Vermont watchman and State journal. [volume] (Montpelier, Vt.) 1836-1883, 1845-03-14

pendent OF each other, but sovereign. The Senate
is composed Of the representatives of the States in
their sovereign capacity. Between powers, each
supreme in ITSELF there can be no inequality and
if any other basis of representation had been as
sumed, then the Senate would have been no longer
the assembly of the States but representation Of
numbers or property, or both.
But if this equality is to be treated as conces-
sion, IT was not at any rate compromise between
the North and South, but between the great States
and the snail. The small States, being sovereign,
were pr0ia fdce entitled to equal weight in the Ma
tional Legislature. The large States claimed
voice prcportioned to their wealth and population.
How was this difficulty to be reconcied? Obvi-
ously by the adoption of a double system, combin-
ing in the Senate the representation of sovereign
ties, and in the House, the representation of num-
bers or wealth And this is the true origin OF the
form and constitution of our National Legislature
This is the great and only perpetual compromise OF
the Constitution. This, and not blind and habit
ual reverence for the forms of British legislation,
is the true reason of the division of the legislative
power into two branches. Being then a comprom-
Use between the larger and smaller States, it was
not at the same time compromise between the
North and the South, reference to the first cen
sus will SHOW For of the six larger States, three
were northern and three southern. The smaller
States were also equally divided-Maryland, the
thirteenth. Ieng middle tern, both in numbers
and position Does, then, the Constitution contain
any compromise between the North and the South !?
Unquestionably it does and it is this, that the
South should be allowed larger ratio of represent
tation, in consideration Of the assumption of lar
ger proportion Of the public burdens. when direct
taxation should be necessary. Where there is moth
ing at issue between the parties, no supposed con-
hict Of rights, there can be no compromise. What,
then, was the point of dispute between the North
and the South Simply this Shall property lave
representation in the National Legislature? At
the time of the adoption of the Constitution, al
though the principal trading towns were at the
| North, vet the actual convertible wealth of the
South including slaves, supposed to be greater
than that of the North. This, then, is the COM
PROMISE and the only compromise, between the
| North and the South In consideration that the
Southern States would treat the slaves as PERSONS
for the purpose Of taxation, the Northern States a.
greed that they should be treated as persons for the
purpose of representation. 1t is an admission OF
the principle of a property representation con-
cesson by the INDECENT North to the affluent South
Candor obliges me to admit that there is great
force in the argument used by the saveholding
States, that if numbers alone were to be the basis
of representation, the slaves ought to be counted.
You at the North, said they, exercise the right of
determining who shall enjoy the franchises OF Tree.
men. You require various qualifications, such as
term of residence, and, in some cases, stipula-
ted amount Of property; and you insist that white
persons excluded from all political rights, shall be
enumerated. Why not, with equal proprlety, count
onr slaves to whom, by the same sovereign author
ity which you exercise, we deny political rights
repeat sir, there Is, rather, before the general
adoption Of the prnc pie Of universal suffrage by
the Northern States, there great force in this
argument. But though forcible, it was not unan-
swerable, and among the counter arguments, by
which it may be met are these: The legislation of
the South deprlves the slaves not only of political
rights, but of all the personal rights of humanity
You deny them the attribute personality atogeth-
err. You make them not persons but things. 1t
does not, them lie in your mouths to say, that for
the purposes Of government, and that, not merely
of the States where they reside, but of those where
they do not the slaves should be treated as entitled
to political rights. On the other hand, our exclu-
, sion of certain persons from the enjoyment of po
litical franchises rests Oh different foundation
The slave, With you, is essentially destitute of the
character of citizen, and can, neither by his own
act, by that OF any other, by the favor of for
tune, acquire that character You may enact laws
to restrain the master from manning him, or taking
his lie; but these laws give him no rights, for he
cannot enforce them, and they are analogous to
laws for the prevention of cruelty to brutes. The
slave, then cannot be recognised by your govern
nents, any thing but a chattel, because he has,
by your laws, Absolutely no relations to Govern
ment. He is not a member of the body polite
The persons excluded by US are excluded Cor the
want of certain acquirable accidents The exclu-
sion of the slave is absolute and perpeual-that of
the non-qualifed white is limited and temporary
The slave is forever DISTINGUISHED by inherent and
irremovabe dlsqualifcations-t right of the non
qualified white is merely suspended. The force OF
this reasoning is virtually admitted by many Of the
southern States, which apportion the members of
their own legislatures, upon the basis of repre-
, sentation of whites only.
Again, then, sir, the only compromise ofthe Con
stuton, betw cen the North nd the South, is that
" whereby dsproporonate representation is granted
to the slaVehoding States, and dsproportlonate
alton assumed by them.
1t is assorted by the South, that this compromise
= is in It's nature perpetual and sacred and more
h over it is insisted that its perpetuty is secured by
c the Constitution and this brings me to the remain
= ing point which IS what are the guarantees OF that
1t instrument:
e shall first consider whether this constitutions
compromise is in its nature perpetual, and then ex
e anime the Constitution, to see whether | can fine
J. there any guaranty of its perpeuty.
: 1t is a rule, both of political law and of ethics
N that in all contracts there must be consideration
"a and if both the contract and consideration be il
their nature continuing, and there be neither words
lie of perpetuity of limitation in time, the unfor
Of seen failure OF consideration, which both parties
= expected TO be as durable as the contract ITSELF will
in general, absove the party from the obligation q
a. the contract Now, the true nature Of this con
rs tract the admission of the principle Of prop
NJ erty representation. When it was entered into, tn
South was superior in wealth. estimating the slave
re property and, of course, so long slavery con
ct tinued, it thought that the South would Away
ne bear heavier proportional share of taxation, Cir
a cumstances, however, are now changed. The in
ID. dusry and enterprise of the North have drawn t
E. her larger share of wealth. The vine of our pros
n perity has thrven while you have slept; and wer
n the principle Of the taxation and representation
of wealth, which you contended for, and we concede
IT. to YOU now fairly carried out, we should have
greatly increased proportion of constant represen
sc taton, as well asoccasiona taxation. The reason
en- upon which you were allowed an advantage in ap
portionnent no longer exist and cessanie ratiOn
lat ceSsa Ell ipSa ler. The compromise, then is not il
he its nature perpetual and therefore the expedienc
lis of revoking it is lawful matter of inquiry, and
u course of petition; though, for reasons which
&c, shall give hereafter its actual revocation, with
lal any reasonable period Of computation, is impossible
* Whether you will give that assent is question f
err yourselves; but confess my expectations for s
lIorirn L..