一些人提出的方案因为也可能那些方案恰恰并不是他们愿意接受或拒绝的我了解到现在已有人提出一项宪法修正案——这修正案我并没有看到但在国会中已经通过了大意说联邦政府将永远不再干涉各州内部制度包括那些应服劳役者的问题为了使我讲的话不致被误解我现在改变我不谈具体修正案的原来的打算明确声明这样一个条款既然现在可能列入宪法我不反对使它成为明确而不可改动的条文合众国总统的一切权威都来之于人民人民并没有授于他规定条件让各州脱离出去的权力人民自己如果要那样干那自然也是可以的；可是现在的行政当局不能这样做他的职责是按照他接任时的样子管理这个政府然后,毫无损伤地再移交给他的继任者我们为什么不能耐心地坚决相信人民的最终的公道呢?难道在整个世界上还有什么更好的或与之相等的希望?在我们今天的分歧中难道双方不都是认为自己正确?如果万国的全能统治者以他的永恒的真理和公正站在你们北方一边或你们南方一边那么依照美国人民这一伟大法官的判决真理和公正必将胜利按照目前我们生活其下的现政府的构架我国人民十分明智；授于他们的公仆的胡作非为的权力是微乎其微的；而且同样还十分明智地规定即使那点微乎其微的权力经过很短一段时间后就必须收回到他们自己手中由于人民保持他们的纯正和警惕任何行政当局在短短的四年之中也不可能用极其恶劣或愚蠢的行为对这个政府造成严重的损害我的同胞们请大家对这整个问题平心静气地好好想一想真正有价值的东西是不会因从容从事而丧失的如果有个什么目标使你迫不及待地要取得它你采取的步骤是在审慎考虑的情况下不会采取的那个目标的确可能会由于你的从容不迫而达不到；但一个真正好的自标是不会因为从容从事而失去的你们中现在感到不满的人仍然必须遵守原封未动的老宪法新个敏感的问题上仍然有根据宪法制订的法律；而对此二者新政府即使想要加以改变它自身也立即无此权力即使承认你们那些心怀不满的人在这一争执中站在正确的一边那也丝毫没有正当的理由要采取贸然行动明智、爱国主义、基督教精神以及对从未抛弃过这片得天独厚的土地的上帝的依赖仍然完全能够以最理想的方式来解决我们当前的一切困难决定内战这个重大问题的是你们我的心怀不满的同胞们而并非决定于我政府决不会攻击你们只要你们自己不当侵略者就不会发生冲突你们并没有对天发誓必须毁灭这个政府而我却曾无比庄严地宣誓一定要“保持、保护和保卫”这个政府我真不想就此结束我的讲话我们不是敌人而是朋友我们决不能成为敌人尽管目前的情绪有些紧张但决不能容许它使我们之间的亲密情感纽带破裂的神秘琴弦在整个这片辽阔的土地上从每一个战场每一个爱国志士的坟墓延伸到每一颗跳动的心和每一个家庭它有一天会被我们的良知所触动再次奏出联邦合唱曲篇二：林肯就职演说原文1林肯的第二任总统就职演说这篇演说的讲稿是人类历史上最伟大的演说词永久地刻在了林肯纪念堂里英文原文是：Atthissecondappearingtotaketheoathofthepresidentialofficeth ereislessoccasionforanextendedaddressthantherewasatthefirst .Thenastatementsomewhatindetailofacoursetobepursuedseemedfi ttingandproper.Nowattheexpirationoffouryearsduringwhichpubl icdeclarationshavebeenconstantlycalledforthoneverypointandphaseofthegreatcontestwhichstillabsorbstheattentionandengros sestheenergiesofthenationlittlethatisnewcouldbepresented.Th eprogressofourarmsuponwhichallelsechieflydependsisaswellkno wntothepublicastomyself;anditisItrustreasonablysatisfactory andencouragingtoall.Withhighhopeforthefuturenopredictioninr egardtoitisventured.Ontheoccasioncorrespondingtothisfouryearsagoallthoughtswere anxiouslydirectedtoanimpendingcivilwar.Alldreadeditallsough ttoavertit.Whiletheinauguraladdresswasbeingdeliveredfromthi splacedevotedaltogethertosavingtheUnionwithoutwarinsurgenta gentswereinthecityseekingtodestroyitwithoutwarseekingtodiss olvetheUnionanddivideeffectsbynegotiation.Bothpartiesdeprec atedwar;butoneofthemwouldmakewarratherthanletthenationsurvi ve;andtheotherwouldacceptwarratherthanletitperish.Andthewar came.OneeighthofthewholepopulationwerecoloredslavesnotdistributedgenerallyovertheUnionbutlocalizedintheSouthernpa rtofit.Theseslavesconstitutedapeculiarandpowerfulinterest.A llknewthatthisinterestwassomehowthecauseofthewar.Tostrength enperpetuateandextendthisinterestwastheobjectforwhichtheinsurgentswouldrendtheUnionevenbywar;whilethegovernmentclai mednorighttodomorethantorestricttheterritorialenlargementof it.Neitherpartyexpectedforthewarthemagnitudeorthedurationwh ichithasalreadyattained.Neitheranticipatedthatthecauseofthe conflictmightceasewithorevenbeforetheconflictitselfshouldce ase.Eachlookedforaneasiertriumphandaresultlessfundamentalandast ounding.BothreadthesameBibleandastoundingtothesameGod;andea chinvokesHisaidagainsttheother.Itmayseemstrangethatanymensh oulddaretoaskajustGod'sassistanceinwringingtheirbreadfromthesweatofothermen'sfaces;butletusjudgenotthatwebenotjudged .Theprayersofbothcouldnotbeanswered;thatofneitherhasbeenans weredfully.TheAlmightyhashisownpurposes.Woeuntotheworldbeca useofoffence！foritmustneedsbethatoffencese;butwoetothatmanbywhomtheoffen ceeth！IfweshallsupposethatAmericanSlaveryisoneofthoseoffenceswhic hintheprovidenceofGodmustneedsebutwhichhavingcontinuedthrou ghHisappointedtimeHenowwillstoremoveandthatHegivestobothNorthandSouththisterriblewarasthewoeduetothosebywhomtheoffence cameshallwediscernthereinanydeparturefromthosedivineattribu teswhichthebelieversinaLivingGodalwaysascribetoHim?Fondlydo wehopeferventlydowepraythatthismightyscourgeofwarmayspeedil ypassaway.YetifGodwillsthatitcontinueuntilallthewealthpiled bythebondman'stwohundredandfiftyyearsofuequitedtoilshallbes unkanduntileverydropofblooddrawnwiththelashshallbepaidbyano therdrawnwiththeswordaswassaidthreethousandyearsagosostilli tmustbesaidthejudgmentsoftheLordaretrueandrighteousaltogeth erWithmalicetowardnone;withcharityforall;withfirmnessintherig htasGodgivesustoseetherightletusstriveontofinishtheworkwear ein;tobindupthenation'swounds;tocareforhimwhoshallhaveborne thebattleandforhiswidowandhisorphantodoallwhichmayachievean dcherishajustandlastingpeaceamongourselvesandwithallnations .最后两段译文：(交战)每一方都在寻求一个快速的、不伤根本的胜利双方都读同一本圣经向同一位上帝祷告求祂的帮助看起来真是奇怪：一些人竟企求上帝让别人流汗而使自己可以得到面包；但是不要让我们论断如果我们自己不想被论断的话双方的祷告不会同时被回答任何一方的祷告也不会被完全应允全能的神自有其旨意“祸哉世界！因着必来之罪；祸哉此人罪因其而来”如果我们假设美国奴隶制度乃是众罪之一此罪到了期限神便定意除去这个制度引发这一场可怖的南北战争因为灾降于那些罪因其而来的人身上如同以往圣徒所描写的神的属性神的作为难道会有任何偏差我们热切地盼望恒切地祷告这场惩罚性的战争得以迅速地远离我们而去然而如果神定意让战争持续下去直到我们从所有奴隶在两百五十年间没有报酬、困苦劳动之下所累积的财富毁去及直到每一滴皮鞭上的血迹被报之以刀下每一条冤魂就如同我们在三千年前所说而今天仍要再说的那样：“主的审判信实合乎公义”不以恶待人而以仁爱相处当神开启我们的眼得见公义时我们必须持守公义让我们全力以赴完成我们手中的工作医治国家的创伤；并照料在战场上承受苦痛的人和那些寡妇、孤儿不忘记关怀他们让我们竭尽全力达成在我们中间及众民族之间的永久的公义和和平简单统计：?讲演总字数：699?提到上帝次数：10(God:6;TheAlmighty:1;Lord:1;He:2)?提到祷告次数：3?提到圣经次数：1?引用圣经次数：2所以只要读一下这篇讲演就会知道林肯是怎样一位敬畏上帝祈求上帝带领的人了！就如林肯传记《公民林肯》(LincolntheCitizen)。
林肯就职演说英文版【篇一：林肯就职演说原文1】林肯的第二任总统就职演说这篇演说的讲稿是人类历史上最伟大的演说词，永久地刻在了林肯纪念堂里，英文原文是：at this second appearing to take the oath of the presidential office，there is less occasion for an extended address than there was at the first. then a statement，somewhat in detail，of a course to be pursued，seemed fitting and proper. now，at the expiration of four years，during which public declarations have been constantly called forth on every point and phase of the great contest which still absorbs the attention，and engrosses the energies of the nation，little that is new could be presented. the progress of our arms，upon which all else chiefly depends，is as well known to the public as to myself; and it is，i trust，reasonably satisfactory and encouraging to all. with high hope for the future，no prediction in regard to it is ventured.on the occasion corresponding to this four years ago，all thoughts were anxiously directed to an impending civil war. all dreaded it--all sought to avert it. while the inaugural address was being delivered from this place，devoted altogether to saving the union without war，insurgent agents were in the city seeking to destroy it without war--seeking to dissolve the union，and divide effects，by negotiation. both parties deprecated war; but one of them would make war rather than let the nation survive; and the other would accept war rather than let it perish. and the war came.one eighth of the whole population were colored slaves，not distributed generally over the union，but localized in the southern part of it. these slaves constituted a peculiar and powerful interest. all knew that this interest was，somehow，the cause of the war. to strengthen，perpetuate，and extend this interest was the object for which theinsurgents would rend the union，even by war; while the government claimed no right to do more than to restrict the territorial enlargement of it. neither party expected for the war，the magnitude，or the duration，which it has already attained. neither anticipated that the cause of the conflict might cease with，or even before，the conflict itself should cease.each looked for an easier triumph，and a result less fundamental and astounding. both read the same bible，and astounding to the same god; and each invokes his aid against the other. it may seem strange that any men should dare to ask a just gods assistance in wringing their bread fromthe sweat of other mens faces; but let us judge not that we be not judged. the prayers of both could not be answered; that of neither has been answered fully. the almighty has his own purposes. woe unto the world because of offence！ for it must needs be that offence s come; but woe to that man by whomthe offence cometh！ if we shall suppose that americanslavery is one of those offences which，in the providence of god，must needs come，but which，having continuedthrough his appointed time，he now wills to remove，and that he gives to both north and south，this terrible war，as thewoe due to those by whom the offence came，shall we discern therein any departure from those divine attributes which the believers in a living god always ascribe to him? fondly do we hope--fervently do we pray--that this mighty scourge of warmay speedily pass away. yet，if god wills that it continue，until all the wealth piled by the bond-mans two hundred andfifty years of uequited toil shall be sunk，and until every dropof blood drawn with the lash，shall be paid by another drawn with the sword，as was said three thousand years ago，sostill it must be said the judgments of the lord，are true and righteous altogetherwith malice toward none; with charity for all; with firmness in the right，as god gives us to see the right，let us strive on to finish the work we are in; to bind up the nations wounds; tocare for him who shall have borne the battle，and for his widow，and his orphan--to do all which may achieve andcherish a just and lasting peace，among ourselves，and withall nations.最后两段译文：(交战)每一方都在寻求一个快速的、不伤根本的胜利。
第一次就职演说【美国】林肯（1809～1865）林肯，杰出的演说家，美国第十六届总统，1865年赢得内战胜利，废除了黑奴制。
内战结束后被暴徒行刺身死。
这是他1861年第一次当选总统后的就职演说。
我们的国家，连同她的行政机构，都属于定居其上的人民。
任何时候，他们只要对现政府感到厌倦，便可以行使宪法赋予的权利改造政府，或使用革命的权利推翻政府。
我知道许多德高望重的爱国公民希望修改国家宪法。
我虽然没有提出修改宪法的具体建议，但是我完全承认，在这整个问题上，人民有权按宪法规定，以上述两种方式去行使他们的权利；在当前的情况下，我并不反对而是赞成给予人民公平的机会去行使这种权力。
……最高行政长官的一切权力来自人民，人民并未赋予他任何权力订立分裂各州的条件。
如果人民愿意，他们可以确定这样的条件。
但最高行政长官本人无权过问此事。
他的职责只是接任管理现政府，在卸任时把政府机构完好地移交继任人。
人民是最公正的，我们为什么不对这点抱有最坚定的信心呢？在世界上，我们还能对别的什么寄予同样的或更大的希望吗？在目前南北分歧中，难道哪一方不坚信公理在自己方面？倘若掌握永恒真理与正义的万能之主站在你北方一面，或站在你南方一面，那么美国人民这位伟大的法官必会作出裁决、将真理与正义判与该方。
同样还是这些人民，他们明智地规定了我国的政体，使人民公仆的权力十分有限，不能为非作歹；他们还同样明智地规定了每隔一段很短的时间，使可将这极有限的权力收回自己手中。
只要人民保持道德情操和警惕戒备，任何行政管理人员，纵使极端腐败或愚蠢，亦不能在四年的短期中对这政体造成严重损害。
全体同胞们，请你们冷静认真地把整个问题考虑一下。
真正有价值的东西是不会因花费一点时间而失去的。
如果有一个目标，促使你们在头脑发热时匆忙地采取了某些不经过深思熟虑是绝不会采取的行动，那么时间稍加拖延这目标就得不到实现了；但是，真正有价值的目标不会因时间拖延而得不到实现。
你们当中有人不满未能改变旧宪法，更主要的是未能改变由你们自己根据旧宪法制定的各项法律。
林肯就职演讲稿全文1860年11月，林肯当选总统，共和党首次执政。
林肯的当选对南方种植园主的利益构成严重威胁，南方种植园奴隶主为制造分裂，发动了叛变，南方11个州先后退出联邦，宣布成立“美利坚联盟国”，并制订了新的宪法，选举新总统。
以下是店铺整理了林肯就职演讲稿全文，供你参考。
林肯就职演讲稿全文如下：At this second appearing to take the oath of the presidential office， there is less occasion for an extended address than there was at the first. Then a statement，somewhat in detail，of a course to be pursued，seemed fitting and proper. Now，at the expiration of four years，during which public declarations have been constantly called forth on every point and phase of the great contest which still absorbs the attention， and engrosses the energies of the nation，little that is new could be presented. The progress of our arms，upon which all else chiefly depends，is as well known to the public as to myself;and it is，I trust，reasonably satisfactory and encouraging to all. With high hope for the future，no prediction in regard to it is ventured. On the occasion corresponding to this four years ago，all thoughts were anxiously directed to an impending civil war. All dreaded it--all sought to avert it. While the inaugural address was being delivered from this place，devoted altogether to saving the Union without war，insurgent agents were in the city seeking to destroy it without war--seeking to dissolve the Union，and divide effects，by negotiation. Both parties deprecated war;but one of them would make war rather than let the nation survive;and the other would accept war rather than let it perish. And the war came. One eighth of the whole population were colored slaves，not distributed generally over the Union，but localized in the Southern part of it. These slaves constituted a peculiar and powerful interest. All knew that this interest was，somehow，the cause of the war. To strengthen， perpetuate，and extend this interest was the object for which the insurgents would rend the Union，even by war;while the government claimed no right to do more than to restrict the territorial enlargement of it. Neither party expected for the war，the magnitude，or the duration，which it has already attained. Neither anticipated that the cause of the conflict might cease with，or even before，the conflict itself should cease. Each looked for an easier triumph，and a result less fundamental and astounding. Both read the same Bible，and astounding to the same God;and each invokes His aid against the other. It may seem strange that any men should dare to ask a just God's assistance in wringing their bread from the sweat of other men's faces;but let us judge not that we be not judged. The prayers of both could not be answered;that of neither has been answered fully. The Almighty has his own purposes. "Woe unto the world because of offence! for it must needs be that offence s come;but woe to that man by whom the offence cometh!"If we shall suppose that American Slavery is one of those offences which，in the providence of God，must needs come，but which，having continued through His appointed time，He now wills to remove， and that He gives to both North and South，this terrible war，as the woe due to those by whom the offencecame，shall we discern therein any departure from those divine attributes which the believers in a Living God always ascribe to Him? Fondly do we hope--fervently do we pray--that this mighty scourge of war may speedily pass away. Yet， if God wills that it continue，until all the wealth piled by the bond-man's two hundred and fifty years of unrequited toil shall be sunk，and until every drop of blood drawn with the lash，shall be paid by another drawn with the sword，as was said three thousand years ago，so still it must be said "the judgments of the Lord，are true and righteous altogether"With malice toward none;with charity for all;with firmness in the right，as God gives us to see the right，let us strive on to finish the work we are in;to bind up the nation's wounds;to care for him who shall have borne the battle，and for his widow，and his orphan--to do all which may achieve and cherish a just and lasting peace，among ourselves，and with all nations.林肯人物评价：亚伯拉罕·林肯(Abraham Lincoln)(1809年02月12日—1865年04月15日)，是美国第16任总统，首位共和党籍总统，也是首位被暗杀的美国总统。
林肯就职演讲稿全文林肯就职演讲稿全文演讲稿可以起到整理演讲者的思路、提示演讲的内容、限定演讲的速度的作用。
在发展不断提速的社会中，我们可以使用演讲稿的机会越来越多，你知道演讲稿怎样才能写的好吗？下面是小编整理的林肯就职演讲稿全文，仅供参考，希望能够帮助到大家。
At this second appearing to take the oath of the presidential office，there is less occasion for an extended address than there was at the first. Then a statement，somewhat in detail，of a course to be pursued，seemed fitting and proper. Now，at the expiration of four years，during which public declarations have been constantly called forth on every point and phase of the great contest which still absorbs the attention，and engrosses the energies of the nation，little that is new could be presented. The progress of our arms，upon which all else chiefly depends，is as well known to the public as to myself;and it is，I trust，reasonably satisfactory and encouraging to all. With high hope for the future，no prediction in regard to it is ventured. On the occasion corresponding to this four years ago，all thoughts were anxiously directed to an impending civil war. All dreaded it--all sought to avert it. While the inaugural address was being delivered from this place，devoted altogether to saving the Union without war，insurgent agents were in the city seeking to destroy it without war--seeking to dissolve the Union，and divide effects，by negotiation. Both parties deprecated war;but one of them would make war rather than let the nation survive;and the other would accept war rather than let it perish. Andthe war came. One eighth of the whole population were colored slaves，not distributed generally over the Union，but localized in the Southern part of it. These slaves constituted a peculiar and powerful interest. All knew that this interest was，somehow，the cause of the war. To strengthen，perpetuate，and extend this interest was the object for which the insurgents would rend the Union，even by war;while the government claimed no right to do more than to restrict the territorial enlargement of it. Neither party expected for the war，the magnitude，or the duration，which it has already attained. Neither anticipated that the cause of the conflict might cease with，or even before，the conflict itself should cease. Each looked for an easier triumph，and a result less fundamental and astounding. Both read the same Bible，and astounding to the same God;and each invokes His aid against the other. It may seem strange that any men should dare to ask a just God's assistance in wringing their bread from the sweat of other men's faces;but let us judge not that we be not judged. The prayers of both could not be answered;that of neither has been answered fully. The Almighty has his own purposes. "Woe unto the world because of offence! for it must needs be that offence s come;but woe to that man by whom the offence cometh!"If we shall suppose that American Slavery is one of those offences which，in the providence of God，must needs come，but which，having continued through His appointed time，He now wills to remove，and that He gives to both North and South，this terrible war，as the woe due to those by whom the offence came，shall we discern therein any departure from those divineattributes which the believers in a Living God always ascribe to Him? Fondly do we hope--fervently do we pray--that this mighty scourge of war may speedily pass away. Yet，if God wills that it continue，until all the wealth piled by the bond-man's two hundred and fifty years of unrequited toil shall be sunk，and until every drop of blood drawn with the lash，shall be paid by another drawn with the sword，as was said three thousand years ago，so still it must be said "the judgments of the Lord，are true and righteous altogether"With malice toward none;with charity for all;with firmness in the right，as God gives us to see the right，let us strive on to finish the work we are in;to bind up the nation's wounds;to care for him who shall have borne the battle，and for his widow，and his orphan--to do all which may achieve and cherish a just and lasting peace，among ourselves，and with all nations.林肯人物评价：亚伯拉罕·林肯(Abraham Lincoln)(1820年02月12日—1865年04月15日)，是美国第16任总统，首位共和党籍总统，也是首位被暗杀的美国总统。
林肯总统在1861年的第一次就职演说--英文版First Inaugural Address of Abraham Lincoln MONDAY, MARCH 4, 1861Fellow-Citizens of the United States: In compliance with a custom as old as the Government itself, I appear before you to address you briefly and to take in your presence the oath prescribed by the Constitution of the United States to be taken by the President before he enters on the execution of this office." 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 susceptible that the property, peace, and security of no section are to be in any wise endangered by the now incoming Administration. I add, too, that all the protection which, consistently with the Constitution and the laws, can be given will be cheerfully given to all the States when lawfully demanded, for whatever cause--as cheerfully to one section as to another. There is much controversy about the delivering up of fugitives from service or labor. The clause I now read is as plainly written in the Constitution as any other of its provisions: No person held to service or labor 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 labor, but shall be delivered up on claim of the party to whom such service or labor may be due. It is scarcely questioned that this provision was intended by those who made it for the reclaiming of what we call fugitive slaves; and the intention of the lawgiver is the law.All members of Congress swear their support to the whole Constitution--to this provision as much as to any other. To the proposition, then, that slaves whose cases come within the terms of this clause "shall be delivered up" their oaths are unanimous. Now, if they would make the effort in good temper, could they not with nearly equalunanimity frame and pass a law by means of which to keep good that unanimous oath? 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 unkept 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 unrepealed than to violate any of them trusting to find impunity in having them held to be unconstitutional. It is seventy-two years since the first inauguration of a President under our National Constitution. During that period fifteen different and greatly distinguished citizens have in succession administered the executive branch of the Government. They have conducted it through many perils, and generally with great success.Yet, with all this scope of precedent, I now enter upon the same task for the brief constitutional term of four years under great and peculiar difficulty. A disruption of the Federal Union, heretofore only menaced, is now formidably attempted. 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 acontract, 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 theseviews 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 Ishall 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 the Union that it will constitutionally defend and maintain itself. In doing this there needs to be no bloodshed or violence, and there shall be none unless it be forced upon the national authority. The power confided to me will be used to hold, occupy, and possess the property and places belonging to the Government and to collect the duties and imposts; but beyond what may be necessary for these objects, there will be no invasion, no using of force against or among the people anywhere. Where hostility to the United States in any interior locality shall be so great and universal as to prevent competent resident citizens from holding the Federal offices, there will be no attempt to force obnoxious strangers among the people for that object. While the strict legal right may exist in the Government to enforce the exercise of these offices, the attempt to do so would be so irritating and so nearly impracticable withal that I deem it better to forego for the time the uses of such offices. The mails, unless repelled, will continue to be furnished in all parts of the Union. So far as possible the people everywhere shall have that sense of perfect security which is most favorable to calm thought and reflection. The course here indicated will be followed unless current events and experience shall show a modification or change to be proper, and in every case and exigency my best discretion will be exercised, according to circumstances actually existing and with a view and a hope of a peaceful solution of the national troubles and the restoration of fraternal sympathies and affections. That there are persons in one section or another who seek to destroy the Union at all events and are glad of any pretext to do it I will neither affirm nor deny; but if there be such, I need address no word to them. To those, however, who really love the Union may I not speak? Before entering upon so grave a matter as the destruction of our national fabric, with all its benefits, its memories, and its hopes, would it not be wise to ascertain precisely why we do it? Will you hazard so desperate a step while there is any possibility that any portion of the ills you fly from have no real existence? Will you, while the certain ills you fly to are greater than all the real ones you fly from, will you risk the commission of so fearful a mistake? All profess to be content in the Union if all constitutional rights can be maintained. Is it true, then, that any right plainly written in the Constitution has been denied? I think not. Happily, the human mind is so constituted that no party can reach to the audacity of doing this. Think, if you can, of a single instance in which a plainly written provision of the Constitutionhas ever been denied. If by the mere force of numbers a majority should deprive a minority of any clearly written constitutional right, it might in a moral point of view justify revolution; certainly would if such right were a vital one. But such is not our case. All the vital rights of minorities and of individuals are so plainly assured to them by affirmations and negations, guaranties and prohibitions, in the Constitution that controversies never arise concerning them. But no organic law can ever be framed with a provision specifically applicable to every question which may occur in practical administration. No foresight can anticipate nor any document of reasonable length contain express provisions for all possible questions. Shall fugitives from labor be surrendered by national or by State authority? The Constitution does not expressly say. May Congress prohibit slavery in the Territories? The Constitution does not expressly say. Must Congress protect slavery in the Territories? The Constitution does not expressly say. From questions of this class spring all our constitutional controversies, and we divide upon them into majorities and minorities. If the minority will not acquiesce, the majority must, or the Government must cease. There is no other alternative, for continuing the Government is acquiescence on one side or the other. If a minority in such case will secede rather than acquiesce, they make a precedent which in turn will divide and ruin them, for a minority of their own will secede from them whenever a majority refuses to be controlled by such minority. For instance, why may not any portion of a new confederacy a year or two hence arbitrarily secede again, precisely as portions of the present Union now claim to secede from it? All who cherish disunion sentiments are now being educated to the exact temper of doing this. Is there such perfect identity of interests among the States to compose a new union as to produce harmony only and prevent renewed secession? Plainly the central idea of secession is the essence of anarchy. A majority held in restraint by constitutional checks and limitations, and always changing easily with deliberate changes of popular opinions and sentiments, is the only true sovereign of a free people. Whoever rejects it does of necessity fly to anarchy or to despotism. Unanimity is impossible. The rule of a minority, as a permanent arrangement, is wholly inadmissible; so that, rejecting the majority principle, anarchy or despotism in some form is all that is left. I do not forget the position assumed by some that constitutional questions are to be decided by the Supreme Court, nor do I deny that such decisions must be binding in any case upon the parties to a suit as to the object of that suit, while they are also entitled to very high respect and consideration in all parallel cases by all other departments of the Government. And while it is obviously possible that such decision may be erroneous in any given case, still the evil effect following it, being limited to that particular case, with the chance that it may be overruled and never become a precedent for other cases, can better be borne than could the evils of a different practice. At the same time, the candid citizen must confess that if the policy of the Government upon vital questions affecting the whole people is to be irrevocably fixed by decisions of the Supreme Court, the instant they are made in ordinary litigation between parties in personal actions the people will have ceased to be their own rulers, having to that extent practically resigned theirGovernment into the hands of that eminent tribunal. Nor is there in this view any assault upon the court or the judges. It is a duty from which they may not shrink to decide cases properly brought before them, and it is no fault of theirs if others seek to turn their decisions to political purposes. One section of our country believes slavery is right and ought to be extended, while the other believes it is wrong and ought not to be extended. This is the only substantial dispute. The fugitive- slave clause of the Constitution and the law for the suppression of the foreign slave trade are each as well enforced, perhaps, as any law can ever be in a community where the moral sense of the people imperfectly supports the law itself. The great body of the people abide by the dry legal obligation in both cases, and a few break over in each. This, I think, can not be perfectly cured, and it would be worse in both cases after the separation of the sections than before. The foreign slave trade, now imperfectly suppressed, would be ultimately revived without restriction in one section, while fugitive slaves, now only partially surrendered, would not be surrendered at all by the other. Physically speaking, we can not separate. We can not remove our respective sections from each other nor build an impassable wall between them. A husband and wife may be divorced and go out of the presence and beyond the reach of each other, but the different parts of our country can not do this. They can not but remain face to face, and intercourse, either amicable or hostile, must continue between them. Is it possible, then, to make that intercourse more advantageous or more satisfactory after separation than before? Can aliens make treaties easier than friends can make laws? Can treaties be more faithfully enforced between aliens than laws can among friends? Suppose you go to war, you can not fight always; and when, after much loss on both sides and no gain on either, you cease fighting, the identical old questions, as to terms of intercourse, are again upon you. This country, with its institutions, belongs to the people who inhabit it. Whenever they shall grow weary of the existing Government, they can exercise their constitutional right of amending it or their revolutionary right to dismember or overthrow it. I can not be ignorant of the fact that many worthy and patriotic citizens are desirous of having the National Constitution amended. While I make no recommendation of amendments, I fully recognize the rightful authority of the people over the whole subject, to be exercised in either of the modes prescribed in the instrument itself; and I should, under existing circumstances, favor rather than oppose a fair opportunity being afforded the people to act upon it. I will venture to add that to me the convention mode seems preferable, in that it allows amendments to originate with the people themselves, instead of only permitting them to take or reject propositions originated by others, not especially chosen for the purpose, and which might not be precisely such as they would wish to either accept or refuse.I understand a proposed amendment to the Constitution--which amendment, however, I have not seen--has passed Congress, to the effect that the Federal Government shall never interfere with the domestic institutions of the States, including that of persons held to service. To avoid misconstruction of what I have said, I depart from my purpose not to speak of particular amendments so far as to say that, holding such a provision to now be implied constitutional law, I have no objection to its beingmade express and irrevocable. The Chief Magistrate derives all his authority from the people, and they have referred none upon him to fix terms for the separation of the States. The people themselves can do this if also they choose, but the Executive as such has nothing to do with it. His duty is to administer the present Government as it came to his hands and to transmit it unimpaired by him to his successor. Why should there not be a patient confidence in the ultimate justice of the people? Is there any better or equal hope in the world? In our present differences, is either party without faith of being in the right? If the Almighty Ruler of Nations, with His eternal truth and justice, be on your side of the North, or on yours of the South, that truth and that justice will surely prevail by the judgment of this great tribunal of the American people. By the frame of the Government under which we live this same people have wisely given their public servants but little power for mischief, and have with equal wisdom provided for the return of that little to their own hands at very short intervals. While the people retain their virtue and vigilance no Administration by any extreme of wickedness or folly can very seriously injure the Government in the short space of four years. My countrymen, one and all, think calmly and well upon this whole subject. Nothing valuable can be lost by taking time. If there be an object to hurry any of you in hot haste to a step which you would never take deliberately, that object will be frustrated by taking time; but no good object can be frustrated by it. Such of you as are now dissatisfied still have the old Constitution unimpaired, and, on the sensitive point, the laws of your own framing under it; while the new Administration will have no immediate power, if it would, to change either. If it were admitted that you who are dissatisfied hold the right side in the dispute, there still is no single good reason for precipitate action. Intelligence, patriotism, Christianity, and a firm reliance on Him who has never yet forsaken this favored land are still competent to adjust in the best way all our present difficulty. In your hands, my dissatisfied fellow-countrymen, and not in mine, is the momentous issue of civil war. The Government will not assail you. You can have no conflict without being yourselves the aggressors. You have no oath registered in heaven to destroy the Government, while I shall have the most solemn one to "preserve, protect, and defend it." I am loath to close. We are not enemies, but friends. We must not be enemies. Though passion may have strained it must not break our bonds of affection. The mystic chords of memory, stretching from every battlefield and patriot grave to every living heart and hearthstone all over this broad land, will yet swell the chorus of the Union, when again touched, as surely they will be, by the better angels of our nature.林肯总统第一次就职演说(1861年3月4日)林肯[学术交流网按：林肯是美国人民和政治家推崇的伟大人物之一，他的维护国家同意，反对分裂的主张，反对扩张奴隶制的主张尤其受到广泛赞扬。
林肯的第一次就职演说导读：１８６１年３月４日，在国会广场举行的总统就职典礼上林肯发表了这篇演说。
威廉·西华德是这篇演说的主要起草人之一，甚至北部民主党党魁、奴隶主的代言人史蒂芬·道格拉斯也参加了起草工作。
这篇演说实际上是共和党统治集团的政策宣言，它规定了林肯政府的基本方针和政策。
演说有三个基本要点：１、用资产阶级法制说明联邦是“永存”的，是“不可分裂”的；２、保证联邦政府“不会以任何方式使任何地区的财产”受到威胁；３、保证与南方奴隶主友好相处。
演说中对当时争论最激烈的问题──奴隶制的存废问题──竟不置一词。
相反却大谈保证“财产”不受威胁。
早在林肯就职前一个月，即２月４日，南部六州已在亚拉巴马州蒙哥马片利城宣布脱离联邦，成立了“南部同盟”。
林肯的这篇软弱无力的演说，进一步助长了这种分裂活动，终于导致了武装叛乱。
……南方诸州的人民似乎存在着顾虑，以为共和党执政就会使他们的财产、他们的安宁与人身安？全遭到威胁。
这样的顾虑是从来没有任何正当理由的。
事实上，一直摆着供他们考查的是大量相反的证据。
这种证据在现在正向你们讲话的这个人的几乎一切公布的演说中都可以找到。
我仅引证一次讲话，我曾声明过，“我没有直接或间接干预各州的现存奴隶制的企图。
我认为我没有如此行事的法律权力，并且也不打算这样作。
”……现在，我要重申这些意见；并且，我这样作的目的，不过想提请公众注意这一情况的最无可置疑的证据，即现在行将执政的政府无论如何都不会使任何地区的财产、安宁与安全遭到威胁。
我还要补充说，当提出合法的要求时，凡是按照宪法和法律能给予的保护，无论其原因为何，政府都将愉快地给予所有的州，不分地区，一样愉快地加以对待。
……我认为，根据普遍法则和宪法来看，联邦是永久的。
永久性即使未经明文规定，也是包含于国家政府的一切基本法则之中的。
可以确切断言，从来没有一个名副其实的政府在自己的组织法中为本身的完结作出过规定。
只要继续执行我国宪法的一切明文规定，联邦就会永存，它是不可能破坏的，除非采用了并非由此文件本身所提供的某种行动。
