The voice of freedom. [volume] (Montpelier, Vt.) 1839-1848, 1839-06-29

says:-"There was obviously gross inconsis-
tency between the principles proclaimed in the
Declaration of Independence and the practice of
holding human beings in perpetual and heredita-
Try bondage: and the supreme judicial tribunal of
the Commonwealth of Massachusetts had decided
even before the conclusion of the Revolutionary
war, that the principles of the Declaration of In
dependence, repeated in the Declaration Rights
prefxed to the Constitution of the State had in
so tacto abolished all slavery within the State
Again Mr.. Adams says" hold the opinion that
one human being cannot be made the property of
another-that persons and things are by the laws
of nature and of natures God, so dstinc. that no
human laws can transform either into the other"
But with these sentiments | cannot reconcile what
follows" But this is not the opinion of the peo-
pie of the District of Columbia; and in the en-
actment of laws to bear exclusively upon them,
and not upon myself or my immediate constitu-
ents, must be governed by their will and not my
own"
These two sentiments should not have been pla-
ced on the same page-much less in the same par
Iagraph No, Mr.. Editor, you should have left
the remaining part of the column blank, after "no
human laws transform either into the other"
so that what follows would not have appeared on
the same page. Who does Mr. Adams mean, by
/" the people Of the District of Co1tmJia?" Slave
laws call only white men the people, and the
black population chatte or part of them at least,
But Mr.. Adams says this definition is not correct,
According to his principles, all the human beings
in the District, are, "by the laws of Nature and
Natures God," "people," and no human laws can
transform them into things. How strange, that
in the same paragraph, man who is justly re-
nowned for wisdom in all civilized nations, should
assent, and virtually deny, that all human beings
are persons, whose rights are equally to be respec
ted Does he mean to say that the slaves in the
District believe that human laws can transform
men into things? No. When he says "the peo-
p1e," he seems to forget that slaves are human be-
ings, and talks in the language of slave laws. l
say consult the wishes of the people Of the Dis
trict." If men want 10 be slaves, why, then let
them be free to enslave themselves. But Mr.. Adj
ANS when he legislates for " the district" must
consult the will of "Me governed" And are the
shareholders the only persons who are the gov
erned?' Are not the slaves governed" also yea,
and with vengeance too! Are not laws made
respecting the slaves aud the free black popula-
ton Consult the will of the governed" would
say, but in ascertaining who the governed are,
we must follow common sense. Am mistaken,
or not? Is Mr.. Adams as Gle ar on this subject as
he is wont to be on other subjects?
How is it that Mr.. Adams should be so incon.
sstent with himself? May it not be owing to the
influence of slavery Is it not possible that sla-
very has exerted its strange influence over the
free spirit of this great statesman Is it not pos
sibe that he has beer so much accustomed to a
society formed under the influence of slavery, and
so long associated with shareholders, that the mo-
ment he thinks of saveholding community he
actually forgets that slaves are persons, or "peo-
ple," in spite of his benevolent feelings and long
cherished notions respecting human rights and
human liberty9 This verify believe to be the
case. And if this be fact, ought not slavery to
be tried for wichcraft, or for being leagued with
the powers of darkness to work mischief? H. C.