FREE BOOKS

Author's List




PREV.   NEXT  
|<   701   702   703   704   705   706   707   708   709   710   711   712   713   714   715   716   717   718   719   720   721   722   723   724   725  
726   727   728   729   730   731   732   733   734   735   736   737   738   739   740   741   742   743   744   745   746   747   748   749   750   >>   >|  
not to have a constitutional existence in the new States. The Ordinance continues the privilege of recapturing fugitive slaves in the North-west Territory to the "existing States." Slaves in that territory, to be the subjects of lawful recapture, must in the language of the Ordinance, owe "labour or service in one of the _original_ States." I close what I have to say on this topic, with the remark, that were it admitted, that the reasons for the increase of the number of slave States are sound and satisfactory, it nevertheless would not follow, that the moral and constitutional wrong of preventing that increase is so palpable, as to justify the scorn and insult, which are heaped by Congress upon this hundred thousand petitioners for this measure. It has hitherto been supposed, that you distinctly and fully admitted the Constitutional power of Congress to abolish slavery in the District of Columbia. But, on this point, as on that of the right of petition, you have for reasons known to yourself, suddenly and greatly changed your tone. Whilst your speech argues, at no small length, that Congress has not the right to abolish slavery in the District, all that it says in favor of the Constitutional power to abolish it, is that "the language (of the Constitution) may _possibly_ be sufficiently comprehensive to include a power of abolition." "Faint praise dams;" and your very reluctant and qualified concession of the Constitutional power under consideration, is to be construed, rather as a denial than a concession. Until I acquire the skill of making white whiter, and black blacker, I shall have nothing to say in proof of the Constitutional power of Congress over slavery in the District of Columbia, beyond referring to the terms, in which the Constitution so plainly conveys this power. That instrument authorises Congress "to exercise exclusive legislation in all cases whatsoever over such District." If these words do not confer the power, it is manifest that no words could confer it. I will add that, never, until the last few years, had doubts been expressed, that these words do fully confer that power. You will, perhaps, say, that Virginia and Maryland made their cessions of the territory, which constitutes the District of Columbia, with reservations on the subject of slavery. We answer, that none were expressed;[A] and that if there had been, Congress would not, and in view of the language of the Constitution, could no
PREV.   NEXT  
|<   701   702   703   704   705   706   707   708   709   710   711   712   713   714   715   716   717   718   719   720   721   722   723   724   725  
726   727   728   729   730   731   732   733   734   735   736   737   738   739   740   741   742   743   744   745   746   747   748   749   750   >>   >|  



Top keywords:
Congress
 

District

 

slavery

 

States

 

Constitutional

 

abolish

 
language
 

confer

 

Columbia

 

Constitution


increase
 

expressed

 

concession

 
Ordinance
 
reasons
 
admitted
 

territory

 
constitutional
 

referring

 

plainly


fugitive

 

instrument

 

exclusive

 

legislation

 

exercise

 
authorises
 

conveys

 
whiter
 

consideration

 

construed


slaves

 

reluctant

 

qualified

 

denial

 
making
 

acquire

 
blacker
 

cessions

 

constitutes

 

Maryland


Virginia

 

reservations

 

subject

 
answer
 

doubts

 
continues
 
manifest
 

privilege

 
recapturing
 
existence