to women citizens, and the general understanding that such denial
was in conformity with the Constitution, should be taken to
settle the construction of that instrument. Any force this
argument may have it can only apply to the original text, and not
to the XIV. Amendment, which is of but recent date. But, as a
general principle, this theory is fallacious. It would stop all
political progress; it would put an end to all original thought,
and put the people under that tyranny with which the friends of
liberty have always had to contend--the tyranny of precedent.

From the beginning, our Government has been right in theory, but
wrong in practice. The Constitution, had it been carried out in
its true spirit, and its principles enforced, would have stricken
the chains from every slave in the republic long since. Yet, for
all this, it was but a few years since declared, by the highest
judicial tribunal of the republic, that, according to the
"general understanding," the black man in this country had no
rights the white man was bound to respect. General understanding
and acquiescence is a very unsafe rule by which to try questions
of constitutional law, and precedents are not infallible guides
toward liberty and the rights of man.

Without any law to authorize it, slavery existed in England, and
was sustained and perpetuated by popular opinion, universal
custom, and the acquiescence of all departments of the government
as well as by the subjects of its oppression. A few fearless
champions of liberty struggled against the universal sentiment,
and contended that, by the laws of England, slavery could not
exist in the kingdom; and though for years unable to obtain a
hearing in any British court, the Somerset case was finally tried
in the Court of King's Bench in 1771, Lord Mansfield presiding,
wherein that great and good man, after a long and patient
hearing, declared that no law of England allowed or approved of
slavery, and discharged the negro. And it was then judicially
declared that no slave could breathe upon the soil of England,
although slavery had up to that time existed for centuries, under
the then existing laws. The laws were right, but the practice and
public opinion were wrong.

It is said by the majority of the committee that "if the r