Anti-slavery bugle. [volume] (New-Lisbon, Ohio) 1845-1861, 1846-10-30
SALEM, OHIO, FRIDAY, OCTOBER 80, 1916.


clearly implies a power in Congress to legis-
late 0~gdiHsi" such importation. Yes, and it
as clearly implies a power in Congress to le-
gislate in futor of such importation. 1t for
bids the exercise Of this implied power against
1t tor more than twenty years but 1t torblds
not the exercise Of this power in faror of this
business at any time. Should Congress n0,c
repeal the law which prohibits the slave
trade, the Constitution would to this day
protect any of the original states in carrying
on the n~etarious traffic ay, and continue to
protect them TO the end of time, unless amen
ded ia this very particular. Indeed, one
branch of this trade (he internll or inter-
state) is still pursued with vigor under this
constitutional sanction. by what grammat-
ical construction can any honest man say,
that this clause eithor did abolish, or was in
tended TO abolish, slavery ! Nonsense!
The next quotation is Art. iv. sec. ,, par.
g:
"No person held TO service or labor in one
state, under the laws thereof, escaping into
another, shall in cons, Guence of any law or
regulation therein, be DISCHARGED from such
service or labor; but shall be delivered ZIP on
claim of the party 10 whom such service or
labor may be due
"Persons held to service or labor First
We ibNb NbO IltAl9Gs Oltit lGlobto, al
other persons Then, "such PERSONS" sc.
Now, " persons held to service or labor
How ~ineifably modest! Why this sicken-
ing sqeamishuess about the use of the word
Stare? And yet the meaning is so clear that
1t cannot be mistaken. Persons may be held
to service or labor under the laws Of state.
They may be so held either with or without
their consent. There is no kind of imitation.
Slaves are SO held, and hence, beyond all
controversies, slaves are here included, what
ever other persons may be. Then It'll clear
ly in accordance with this Constitution to
hold slaves under the laws of a state. Is not
this sanction ! Buff they escape out of that
state, by the laws Of which they are held, in
to another under whose laws they would be
free, what then ! Shall they be permitted
to remain p! BY no means. They must be
delivered up on claim Of the party to whom,
by the laws Of the state which they left, their
labor is due. 1t is not enough that slavery
t be sanctioned and protected within the bor-
f ders of those states whose laws make men
slaves. Oh, no, This grand dHti-Si1rcry
1 Constitution goes a lille farther, and compels
those states whose laws guaranty liberty to
5 all the inhabitants, to bind the chains Of sla.
= very again ON those who have escaped from
it. If this Constitution he anii-Siarery, it i;
5 beyond the power Of our imagination TO con
t ceive what a PrO-Siacety constitution would
be.
d But the Dr.'s grammar gives us an inter
If probation SUI generiS, purely anti-slavery.-
o !. No person shall be discharged,' &C., an
:, then ''no person Che same nominative) shall
: be delivered up,'' sc. Now, the Dr.'s gram
mar may be very correct, yet we think thi
is rather hyper-critical. The little particI
:. ''but," seems to us, by the aid Of a very SINAI
0 Infusion of common sense, to make the para
= graph plain enough. "No person shall b
! discharged from such service, but shall be de
If liycred up.' Had the Dr.. conlescended t.
S admit common sense, as well as gramma
s. and verbiaoe, among his rules Of interpreta
ton, he would have been more likely to ar
5 rive at a correct construction. When W
make nonsense Of any passage, we may b
sure we have a wrong Interpretation. II tn
y language of other writer's was put on tn
Sc Dr.'s grammatical rack, we think he woul,
y, find a vast amount Of nonsense in almo;
to every book in the world, not excepting eve
Sc the Bible itself. Let him explain, for exam
i'd pie, Eph. iv. 20, by this rule, and see VIII,
mt he will make of it. 'No man ever hated h
- own flesh; but nourishcth and cherisheth it..
an mo man. hated his flesh and mo man
IL nourisheth and cherishelh it. To all the.
Te verbs the nominatiye case is ''no man." BI
on such trifing is too ridiculous to be treatt
of seriously. OF all the sophistical and sill
RI trash that has been written by new-light c
or venanters in defense of the Constitution, Y
on know of nothing to compare with this.
no Again, we arc told that a slave is not he
of spoken of. 1t is a 'person held to service,
and from whom ''seryice or labor may
due - and the learned have never given
g definition of slavery that would admit the a
in ~plication of this language to a slave. No
~ a. .---l I-aA Z
lin definitions Of slavery given by the learned
are nor do we think such definitions of much /
TIL portancr. We are very sure that most
It'll those who understand best what slavery is
ee- the slaves henselyes-know very little abe
de- ..thc definitions Of the learned" And
his. are very sure-grammar or no grammar-tl
V "A slaves are '].persons held TO service or labol
ted and that their ~''servirc or labor Is due"
sr a the laws of the slavehulding states, to the
will who h0H them thereto. To that kind OF 5
ara very (if such slavery can beg which does
hold persons to service or labour, we see
end valid objection: and with those laws Of sta
which free the slave from all obligation TO
master, we fully accord. The definitions
slavery given by the learned, then, Won
seem TO us rather to be definitions OF ireedo
'hNt How DR.. Brisbane could honestly assert Il
the correct grammatical and verbal constr
ppr- ZION OIL theSe passages Woulu duol's" saw
is past our comprehension.
The Dr., in conclusion, quotes a NUM-
nol of clauses from the Constitution, such,
u It example, as that "Congress shall have pc
70 er to regulate commerce with foreign natl(
a'9e to establish a uniform rule of naturall
io'o tion-to raise and support armies-to prov
and maintain a navy" &c. &c. Unjust su
n OF ly be a strange sort of grammatical constr
| by tiOn that will make these clauses abolish
\, 1t veIy-any Of which, he says, would abol
hen slavery if the Constitution was righteous
)uld administered. But not ona of them has
ould bearing on the subject; and we would g
pqr' slider it an imposition on the readers OF
! be Covenanter 10 attempt to answer mn
nuY which fave'hot even the appearance OF AT
ten ments. Quo article, indeed, he quotes