The Ohio star. [volume] (Ravenna, Ohio) 1830-1854, 1852-09-30


the State where it prevailed" Oliver Ellsworth,
of Connecticut, said: ''The morality wisdom of
Slavery considerations belonging to the States
themselves" +" According to him, Slavery sec
tional.
AT later day, discussion ensued on the clause
touching the African slave trade which reveals the
defnitive purposes of the Convention. From the
report of Mr.. Madison we learn what was said.
Elbridge Gerry, of Massachusetts, 'sthought had
hing to do with the conduct of the States to
Slavery, but ought to be careful not to giue any
sanction to it'' According to these words, he re-
garded Slavery sectional, and would not make it
national Roger NJ. Sherman, of Connecticut,
'was opposed to any tax on slaves imported,
king the matter worse because it implied they
property" He would not have Slavery national.
After debate. the subject was committed to
mittee of eleven, who subsequently reported sub
stitute, authorizing ga tax such migration i'm
pOraton, at a rate not exceeding the Average of dU
hes laid on imports" This language, classifying
persons with merchandise, seemed to imply recog-
milton that they were property. Mr. Sherman at
once declared himself "aganst this part,
kaoulcdgiag men to be property, by taxing them
such under the character of slaves" Mr.. Gorham
Thought Mr.. Sherman should consider the duty
mt as implying that sLaoes are property, but as dis
couragement to the importation o. them" Mr..
Madison in mild juridical phrase sthought ii IoTong
to admit the Constitution the idea that there could
be property in man" After discussion, it was f.
nay agreed to make the clause read
"But tax or duty may be imposed on such impor-
tatlon. not exceeding ten dollars for each person"
The difficulty then seemed to be removed, and the
whole clause was adopted This record demonstrates
taat the word ''persons" was employed in order to
show that slaves, everywhere under the Constitu-
ton, were always to be garded persons, and
not property and thus to exclude from the Con-
sitution all idea that there can be property in man.
Remember well, that Mr.. Sherman opposed to
the clause in its original form, s'as acknowledging
men to be property;' that Mr. Madison was also op-
posed toit, because he ''though it torong to admit
in the Constitution the idea that there could be
property in man,; and that, after these objections,
the cI2use was SO amended as to exclude the idea.
But Slavery cannot be national, unless this idea is
distinctly and unequivocaly admitted into the Con-
| stitution.
Nor is this all. In the Massachusetts, Conven-
| ton, to which the Constitution when completed,
submitted for ratification, veteran of the Re-
volution, General Heath openly declared that, ac-
cording to his view, Slavery sectional, and not
national. His language pointed. 81 appre-
hend, he says, "that it is not in power to do
anything for against those ooho are in slarery IN
| the Southern States No gentleman within these
walls detests every idea of Slavery than do,
it is generally deested by the people of this Com
monwealth; and ardently hope the time will soon
come, when our brethren in the Southern States
will view it do, and put stop to it; but to
| this we have no rig ght to compel them. Two ques-
tions naturally arise. IF ratiy the Constitution
shall do any thing by act to hold the blacks IN
Sarery-or shall oe become partakers of other mems
sins? I think neither of them
Afterwards, in the first Congress under the Con-
stitution, on a motion, which was much debated, to
introduce into the Impost Bill duty on the impor
tation of slaves, the same Roger M. Sherman, who
i'll the National Convention had opposed the idea of
| property in man, authoritativey exposed the true
relations of the Constitution to Slavery. His Ian
guage was that ''the Constitution does not consid
er these persons property; it speaks of them as
persons"
Thus distinctly and constantly, from the very lips
of the trainers of the Constitution, we learn the
falsehood of the recent assumptions in favor of Sla
very and in derogation of Freedom.
Thirdly, According to familiar rule of interpre
aton, all laws concerning the same matter, IN par
materiG, to be construed together. By the
same reason. the grand paLticaI acts of the Nato,
are to be construed together, giving and receiving
light from each other. Earlier than the Con stitu
ton was the Declaration of independence, embody
ing in immortal words, those primal truths tt
!: which our country pledged itself with its baptis
NAL vows a Nation. ''We hold these truths tt
be self-evident," says the Nation, tthat all mel
are created equal, that they endowed by thei
Creator with certain inaienable rights that anon
them are life liberty, and the pursuit of happiness
that to secure these rights governments are instl
| tuted among men, deriving their just rowers tror
the consent of the governed" But this does no
stand alone. There is another national act OF sim
liar import On the successful close OF the ReVo
luton, the Continental Congress, in an address
the people, repeated the same lofty truth. "Let
be remembered said the Nation again, ''that
has ever been the pride and the boast of Americ;
that the rights for lchich she has contendsd aocre
rights of human nature. By the blessing OF tn
| Author of these rights, they have prevailed over a
opposition, and FORM THE BASIS of thirteen lnd
| pendent States Such were the acts of the NJ
tion in its united capacity. Whatever may be tn
privileges of States in their Individual capacitie
| within their several local Jurisdictions, powt
| bao otfr ,foI to- fho NotIo in
positive, unequvocal grant. inconsistent with thes
two national declarations Here, sir, is the natol
al heart, the national SOUL the national will, the
tional voice, which must inspire our nterpretatlc
of the Constitution, and enter into and diffuse
self through all the national legislation. Ihl
again is Freedom national
Fourthly. Beyond these is principle of the COZ
mon law, clear and indisputable, supreme rule
Interpretation from which in this case there can
no appeal. In any question under the Constlt
tion eUery aoordis to be construed IN taUOr of tcrt
, This rule, which commends itself to the natur
, reason, is sustained by time honored maxims of o
early jurisprudence. Blackstone apty express
, it, when he says that sthe law is always ready
catch at anything in favor of Hberty."-(l2 &C
Com, 94) The rule is repeated in various form
Fauorcs ampEiandi stunt; odia restringenda. Favo
are to be ampifed; hateful things to be restraine
:. Lcr anglo est le1 nlisericordie. The law of En-
land is e law of mercy. Angle jura IN onanl ca
= hbertati dant jaUorem The laws of Englandin ev
ry case show favor to liberty. And this sentime
breaks forth in natural though intense force, in
maxim: Impius ct crudeIs jttdcandus est qui Hbert
Z non facet He is to be adjudged impious and or,
l. who does not favor liberty. Reading the Constit
L ton in the admontion of these rules, again l S
Il Freedom is national
FftthEy From learned Judge of the Supre
Court of the United States, in opinion of t
u Court, we derive the same lesson. In consider
the question, whether State prohibit the i
a portation of slaves as merchandise, and whetf