Anti-slavery bugle. [volume] (New-Lisbon, Ohio) 1845-1861, 1854-11-11
ANTI-SLAVERY BUGLE.
LETTER TO MR.. BURLEIGH.

COLUMBIANA, Nov. |, 1891.
In the report Of tho Michigan Anniversary, Mr..
Burleigh asks" Could those persons who at the
very beginning gave the Constitution a pro-slavery
Interpretation, be supposed to have made it anti
slavery, and thus subject themselves to the necesi
sitv of perverting itY" "This" said Mr.. b., is
question which, SO far as know, has never been
answered by the advocates of the anti-savery char
acter of the Constitution" "Everybody admits
that it has been administered as though it were
pro-slavcry."
Answer-Who were 'those who made the Con-
stituton?" Itmust here be referred to those who
framed it, or it can need no answer. But certainly
the framcrs (if we coHld hare, as we cannot, any
legal knowledge of them, except from the words Of
the Constitution have nothing to do with
the legal meaning to the document.
The instrument as it came from their hands
was mere proposal having no legal authority
The Convention that framed the Constitution was
not delegated to establish, but only to consult, de-
wise, and recommend one to the people at large
Then, of course, the people at large are the only
ones that of any Importance in determining
the legal meaning of the instrument. And are
their intentions" 20 be gathered from any other
source than from the words which they adopted to
express their Intentions namely, those of the Con-
rtitution? Certainly not. Then the words Of the
U. S. Constitution, strong Lhcy arc for liberty,
notwithstanding their peryersion to answer Jdd
purposes, by the well nigh universal consent, must
be the expressed intention of the adoptcrs. Mr..
b., we believe, does not condemn the language OF
the Constitution with literal meaning, so we drop
this here, after asking question for the benefit
of those who gather the spirit and intention Of the
instrument from external evidence
Did Mr. Madison swear to suprcyt those scraps
of debates which he had among his private papers,
or did he swear to support the |. 5. Constitution
in spirit and word as the people had adopted it,
when he took the oath of Office, President Of the
u S.? We do not recollect of ever having seen
this question answered by those who advocate its
pro-savery character, but should be pleased to.
Question-If the language Of the Constitution
is clear for liberty has not slavery been abolished
under it?
Answer-No one disputes the decision of Mans
field being clear Cor liberty, or that it did abolish
slavery in England but slavery was tolerated
there for number Of years after, the following
advertisement will show:
...... "LIvERrooL, Oct, Is, l779.
"'fo be sold at auction, at Geo. Dunbar's Office,
on Thursday, the 2lst inst, Black Boy, about II
years Of age" &c.
This liberation WAS in violation of Mansfeld's
Hecisitn, But none have attempted to make it APP
pear that he did not mean what is said, So our toll
GRAFTON of slavery in this country is in violation OF
our Constitution and Declaration of Independence
The English disobediently for time, kept theii
slavery in check to finally terminate its existence
We, in doing so have allowed ours to grow, unit
it has asserted its possession of the bribe and pow
or to mould, if not the spirit of our laws, an ac
auiescence of the people to its will.
Chen the course of the rofarmer is plain. Gas
all documents to the wind that would enslaye men
but join to pervert or disobcy no word or documen
that would protect them; as in our case it has pro
wen to be dangerous policy. obedience to ty
rants is resistance to God"
Friend Editor: Please allow this room in tn
paper, that by comparison both the truth and sol
-GaAacies" may be fairly diecernable.
Respectfully, &C.,
JNO. d. COPELAND.