The spirit of democracy. [volume] (Woodsfield, Ohio) 1844-1994, 1848-08-26

slave. And why? because a horse j
recognised as chattel, a slave as hu
man being. A Kentuckian, purchasing
a farm in Ohio, can remove his horse
and his cattle to j. and hold them there
But not so with his slaves. Nothing
can be held as property here in Ohio
except such things as are recognised a
property by the common law, the stat
ute law, the laws Of nations or Of ma
ture. Does the Constitution OF th'
United States create slavery, or MAKE
human beings the subject of barter
Most assuredly not. True the Consti
tuition provides that a slave escaping
from one State into another shall be re
stored or given up. But this at once
proves that slavery exists not by force
of the law of nations or Of nature,
Where is the clause in the constitution
that provides that horse or an OK escop
ing from one State into another shal
be restored? Such a provision would be
absurd, because they are property ev-
erywhere. The slave clause at once
proves that slavery is not only an excep.
ton, but that it requires provisions
which no other property requires. In
addition to this, we all recognise the
African race as human beings; and the
Constitution Of the United States also
recognises them as such in the clause
which provides for the apportionment
of representatives and direct taxes.
This clause is in the following words:
Representatives and direct taxes
"sha!l be apportioned among the sever
sal States which may be included in the
"Union, according to their respective
"numbers, which shall be determined
"by adding to the whole number Of free
"persons, including those bound to SER
"vice for term of years, and excluding
"lndians not taxed, three Dths of all
"other persons"
This clause, all are aware, includes
the slaves Of the south--that is "three-
fiflhs Of all other PERSONS" or in other
words, "three-fifths of alp the slave
The Constitution again
declares that
"The emigration or importation Of
.such persons as any of the States now
''existing shall think proper TO admit
'shall not be prohibited by Congress
''prior to the year 1905"
Again: s'"
"No person held 20 service or labor
Sin one State under the laws thereof,
escaping into another, shall, in conse-
'quence any law or regulation there
sin, be discharged from such service or
'labor, ,out shall be delivered up on claim
sof the party to whom such service or
labor may be DUE"
We merely quote these passages Of
he Constitution in order 10 show that
he Constitution, wherever it refers TO
aves speaks of them as persons and
lot as property. We now ask whence
he power to hold slaves in the free
erritories of the United States without
positive law, under the Constitution,
merely because the territories are the
ommon property of all the people Of
II the States? We answer that no
uch authority exists. And to further
ubstantiate this position, in connection
With what we have already said, we
uote the following additional article
rom the Constitution, being an extract
rom the fifth article of the amendments,
which declares that "no person shall
e deprived of life, liberty o, property,
Without due process Of law." Now
What other means is there, to deprive
ny person oflife, liberty, or property,
xcept to discharge debt, fine, or
or as punishment for the
commission of crime? This would be
y due process Of law; and any other
node OF deprivlng a person Of "iberty
r property" would be "without due
rocess flaw" and consequently con-
rary to the Constitution. Simply then,
his clause of the Constitution which
rovides that "no person shall be de.
rived of life, liberty, or property,
Without due process ofIaw," means that
o person shall be deprived Of life, lib