The North-Carolina standard., 1847-03-03


Egentlspen, who not only deny thai slaves are re-
cognised as property, but repel the charge with
eloquent Indignation, as slander upon that free
Constitution, and libel upon the wise and good
men who framed it, Here / take issue with them
And they make this charge, some of them, not
withstanding the debates of the Convention in
which the Constitution was framed, show, that OF
all the questions that were gitated, Slavery slG
oery was the one that excited most their alarm
and their hopes. We find, as was read here yes
terday, that there were fanatics in that convention
who denounced slavery as a curse and sin.
They were from the North We find, also that
other gentlemen, grave and wise men, vindcated
slavery as indispensable requisite in this coun-
try;-we find that representatives from the South,
particularly from Georgia and South Carolina,
soemnly declared that if the attempt aocre made TO
infringe upon their slave property, they would not
come into the Union and that northern men,
equally wise and patriotic, expressed their opinion,
that if slavery recognised in the Constitution
the North would hesitate 10 come into this Union.
But, sir, we find farther that these good and wise
men, burning with desire to consummater this
Union, compromised their personal opinions on
the altar of patriotism. We read in this verY Con-
stiulon clause which protects the STAKEHOLDER,
and enables him TO recover the slave which escapes
into another State another clause establishes the
basis of representation by which negroes are not
TO be counted merely as persons, but to assume
the mixed character Of persons and property--fue
slaves being considered as three persons another
clause by which astax was authorized to be laid
upon the importation of slaves-showing recog-
milton of them as property. And, Mr.. Chairman,
what else do we find 2 We find that these good
and wise men not only did his, but they permitted
the Constitution TO tolerate, and counenance the
idea Of our people employing their vessels, man.
ming their ships, and embarking liz what is de-
nounced as I" the nefarious traffic in human flesh"
IL l.
the idea of extending and increasing slavery. by
expressly propiding for The importation of slaves
for ticenty gears. And yet gentlemen, learned in
constitutional law, acquainted with the history Of
the Convention, solemnly announced their opin-
ion that slaves are not recognised as property in
this Constitution And who were the men who
framed this instrument? Who were the men who
incorporated into it this doctrine and recognised the
institution of slavery, far even TO permit the
importation of slaves for twenty years2 Sir, they
were just fresh from the batle-6clds of liberty"
their mnstrations were upon the holiest altars of
the innermost sanctuary of freedom while the
degenerate patriots Of modern times are scarcely
entitled !" to enter the porch Of the temple"
Sir, we don't ask the privileges which our fa-
theirs granted, of importing slaves from abroad
NC do not even ask you 10 receive into the Union
territory with slavery now in it but we ask you
not 10 interfere with the slave property we already
have, and which, in the Constitution, you have
agreed TO protect Here l would remark that the
name of the venerated Madison is invoked. He
has been called 10 the stand, as witness, by the
gentleman from New York, Mr. Woodl And
allow me to say, thai my friend was little ingc'
nous in this matter, and acted the cautious tacti.
clan, for he prtfaced it with quite an air of great
candor and fairness, by saying that he would not
read from Mr.. Sherman, a northern authory, but
he wonld read from Mr.. Madison. MIR. Chairman,
why did not the gentleman read from Mr. Sher-
man 2 AS he tool. the liberty of reading from
Mr.. Madison, will Ne permit me 10 read from Mr..
Sherman When the question was discussed in
the Convention as to the propriety of allowing a
tax to be levied upon imported slaves, Mr.. Sher-
man contended ihat.if you incorporated the doc
trine Of taxing slaves imported, you admitted in
the Constitution that they were property. Hear
Mr.. Sherman. take the extract from the Madi-
son Papers:
" Mr.. Sherman said il was better TO let the south
ern States import slaves than part with Them If
they made that sine qua non. He was opposed
TO tax slaves imported, because il implied they
were property" ---
Does not this extract explain the true reason
why the honorable gentleman declined reading
from the speeches of Mr.. Sherman, a member Of
the Federal Convention from Connecticut For
if the gentleman had read Mr.. Sherman, he would
have that he distinctly admitted in the debates
that the article of the Constitution, authorizing a
TAX on nnpOTLec slaves, 10 WnlCn L nave alluQeQ,
recognised, by implication that these slaves were
and should be considered as property. Sir the,
proceedings OF the convention in regard to that
matter are curious, entertaining and instructive
They show that there was compromise even asI
as to the word used. The matter was referred to
a committee of eleven the word {" slaves" was
stricken out, but there insereda tax upon them
which was the compromise; thereby showing on
the face of the Constitution that they are recog
nised as property. s-=,t
The gentleman from New York read an ex-
tract from what Mr. Madison said, conveying the
idea that there could not be such thing property
in human beings. remember an expression Mr.
Madison used, and in the very speech of Mr.. Mad
ison- he alluded to the distinction between slaves
and other property Slaves not being " like mer-
chandise consumed" Mr. Dickinson wished the
clause about !" the migration and importation Of
persons" 10 have the word slaves" in it. instead of
" persons" Gouverneur Morris also desired it
F." Mr.. Sherman liked description better than the
term proposed, which had been declined by the
old Congress, and were not pleasing to some peo,
pie" The word "persons," therefore, was used,
and when the vote in Convention was about to be
taken on the second part of the clause about the
tax or duty imposed, Mr.. Sherman was against
this second part as acknowledging men to be prop
erty by taxing them as such under the character
of slaves" Then followed u Mr. King, and Mr.
Langdon considered this as the price of the first
part" General Pinckney admitted that it was So
Thus showing that while one party preferred the
word I" persons" the other did not object when it
was accompanied with a taxing clause also.
But, Mr.. Chairman, although honorable gen.
temen who have lately participated in this de-