FREE BOOKS

Author's List




PREV.   NEXT  
|<   454   455   456   457   458   459   460   461   462   463   464   465   466   467   468   469   470   471   472   473   474   475   476   477   478  
479   480   481   482   483   484   485   486   487   488   489   490   491   492   493   494   495   496   497   498   499   500   501   502   503   >>   >|  
e as plaintiffs: [This last was also the law of Virginia in 1795. See Tucker's "Dissertation on Slavery," p. 73.] There were also laws making marriage contracts legal, in certain contingencies, and punishing infringements of them, ["_Reeve's Law of Baron and Femme_," p. 310-1.] Each of the laws enumerated above, does, _in principle_, abolish slavery; and all of them together abolish it _in fact_. True, not as a _whole_, and at a _stroke_, nor all in one place; but in its _parts_, by piecemeal, at divers times and places; thus showing that the abolition of slavery is within the boundary of _legislation_. 5._The competency of the law-making power to abolish slavery has been recognized by all the slaveholding States, either directly or by implication_. Some States recognize it in their _Constitutions_, by giving the legislature power to emancipate such slaves as may "have rendered the state some distinguished service," and others by express prohibitory restrictions. The Constitutions of Mississippi, Arkansas, and other States, restrict the power of the legislature in this respect. Why this express prohibition, if the law-making power cannot abolish slavery? A stately farce, indeed, formally to construct a special clause, and with appropriate rites induct it into the Constitution, for the express purpose of restricting a nonentity!--to take from the lawmaking power what it _never had_, and what _cannot_ pertain to it! The legislatures of those States have no power to abolish slavery, simply because their Constitutions have expressly _taken away_ that power. The people of Arkansas, Mississippi, &c., well knew the competency of the law-making power to abolish slavery, and hence their zeal to _restrict_ it. The fact that these and other States have inhibited their legislatures from the exercise of this power, shows that the abolition of slavery is acknowledged to be a proper subject of legislation, when Constitutions impose no restrictions. The slaveholding States have recognised this power in their _laws_. The Virginia Legislature passed a law in 1786 to prevent the further importation of Slaves, of which the following is an extract: "And be it further enacted that every slave imported into this commonwealth contrary to the true intent and meaning of this act, shall upon such importation become _free_." By a law of Virginia, passed Dec. 17, 1792, a slave brought into the state and kept _there a year_, was _free_. The Mary
PREV.   NEXT  
|<   454   455   456   457   458   459   460   461   462   463   464   465   466   467   468   469   470   471   472   473   474   475   476   477   478  
479   480   481   482   483   484   485   486   487   488   489   490   491   492   493   494   495   496   497   498   499   500   501   502   503   >>   >|  



Top keywords:

slavery

 
States
 
abolish
 

making

 
Constitutions
 
express
 

Virginia

 

abolition

 
passed
 
legislation

restrict

 

competency

 

legislature

 

legislatures

 

Mississippi

 
restrictions
 
slaveholding
 

Arkansas

 

importation

 

lawmaking


meaning

 

pertain

 

restricting

 

induct

 

special

 

clause

 

Constitution

 

purpose

 

simply

 
brought

nonentity

 
intent
 

proper

 

subject

 

construct

 

acknowledged

 

exercise

 

extract

 

impose

 

recognised


Slaves

 

prevent

 

Legislature

 

inhibited

 

people

 

contrary

 
commonwealth
 

expressly

 

imported

 
enacted