Anti-slavery bugle. [volume] (New-Lisbon, Ohio) 1845-1861, 1847-04-09
SALEM, OHIO, FRIDAY, APRIL 9, 1917.


time that the %promisee received it," For
which see Chitty on Contracts. Il
Judge Story, Comm. ,. 525, speaking OF
a protective tariff, points to this rule:
"If the Constitution was ratified under the
belief, sedulously propagated on all sides,
that such protection was afforded, wouid II
not now be a fraud upon the whole people 10
give a different construction TO its powers
The easonablenes Of this is so %self-evi-
dent, that il seems unnecessary TO enlarge
upon it.
We submit, Of course, to the rule which
Marshall lays down, and which Mr. SpooneI
makes the cornerstone of his book, TINT OF
two meanings one honest md the other wick
ed, the Court will, if possible, adopt the Tor
mer. But the point to which we draw at
tention is, that if the other parts of the law,
its object and its contemporaneous construc-
ton afford irresistible evidence that the Leg
%islature intended to make a wicked law, the
Courts acknowledge it to be their duty to
yield. In other words, cotemporaneous ex-
positions and uninterrupted acqniescence are
one 0f The means the Court has always used
to arrive at that irresistible clearness and GER
tainty on which Mr.. Spooner depends so
much. Judge Story, Comm. SIG, speaking
of the disputed power Of protection to manu-
features, says:
ssThe terms Of the Constitution are sufi-
cient to embrace the power; all nations have
used it; the exercise of it was one OF the
grounds on which the establishment OF the
Constitution was urged and vindicated.-
The argument. in its favor would seem then
aJso'utey irresistible in this aspect"
In l Cranch 299, the Supreme Court, in
reply to objections, say:
"Practice and acquiescence for a period OF
wears, commencing with the organization OF
the Judiciary, afford an irresistible answer
and fix the construction. The Court Will
neither shake nor control it,"
With such maxims universally acknow'
lodged, it is evident that the understanding
of the nation at the time, uniform practice
since, and uninterrupted acquiescence by al
parties, form one OF the most obvious meth
DDS of finding the meaning Of the Constitu
ton, and one which all courts admit and re
spect.
Mr. Spooner himself tells US that:
ITO suppose that the nation at large dix
: not look upon the Constitution as destined +
: destroy Slavery, whenever its principle
should be carried into full effect, is obvious
ly 10 suppose an intellectual imPossi6ift'S
for the instrument was plain, and the peopI
# had common sense and those two facts can
not stand together consistently with the ide
n that there was any general, or even any con
n siderable misunderstanding OF Its meaning
p. l26.
: If, then. there could be no general miSun
e Outstanding Of the meaning, what was III
understanding (! If we can get that. we shall
according TO Mr.. Spooner, have the right un
Outstanding OF the instrument.
At the same time he tells us that
n ..The idea is preposterous that the majo
5 rity of The people Of all the States either IN
a tended to establish. or could hare been induce
10 establish, any other Than a free one for tn
G nation. Or that they believed or understood
that they were establishing any but a FREE
one."-p. l2S.
We confess this last statement made u
pause. To argue that Slavery was not toleI
e ated by the Constitution has been aptly com
pared by Edmund Quincy as "arguing tn
e nose off of ones face" an Illustration whic
e the sentiments of Gouverneur Morris, take
for our motto, sanctions and might almos
suggest. But it needs a much holder ma
to maintain that the American people did III
believe that Slavery was alluded 10 in the 81
called pfo-slavery clauses We hardl
y know OF a more daring flight of genius in tt
le whole range of modern fiction than this
J. Archbishop Whately once framed an argI
l. ment, in Jest, 10 prove that Napoleon new
l. existed. The attempt Of Mr.. Spooner he
seems a counterpart 10 that, but then he is
e. earnest.
ne Throughout his book Mr.. Spooner expen'
a great deal Of very excellent indignation Il
n on those who refer 10 the Madison Pape
Is and the Convention which met at PhIladt
phia in 1887, 10 ascertain the meaning OF 1
IT. people. He tells us very truly that tho
:" men were employed merely to draft the Co
s~tilution. Their Office was that Of clerks.
IT. Still their opinions are of value. But
he mistakes the point. The Conventions
ne ferred 10 are those which met in the seve'
,e- States, and, in the name Of The people, ado
In ed the instrument. Theirs were the han
iT- which ratified, and theirs the voices viii
meanwhile explained the sense in which tn
III ratified and adopted the paper Ihelr op
III ions, therefore, are fair and legitimate e
III dence of the sense in which the CONSTITUTE
he was accepted. Very good evidence exists
The the views they took on all the main poin
L. and when they were all agreed, as they we
on the slave clauses, it is idle 10 say OF
nd contract, like the Constitution, that the vie'
, / of those that made it, are TO be thrown {
tirely out Of notice.
to But we can throw these debates and I
on Federalist also aside, and yet furnish n
us Spooner with abundant, aye, and legal e.
,al dence what was the meaning attached to t
&C. chief pro-slavery clause in the Constituti
by the people themselves; we mean that
J.. lating to the three-ffth slave basis and VIII
We Their he thinks it an " intellectual impOsSibi
sa fy" or not, he will find that the meanil
at. thus affixed to it was the same it has Dor
of ever since, and everywhere, except in
lie pages.
We This clause, the reader will hereafter Sc
by Mr.. Spooner maintains has no relation or
IN ference TO the slaves.
on Now, in 1889, the Constitution was launc
ed. In 1892, elections were held throug
out the Union, for members Of Congress.
,se If there was 10 understanding that t
a.. gl,,.s ~ p 4, bo counted in a distinct roa