(单词翻译:单击)
听力文本
Welcome to THE MAKING OF A NATION -- American history in VOA Special English. As we said last week, James Buchanan of Pennsylvania won the presidential election of eighteen fifty-six. He defeated John Fremont, the candidate of the newly created Republican Party, which opposed slavery. Buchanan, a Democrat, had often supported the South in the dispute over slavery. Most of the new president's closest friends were southerners. He wrote that the North was too aggressive toward the South and should stop interfering in the slave states. Buchanan said the South had good reason to leave the Union if abolitionists continued their attacks against slavery. This week on our series, Jack Moyles and Stan Busby tell more about James Buchanan. And they discuss his influence in the Supreme Court ruling in the case of a slave from Missouri named Dred Scott.
As the new president, Buchanan believed he could solve the slave question by keeping the abolitionists quiet. Success would mean the end of the anti-slavery Republican Party. In choosing his cabinet, Buchanan wanted men who shared the same ideas and interests. President Pierce had tried to unite the different groups in the party by giving each a representative in his cabinet. This had not worked. It had driven the different party groups farther apart. Buchanan had served in President Polk's cabinet. He remembered how well its members worked together. He said it was the unity of this cabinet that made Polk's administration so successful. Buchanan gave the job of Secretary of State to Lewis Cass of Michigan. Cass was seventy-five years old. His mind had lost its sharpness. This did not worry Buchanan, because he had planned to be his own foreign minister. The job of treasury secretary went to Howell Cobb, a southern moderate from Georgia. Southerners also were named as secretary of war, interior secretary and postmaster general. Isaac Toucey of Connecticut was given the job of Navy secretary. Toucey was a northerner. But he supported many policies of the South. Another northerner -- Jeremiah Black of Pennsylvania -- became attorney general.
In forming his cabinet, Buchanan did not ask for advice from Senator Stephen Douglas of Illinois. Douglas was the party's leader in the Senate and the most powerful Democrat in the northwest. Douglas believed that the northwest should have two representatives in the cabinet. He said Cass could be one of them. But Douglas wanted one of his own supporters to be the other. Buchanan refused what Douglas wanted. And he gave the administration's support to a political enemy of Douglas. James Buchanan was sworn-in as president on March fourth, eighteen fifty-seven. In his inaugural speech, the new president denounced the long dispute over slavery. He said he hoped it would end soon. Buchanan said the dispute could be settled easily by doing two things: by ending interference with slavery in states where it was legal. And by letting the people of a territory decide if they wanted slavery. Buchanan said he expected the Supreme Court to rule soon on the right of the people of a territory to decide this. He said he was sure that all good citizens -- North and South -- would accept the high court's ruling. At the time he said this, Buchanan already knew what the court's decision would be. He had even used his influence to help one member of the court to decide. The decision was made in the case of Dred Scott, a negro slave.
Scott was sold in Missouri to an army doctor who took him to Illinois and then went into the Wisconsin territory. Scott lived in these two places for almost four years before he was returned to Missouri. Scott asked a court in Missouri to give him his freedom. He claimed that living in Illinois and Wisconsin -- where slavery was illegal -- had made him a free man. The court agreed with Scott and gave him his freedom. But the decision was appealed, and the Supreme Court of Missouri ruled against him. Scott then took his case to a federal court. Finally, he asked the United States Supreme Court to decide if he was a slave or a free man. The Supreme Court took up the case in December, eighteen fifty-six. The judges studied it carefully because it raised serious constitutional questions. Scott claimed he was free because he had lived in free territory. It was free because Congress -- in the Missouri Compromise of Eighteen Twenty -- made slavery illegal in that area. Scott's owner raised the questions: Did Congress have the Constitutional power to close a territory to slavery? Was the Missouri Compromise legal?
At first, most of the nine Supreme Court judges had planned to give a decision without answering this question. They did not want to involve the court in this bitter dispute. The majority decided that a negro was not a citizen. Therefore, they said, Dred Scott had no right to ask the court to hear his case. In this way, the case could be settled without deciding on the power of Congress to act on slavery in the territories. But two of the nine Supreme Court judges opposed this ruling. Both were from the North. They had said they would write a minority decision. They said their decision would include a statement that Congress did have power over slavery in the territories. Since two members of the court had planned to offer views on this question, the other seven decided the majority also should do so. Of the seven, five were from the South. They did not believe Congress had any power over territorial slavery. The remaining two judges -- both from the North -- did not want to make what they felt would be a political decision.
One southern member of the Supreme Court was James Catron, a good friend of James Buchanan. Buchanan had written to him asking when the court would act on the Dred Scott case. Catron had answered that the court would rule soon. Then he asked for Buchanan's help in getting one of the northern members of the court to vote with the five from the South. He told the president that the country would more easily accept the court's ruling if one of the northern judges gave his support. Catron proposed that Buchanan write to Justice Robert Grier of Pennsylvania. So Buchanan wrote to Grier. He told him that a strong decision in the Dred Scott case might do much to bring peace to the country. Grier agreed. He said he would vote with the five southerners. They would rule that the Constitution did not give Congress power over slavery in the territories. All this had happened in the few weeks before Buchanan became president. The Supreme Court finally announced its decision just two days after Buchanan moved into the White House. Chief Justice Roger Taney read the decision in the small courtroom in the Capitol building.
The room was crowded with congressmen, senators, government officials, and newspapermen. Chief Justice Taney began reading the decision at eleven o'clock. He read for more than two and a half hours. He said the high court rejected Scott's claim of freedom for three reasons. First, Scott was not a citizen. Taney said the Constitution gave the right of citizenship only to members of the white race. Because he was not a citizen, he had no right to ask the court to hear his case. Secondly, Taney said Scott was ruled by the laws of Missouri, the state in which he lived. Missouri laws did not give freedom to slaves who lived temporarily in free territory. Therefore, said Taney, Scott was still a slave. Then the chief justice took up the question of the free territory in which Scott had lived. It had become free territory under the Missouri Compromise. This was the law that Congress passed in eighteen twenty. This law kept slavery out of the northern part of the territory which the United States bought from France.
Justice Taney said Congress did not have the constitutional power to pass such a law. He said when new territory was won, it belonged to all citizens. He said Congress had the right to govern such territory until it became a state. But he said Congress did not have power to close new territory to any American citizen. He said the citizen from Georgia had as much right to settle in this territory with his slaves as a citizen of Maine with his horse. Taney said there was no word in the Constitution that gave Congress greater power over slave property than over any other kind of property. The only such power Congress held was the power to guard and protect the rights of the property owner. To close territory to slaves, Taney said, violated the constitutional rights of slaveholding citizens. Therefore, the Missouri Compromise was unconstitutional. Congress did not have power to act on slavery in the territories.
重点解析
1.return to 回到；返回
I solemnly vowed that someday I would return to live in Europe.
我郑重发誓，总有一天我将回到欧洲生活。
2.rule against 否决；作出不利于......的裁决
We must make it a hard and fast rule against smoking in the office.
我们必须严格规定：办公室里不准吸烟。
3.take up 从事；开始
He will take up his post as the head of the civil courts at the end of next month.
他将在下个月底就任民事法庭庭长一职。
4.at first 起先；最初
At first I felt very resentful and angry about losing my job.
起初我对丢掉工作感到非常怨恨和恼怒。
参考译文
欢迎收听VOA慢速英语之建国史话节目。我们在上周的节目中讲到，宾夕法尼亚州的詹姆斯·布坎南赢得了1856年的总统选举。他击败了新成立的反对奴隶制的共和党候选人约翰·弗里蒙特。布坎南是一位民主党人，在奴隶制问题上经常支持南方。新总统最亲密的朋友大多是南方人。布坎南写道，北方对南方过于咄咄逼人，应该停止干涉实施奴隶制的各州。布坎南说，如果废奴主义者继续攻击奴隶制，南方有充分的理由离开联邦。本周，杰克·莫伊尔斯和斯坦·巴斯比将详细介绍詹姆斯·布坎南。他们还讨论了他对最高法院裁决密苏里州一起名叫德雷德·斯科特的奴隶案件的影响。
作为新总统，布坎南相信他可以通过让废奴主义者保持沉默来解决奴隶制问题。成功将意味着反奴隶制共和党的终结。布坎南在选择内阁时，希望招募志同道合之人。总统皮尔斯曾试图通过在内阁中给每个团体派一名代表，来实现党内团结。但这种做法没有生效。它还拉大了不同政党团体之间的距离。布坎南曾在总统波尔克的内阁任职。他记得那时和成员们在一起工作得非常愉快。他说正是内阁的团结才能使波尔克政府如此成功。布坎南把国务卿的职位交给密歇根州的刘易斯·卡斯。卡斯七十五岁，思绪已不再敏锐。但布坎南对此并不担心，因为他计划自己当外交部长。财政部长的工作交给了来自乔治亚州的南方温和派豪厄尔·科布。作战部长、内政部长和邮政局长的职位也委任给了南方人。康涅狄格州的艾萨克·杜西被任命为海军部长。杜西是个北方人，但他支持南方的许多政策。宾夕法尼亚州的杰里米·布莱克也是北方人，他成为了司法部长。
布坎南组建内阁时，没有征求伊利诺伊州参议员斯蒂芬·道格拉斯的建议。道格拉斯是该党在参议院的领袖，也是西北部地区最有权势的民主党人。道格拉斯认为西北部地区应该在内阁中有两名代表。他说卡斯可以是其中一人，但道格拉斯希望另一人可以是自己的支持者。布坎南拒绝了道格拉斯的请求，他还是支持了格拉斯的政治敌人。詹姆斯·布坎南于1857年3月4日宣誓就任总统，新总统在就职演说中谴责了长期以来关于奴隶制的争论。他说他希望此事很快就会结束。布坎南说，通过做两件事可以很轻松地解决这一争端：结束对合法实施奴隶制各州的干涉，并让生活在某片领土上的人民决定是否要实施奴隶制。布坎南说，他希望最高法院能很快就生活在某片领土上的人民拥有决定此事的权利一事作出裁决。他说，他确信南方和北方所有优秀的公民都会接受高等法院的裁决。他说这句话的时候，布坎南已经知道法院的判决是什么。他甚至利用自己的影响力帮助一位法院成员作出裁决。这一决定是以黑人奴隶德雷德·斯科特为例做出的。
斯科特在密苏里州被卖给一名陆军医生，医生带他去了伊利诺伊州，然后进入威斯康星州。斯科特在回到密苏里州之前，在这两个地方住了将近四年。斯科特要求密苏里州法院给予他自由，他声称生活在奴隶制为非法的伊利诺斯州和威斯康星州，使他成为一名自由人。法院同意斯科特的意见，给与他自由。但这一裁决遭到上诉，密苏里州的最高法院驳回了他的请求。随后，斯科特将案件提交联邦法院。最后，他要求美国最高法院对他是奴隶还是自由人一事做出裁决。最高法院于1856年12月接手此案。法官们仔细研读，因为它提出了严肃的宪法问题。斯科特声称他是自由的，因为他曾生活在自由的领土上。那里是自由的，因为在1820年的密苏里州折衷法案中，国会裁定奴隶制在该地区是非法的。斯科特的主人提出这样的问题：国会是否拥有宪法权力不让奴隶制进入一片领土？密苏里州折衷法案合法吗？
起初，九位最高法院法官中的大多数人计划不回答此问题，以此作为裁决。他们不想让法庭卷入这场激烈的争端。多数法官认为黑人不是公民。因此，他们说，德雷德·斯科特无权要求法院审理他的案件。这样，此案件就可以在不决定国会是否具有在领土上实施奴隶制裁决权的情况下，解决案件。但九位最高法院法官中有两位反对这项裁决，他们都来自北方。他们说，他们要起草一份少数人裁决书。他们的决定将包括一项声明，即国会拥有对领土实施奴隶制的控制权。由于两名法院成员计划就这个问题提出意见，另外七名法院成员决定，多数方也应该采取同样的做法。这七位法官中有五位来自南方，他们不相信国会对领土实施奴隶制具有任何控制权。还有两位来自北方的法官，不想做出他们认为是政治决定的决定。
最高法院的一名南方成员是詹姆斯·凯乔，他是詹姆斯·布坎南的好朋友。布坎南写信给他，询问法院何时处理德雷德·斯科特的案件。凯特伦回答说，法院很快就会做出裁决。随后，他请布坎南帮忙，让法院中的一名北方成员与来自南方的五名成员投票。他告诉总统，如果北方的一位法官给予支持，国民将更容易接受法院的裁决。凯乔建议布坎南给宾夕法尼亚州的罗伯特·格里尔法官写信。于是，布坎南就给格里尔写信。他说德雷德·斯科特案件做出的强有力决定可能会为国家带来和平。格里尔表示同意，他说自己将与五名南方法官投票。他们将裁定，宪法没有赋予国会控制领土实施奴隶制的权利。这些事情都发生在布坎南就任总统几周前的时间里。就在布坎南入主白宫两天后，最高法院终于宣布了裁决。首席大法官罗杰·塔尼在国会大厦的小法庭上宣读了判决。
房间里挤满了国会议员、参议员、政府官员和新闻记者。首席大法官塔尼11点开始宣读判决书，时长为两个半小时。他说道，高等法院驳回斯科特获取自由的主张，出于三个原因。首先，斯科特不是公民。塔尼说，宪法只赋予白人成员公民权。因为他不是公民，所以无权要求法院审理他的案件。其次，塔尼说斯科特是由他居住的密苏里州的法律管辖。密苏里州的法律并未给临时生活在自由领土上的奴隶赋予自由。因此，斯科特仍然是一个奴隶。接着，首席大法官提出了斯科特居住地的自由领土问题。根据密苏里州折衷法案，该地区已经成为自由领土。国会于1820年通过该项法案，法案禁止在美国从法国购买的这片领土的北部地区实施奴隶制。
法官塔尼说，国会没有宪法权力通过这样的法律。当获得新领土时，它属于所有公民。在其成为州之前，国会有权管理这些领土。但是，国会没有权力拒绝任何美国公民进入新领地。乔治亚州的公民有权和他的奴隶一起在这片土地上定居，就像缅因州的公民有权和他的马在这里定居一样。塔尼说，宪法中没有任何话语赋予国会对奴隶拥有的控制权超过任何其他财产的控制权。国会唯一拥有的权力就是保护财产所有人的权利。坦尼说，禁止奴隶进入领地，侵犯了被奴役公民的宪法权利。因此，密苏里州折衷法案违背宪法规定。国会无权在领土上对奴隶制进行控制。
译文为可可英语翻译，未经授权请勿转载！
