Anti-slavery bugle. [volume] (New-Lisbon, Ohio) 1845-1861, 1845-08-22

L mldHNnTupIsts
"The language of the Constitution is: -Reprosen-
tauves and direct taxes shall be appor,ioned among
the several States, which may be included within this
Union. according TO their respective numbers, which
shall be determined, by adding TO The whole number
of free persons, including those bound to serve for
a term of years, and excluding Indians, not taxed,
three .hfths Of all other PERsoNs.n There is no as.
sumption here, no implication, that the other persons
are property, or that the trainers of the Constitution
thus regarded them. 'Ah! but they meant 81 ares,
aRd slaves were regarded as property!m As property
by whomi Not by the Federal Convention, for the
nature Of the relation sustained by The "o,her per.
sons" was not the subject Of discussion: the Conven.
ton did not pretend to pass any judgment one way
or the other, upon the character of the relation. Thew
were regarded as property by the States, iu which
they were slaves, but the trainers Of the Constitution,
10 every case where reference is made 20 them, ma IN.
ed them as PERSONS
We care nothing about legal technicalities, and al.
though we may not be able to show that the word
slave or slavery is contained in the Constitution, ye,
we can prove that in the debates upon lis adoption
slaves were frequently referred to, and referred 10 as
property; and tina, while The provisions of the Con.
~stitution were framed with a view 10 avoid the ap-
pearance Of evil, they we're designed 10 uphold and
tO oici vi leIIt oidNefy'
When the question of direct taxation and represen-
talion was before the Convection, the plan proposed
and adopted, was objected to by some upon anti .sIa.
very grounds-lacy regarded it as a mise
with slavery, and some who advocated it, considered
it a bonus upon slavehoIding. Take a few sentiments
uttered in the debates upon this clause, and see 10
what light the trainers of the constitution viewed it.
"MR CHASE (of Md) observed that negroes are
property, and as such cannot he distinguished from
the lands or personalities held in those States where
there are few slaves"
"Mr. GERRY {of Mass thought property not the
rule Of representation. Whv, then, should the blacks,
who we're property in The South, be in The rule Of
representation more than The cattle and horses of The
NorthT p
"MR. PATTERSON (of N. Jersey said, he could
regard slaves in no light but as property. They ara
no free agents, have no personal liberty, no facullv OF
acquiring property, but on the contrary are them
eelues property, and like other property entirely at
the will Of the MASTER"
"MR. MAIDS N (of Ya) added, as worthy Of re-
! mark. that the Southern States have Ibis peculiar
species Of property, over and above the other species
Of property common to all the StaiesT
GEN. PINcKNEy (of S. Caroiina) denied that the
rule of wealth should be asceralned, and not left tr
the pleasure of The Legislature; and that property IL
o stdres should not be exposed 10 danger, under a gov
eminent instituted for the protection Of property"
"MR. RANDOLPH (of Va lanen,ed that such a spc
Q cies of property eristed. But as it did exist the hold
d er Of it would require this security"
Q "MR. GouvERNEuR MORRIS (of Pa said, the nd
- mission of slaves into the representation, when ial:ll
explained, comes 10 this, that the ~inhabitaBt OF Geor
s gia and South Carolina who gees to The coast of Afri
s ca, and in defiance o! the most sacred laws Of human
q ity, tears away mis- fellow creatures from their dear
est connections, and demns them 10 The most crue
bondage, shall have more votes in a government in
siiuted for protection Of the rights Of mankind, tha
:. the citizen of Pennsylvania or New Jersey, VIII
views with a laudable horror SO nelarious a practice
He would add, that domestic 2aocry is the HoSTlrOu
tnent feature in the arlstocratic counlenance of tn
proposed constitution"
So much for the facts 10 The case-so much for III
testimony of the fathers who probably knew as we
. what they were about, as does the editor Of the Pht,ai
%thropist. 10 continuation Of his remarks upon III
If %suhjec, he says:
"The simple fact Of counting them all, or as tire
in ftths, or one fifth, or not at ak, in the ratio of rel
resentation, implied no approbatiou by the Conver
ton, Of their condition, no judgment on is part r.
speeding it, no sanction whalsuever tn the relation
they sustained TO The States"
-e Suppose shat South Carolina had built up a SON
what different kind of aristocracy from that whic
she had at the time The Constitution was lramed-a
ia aristocrocy which recognized ten Of The inhabilan
h as lreemen and mobiles, and all the others as subjec
s, aud sers. Would it imply sanction of that relatio
if in fixing The ratio Of representation, The convenlit
,e had conferred upon the mobiles a degree of polite
es power commensurate with The number of serfs? "
il answer IN The affirmative; and we arrive at the san