FREE BOOKS

Author's List




PREV.   NEXT  
|<   502   503   504   505   506   507   508   509   510   511   512   513   514   515   516   517   518   519   520   521   522   523   524   525   526  
527   528   529   530   531   532   533   534   535   536   537   538   539   540   541   542   543   544   545   546   547   548   549   550   551   >>   >|  
n thousand blacks daily. That Congress has power to restrain these acts in one case, all assert, and in so doing they assert the power "in _all_ cases whatsoever." For the grant of power to suppress insurrections, is an _unconditional_ grant, not hampered by provisos as to the color, shape, size, sex, language, creed, or condition of the insurgents. Congress derives its power to suppress this _actual_ insurrection, from the same source whence it derived its power to suppress the _same_ acts in the case _supposed_. If one case is an insurrection, the other is. The _acts_ in both are the same; the _actors_ only are different. In the one case, ignorant and degraded--goaded by the memory of the past, stung by the present, and driven to desperation by the fearful looking for of wrongs for ever to come. In the other, enlightened into the nature of _rights_, the principles of justice, and the dictates of the law of love, unprovoked by wrongs, with cool deliberation, and by system, they perpetrate these acts upon those to whom they owe unnumbered obligations for _whole lives_ of unrequited service. On which side may palliation be pleaded, and which party may most reasonably claim an abatement of the rigors of law? If Congress has power to suppress such acts _at all_, it has power to suppress them _in_ all. It has been shown already that _allegiance_ is exacted of the slave. Is the government of the United States unable to grant _protection_ where it exacts _allegiance_? It is an axiom of the civilized world, and a maxim even with savages, that allegiance and protection are reciprocal and correlative. Are principles powerless with us which exact homage of barbarians? _Protection is the_ CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHT _of every human being under the exclusive legislation of Congress who has not forfeited it by crime_. In conclusion, I argue the power of Congress to abolish slavery in the District, froth Art. 1, sec. 8, clause 1, of the constitution: "Congress shall have power to provide for the common defence and the general welfare of the United States." Has the government of the United States no power under this grant, to legislate within its own exclusive jurisdiction on subjects that vitally affect its interests? Suppose the slaves in the District should rise upon their masters, and the United States' government, in quelling the insurrection, should kill any number of them. Could their masters claim compensation of the government?
PREV.   NEXT  
|<   502   503   504   505   506   507   508   509   510   511   512   513   514   515   516   517   518   519   520   521   522   523   524   525   526  
527   528   529   530   531   532   533   534   535   536   537   538   539   540   541   542   543   544   545   546   547   548   549   550   551   >>   >|  



Top keywords:
Congress
 

suppress

 

government

 

United

 

States

 

insurrection

 
allegiance
 

principles

 

District

 

exclusive


masters

 

protection

 

wrongs

 

assert

 

CONSTITUTIONAL

 

Protection

 

barbarians

 

homage

 

reciprocal

 
civilized

exacts
 
unable
 
correlative
 

powerless

 

exacted

 
savages
 

jurisdiction

 
subjects
 

vitally

 
legislate

affect

 
interests
 
number
 

compensation

 
quelling
 
Suppose
 

slaves

 
welfare
 

general

 

abolish


slavery

 
conclusion
 

forfeited

 

provide

 

common

 

defence

 
clause
 
constitution
 

legislation

 
actual