Anti-slavery bugle. [volume] (New-Lisbon, Ohio) 1845-1861, 1853-09-03
UNITED STATES CONSTITUTION AND sLA
VERY.

/ We published few weeks since some structure.
on what we understood to he the opinions of the In
diana Free Democrat on constitutional oblpalion,
to slavery. Partly in reply to us the editor has the
Following ilo frankly admits the correctness Of the
non voters position viz "If the constitution 4 pro.
slavery there Is an end ofall honest citizenship"
"Somc Of our ant-slaycry brethren have taken n.
to task Tor admitting the right of Shareholders UNI
dor the constitution, to reclaim their fugitive slaves.
The New York OHCidd CRicC contends that thcy
have no such right and is ''dsgustcd" with anti
slavery men for making such conccssions while the
oalem (O) AHti-Sidrcy BHgie admits our ccrstruc-
non TO DC correct can see no difference between our
position and that Of the bunker party. That while
we admit the "damning fact that slaves may he re-
claimed, we should oppose no law designed to fcil-
iac their reclamation; and expresses the hone that
We may he led to see tho inconsistency of our posi
ton, and take "highcr ground" by rcpudintin,r tho
constitution rs n pro-saycry instrument. While
we admit that the construction We gave the consti-
tuition d0cS compromise the rights of the slave, we
think 1t by no means follows that VIC are to be ram
Red m the same category with those who UNFOLD
the present fugitive slave lava law which, in our
opinion Is grossly unconstitutional: which renders
every Tree cUlorcd man sub cct to the doprcdatons
ol the kidnappci and which dcpriyos him ofhs lib
cfty ana property without duo process of law
Surely any one can see the difference between the
operations Of such law as this, and an ordinary
suit at comman law before our State courts for scr
vice or labor due The question here arises. how
Is the slavclullcrO substnntatC his "clam" 60 the
services 81 his slave in u suit at common law?-
How viii he hc uLlc to prove that his slave ows him
any service or labor! How will he show tho aud
P"9"2 for which such service or labor is due! The
slave l3 at once thrown back upon his natural rights
nv man, and any legal "cloim" for his services
Will end in nought The fact is, tho relation of
master and slave is such an extraordinary one 50
contrary to all principles ufjustcc reason or rec
tiudc, that any attempt to judge it by ordinary lc-
gal rules only makes confusion worse conluun-
dcd' AID exposes its utter rcpugnaucc TO all Just
principles Of law or equity The state Of slavery
Is apcrycrson of all law and justice. The MASTER
right is the right by which the robbcr captures his
booty. Vt Is tho law of might trampling upon the
law ofHgM Wo are told by common law writers
that hir is rule ofright. That statutes contrary
to fundamental principles Of justice or morality arc
null and void.
We do not believe that the constitution Of the L.
;. recognizes" slavery. Indeed the contcmpoi-
ancous records Of the time render the fact of the re-
iusnl of its trainers to do SO, beyond all doubt. We
io!rn from the debates Of the constitutional convcn-
ton, that Mr.. Madison, who has been called the
father of the constitution" was opposed to having
the word ''slnvc" in that instrument, bccansc he
was unwilling to admit into il the idea that there
could be property in man; or in other words he
~
ton under the constitution. The anti-slaycry men
of the convention would not permit the recognition
OF slavery by the constitution, bat tlry agreed to
clause for the recovery Of the services Of ndcnted
servants and apprentices, which would enable the
stakeholder to bring Il "claim" for the services Of
his escaped slave. "Furthcr than this the rcspon-
sibc leaders in the convention refused to 90. The
Shareholders accepted the security of this article,
caimiug to hold their slaves as servants and ntcn-
ding, doubtless, to recover them under this stipuu-
ton. The aui-SlaycTy delegates in the convention
Nirginiaus, manly were glad 20 escape difficulty
with which they did not feel prepared to contend,
to perfect the scheme of national government
which, while did not directly abolish slavery, left
its anticipated abolition possible, and no guurau-
tees in the national compact TO protect it FOR sin
gle hour While they may have been fully aware
that slaves would ho recovered under this article,
they gave no other security for thcr recovery than
the article itself. While public sentiment, acting
upon the courts, continued 10 hold southern slave,
10 be in the category Of Hlorcrs in the service d
their hirors, they might be pcaccably delivered {,
their claimants, but il could not have nc forcsccl
that so himsy II protection Of such plutcsterou.
claim would have served t.c purposes Of the slave
holders for two gcrcrations1
VI the constitution Is pro-slaycry, ''thcre * On
end, IN our opinion, Of all hoRcst citzcnship;" fol
every good citizcnis bound to uphold the consttu
ton and laws; while on the other hand if the gov
ornmcnt requires him to do anything in violation
of his conscience or tho law of God, his duty 20 hi
conscience and his God rises paramount to his Jbli
cations to civil government, and he Is bound [,
obey the "lighcr law" although ny doing so he be
comes a bad citizen. 1t is1etter to obey God thar
man. 1t is better to lose your body than you
soul.