FREE BOOKS

Author's List




PREV.   NEXT  
|<   1301   1302   1303   1304   1305   1306   1307   1308   1309   1310   1311   1312   1313   1314   1315   1316   1317   1318   1319   1320   1321   1322   1323   1324   1325  
1326   1327   1328   1329   1330   1331   1332   1333   1334   1335   1336   1337   1338   1339   1340   1341   1342   1343   1344   1345   1346   1347   1348   1349   1350   >>   >|  
rected; to fix and establish those principles as the basis of all laws, constitutions, and governments, which forever hereafter shall be formed in the said territory, &c.; it is hereby ordained and declared that the following articles, &c." One of these articles is that, which has been referred to, and which declares that "there shall be neither slavery nor involuntary servitude in the said Territory." You will perhaps make light of my reference to James Wilson and Benjamin Franklin, for I recollect you say, that, "When the Constitution was about going into operation, its powers were not well understood by the community at large, and remained to be accurately interpreted and defined." Nevertheless, I think it wise to repose more confidence in the views, which the framers of the Constitution took of the spirit and principles of that instrument, than in the definitions and interpretations of the pro-slavery generation, which has succeeded them. It should be regarded as no inconsiderable evidence of the anti-slavery genius and policy of the Constitution, that Congress promptly interdicted slavery in the first portion of territory, and that, too, a territory of vast extent, over which it acquired jurisdiction. And is it not a perfectly reasonable supposition, that the seat of our Government would not have been polluted by the presence of slavery, had Congress acted on that subject by itself, instead of losing sight of it in the wholesale legislation, by which the laws of Virginia and Maryland were revived in the District? If the Federal Constitution be not anti-slavery in its general scope and character; if it be not impregnated with the principles of universal liberty; why was it necessary, in order to restrain Congress, for a limited period, from acting against the slave trade, which is but a branch or incident of slavery, to have a clause to that end in the Constitution? The fact that the framers of the Constitution refused to blot its pages with the word "slave" or "slavery;" and that, by periphrase and the substitution of "persons" for "slaves," they sought to conceal from posterity and the world the mortifying fact, that slavery existed under a government based on the principle, that governments derive "their just powers from the consent of the governed," contains volumes of proof, that they looked upon American slavery as a decaying institution; and that they would naturally shape the Constitution to the abridg
PREV.   NEXT  
|<   1301   1302   1303   1304   1305   1306   1307   1308   1309   1310   1311   1312   1313   1314   1315   1316   1317   1318   1319   1320   1321   1322   1323   1324   1325  
1326   1327   1328   1329   1330   1331   1332   1333   1334   1335   1336   1337   1338   1339   1340   1341   1342   1343   1344   1345   1346   1347   1348   1349   1350   >>   >|  



Top keywords:

slavery

 

Constitution

 
principles
 

Congress

 

territory

 

framers

 

powers

 

articles

 

governments

 

District


Federal

 
revived
 
Maryland
 

wholesale

 
legislation
 
Virginia
 

general

 

universal

 

liberty

 

impregnated


character

 

principle

 

losing

 

abridg

 

naturally

 

Government

 

reasonable

 

supposition

 

polluted

 
presence

subject

 

American

 
decaying
 

institution

 

refused

 
existed
 

perfectly

 
periphrase
 

conceal

 
posterity

sought

 

substitution

 

persons

 
slaves
 

clause

 

consent

 
looked
 

acting

 

restrain

 
limited