The Middlebury people's press. [volume] (Middlebury, Vt.) 1841-1843, 1843-05-31
SUPPRESSION OF DOMESTIC VIOLENCE.

|
The trainers of our Federal Constitution
set forth, in the preamble of that instru
ment, the objects for which it was entered
into. One of those objects is 'sTo SECURE
TO OURSELVES AND PosTERITY THE BLESSING:
OF LIBERTY" Mr.. Webster, in his late
letter 10 Lord Ashburton, says, "Slaver1
exists in the southern States of this Unior
under the guaranty of our Federal Consti
tuition. The Patriots who framed the Con
stitution, declared their object was ITO Sc.
cure the blessings Of Liberty" Mr.. Web,
ster atfirms that they 'tguardntied SLAVERY.
Did Madison and Washington, and Frank.
lin sag one thing, and do another, or is Mr.
Webster mistaken in the assertion contain.
ed iu his letterl II this doctrine of Mr..
Webster be correct, it follows, of course,
that the free States are involved in all the
gull, disgrace. and responsibility of slavery;
and the position assumed in my first CON-
munication, "that the free States are no
more liable TO support slavery, than the
slave States are 10 abolish it," is erroneous
and unfounded. This doctrine of Mr.. Web
ster is often asserted by southern slavehold-
ers, as well as by northern men, who ap-
pear anxious TO impress our people with
the idea that the free States are thus subsid-
larry 10 the slave States, and involved in all
the hateful consequences Of slavery. | will
not call such men dough faces; with them
have nothing 10 do /; my business is with
their arguments. Our country and poster
ity will hold them responsible for their al
iempis TO induce our people 10 yield up
their own constitutional rights, aud TO be-
come the voluntary supporters OF slavery,
and the slave trade. To arouse our people
TO the investigation of our constitutional
rights in regard 10 this subject, and TO in
spire them TO patriotic and firm mainten-
ance of our interests and honor, is the duty
of the public press and ofpublic men.
To the people of Ohio, and of the free
States, | declare this doctrine unsupported
by any clause in our Constitution. No such
guaranty is found in that instrument. The
patriots who framed that "bond of Union"
made no such degrading stipulation on the
part of northern freemen. If that instru-
ment mad contained any clause susceptible
OF doubtful construction, in this respect,
all will agree, that it would, and ought to be
so construed, as "to secure The blessings of
liberty" rather than to perpetuate SLAVERY.
But there is no clause that can in the opin-
ion of the writer, be deemed doubtful, or
that by any strained construction, can be
said 10 guaranty slavery. The 4th section
oil the 4lh article is, however, quoted in sup
port of the doctrine referred 10. 1t reads
Nllo III IL
dnty 10 eusry Stale in this Union, a repubH-
can form Of Government, and shall protect
them against invasion, and on application of
the executive, when the Legislature cannot
be convened. against domestic violence"
The word guaranty is used in connexion
with a REPUBLICAN form Of Government;
and not with slavery. 1t can hardly be en-
pected thatany one will suppose these terms
to be synonymous. 1t is believed, however,
that those who adhere 10 the doctrine now
commended against, rely upon the last clause,
which pledges the protection Of the United
States against domestic uiolence,"
The history concerning the insertion of
this provision is this In 1876, the "Shay's
rebellion broke out in the State of Massa.
NhhSCltSs bAo ibSullC(tAOu
overthrow, not only of the government of
that State, but poriended the downfall of all
the other State governments they
were thus endangered, it was discovered
that no authority existed in the old articles
of confederation. by which the troops of one
Stale could be employed TO suppress an in
surreciion in another. This difficulty gave
rise 10 the adoption of this clause for sup
pressing domestic violence. Massachusetts
was then the only State that had abolished
slavery. In this history it is difficult TO
trace out any intention TO guaranty SLAVERY.
1t is impossible TO see how any legal mind
can torture this clause into such a guaranty.
1t is simply provision for suppressing in
SurrectiOns 1t applies as much 10 free
States as to slare States, and would have
been adopted, had no slavery existed in ell
Their of the States. 1t has no relation 10 the
character of the insurgents, whether they
be black or ichite, bondmen or freemen,
masters or SLAVES. If an instruction actu-
ally take place, the power of the Federal
Government must be employed to put ii
down, if milder measures will not effect that
object. But the President, when called on
for aid to suppress an insurrection, cannot
stop TO inquire into the cause from which II
arose. He is entirely unauthorized to with
hold such aid in case it arise from the a6-
clifton of slavery. The truth is, The Fede>
raj Constitution considers slaves as persons;
and draws no distinction in regard to the
character of the insurgents. When the u
nited States troops arrive upon the theatre
of action, they must direct their efforts to
supervising the riolence. 1t is their duty
to slay all persons found in arms against the
public tranquility. The master and slave
fighting side by side against the public au-
tboritv, must both be slain without distinc-
ton, and without iuqniring into their rela-
tons to each other.
When the violence is suppressed, the du.
ty of the troops will be performed. If, then,
every slave in The nation Peaceably leares
his master, and starts for CANADA, there is
no power in the Federal Government to
send our troops after them. or TO set them
as guard to prevant their escape. The