Green-Mountain freeman. [volume] (Montpelier, Vt.) 1844-1884, 1855-01-25
THE LEGAL TENURE OF SLAVERY.

~ " 'SS"iiAiuS lts 10 Otc vi d ooIlee oii INC
same subject now being published ip the Era
by William Goodell, one of the ablest, if not
the ablest anti-slavery writer in America
SLAVERY, BEING ILLEGAL, COULD NOT HAVE BEEN
MADE CONSTITUTIONAL.
To the Friends Of AM ricaa Liberty:
1t was shown, in my last letter, ii | mistake
not, that all theories of Government, UNDER
all forms, preclude the idea of power to legal
ize Slavery Will it be pretended that an
exception to the general rule is found in our
North American Republics 1t was also
shown that "al theories of Government,
under all forms. imply tho duty of Govern
ment to suppress Slavery" Can it be suppos-
ed that our own Federal Government furnishes
the first and the only exception! Let US ex-
anime and see.
Whatever the possible powers of Govern
ments may be- we have found, in the light Of
historical facts, that Slavery has never been
egalized in this country, either by positive law,
or by any other process. Slavery exists in
some of the States. 1t has existed 10 several
others of them. But it exists and has existed,
like other crimes, without the authority, Of
valid law. ~ d"
The relation of the Federal Constitutional
Slavery is to be studied in the light of these
facts Of our condition and history.
1t will not be pretended that the Constitu-
ton originated or legalized Slavery. 1t is
claimed that Slavery had legal existence
long before the Constitution was formed. 1t
will not, probably, be pretended that the Fed
eral Constitution gives to Slavery any addi-
tional degree Of legality or validity that it did
not possess before; for it will be claimed that
its Legality was previously complete.
If Slavery, therefore, was illegal before the
Constitution was formed, and at the time Of
its adoption, and it, since its adoption, the
States have given to it no legality, it remains
Illegal still.
And such we have already ascertained
to be the facts. We have traced the legal
pretenslons of Slavery, historically, step by
step, and year by year, from its first introduce
ton down to the present day, and have heard
the testimony, first, of Southern jurists, to
the fact that Slavery cannot legal exist with
out positive law; next, of the Same iurists, in
harmony with saveholdng statesmen, Mason,
Bayly, and Douglas, to the fact that there has
never been, in this country, any positive law
creating or lesalizing Slavery. We have found
that there could have been no egalzation Of
American Slavery under English common law,
while we were British Colonies that if there
could have been, the Declaration of Indepen-
dencc would have abolished it; that if it had
been otherwise the State Constitutions, formed
soon afterwards, would have swept it away /;
that the Articles Of Confederation, copfessedly,
took no knowledge of it and. finally, that no
theory Of Government under any form, allows
Governments, to egalzo Slavery, which cannot
exist by natural Or common law.
What, then, are the relations of the Fed
era Constitution and oil the Federal Govern
ment to Sayery9 We hear it constantly and
confidently affirmed that the Constitution
sanctions Slavery-that the Constitution con
tains compromises with Savery-that we arr
under constitutional obligations to return flu
gitivc slaves. 1t is also said that Congress
cannot interfere with Slavery in the States
that it is State institution, not to be med
' died with, lest we should trespass upon Stat,
rights. Yet it is held to be the duty OF thu
Fedora Government, in its foreign, diplomacy
to protect the rights OF Shareholders i'll thei
slaves, to hunt fugitive slaves at the North, I,
protect Slavery in the Territories,and in short
to do I'll in its power to extend and to pepet
uatc Slavery. Such are the claims of tn
Shareholders.
The frio Dis of Liberty dcmur against por
ton Of these claims, but, for the most part
they admit a portion Of them. They admit
in some vague sense, " the compromise Of til
Constitution, and that Congress cannot met
die with the State institution ofSlavcry, whic
[ implies that there isa legal State "institutio,
Of that character. Toa great extent they &C
nit the constitutional obligation Of returnip
fugitive slaves, but contend that the FEEDER;
Government has nothing to do with it, or III;
the Fugitive Slave Bill, in some Of its detail
is unconstitutional. They would have :, jul
trial for persons claimed as fugitive slave
o which Implies that, if they are fairly prove
$ to be slaves, they are to be delivered up
a their legal owners.
8 They would "divorcc the Federal Cover
Z ment from Slavery" and from al support
G it, and las they conceive) " from all rsspons
n bility for its existence" They would NAL
!. " Freedom national, and Slavery sectional"-
: letting Slavery alone in the Stotes, but abe
" ishing it in the Fed raj District and Territ
:. ries-So that natjonai Frad0m' would
witnessed in the five miles square, and in
few sparscly-settled new Territories, viii
= sertioaai Slavery would continue untouch,
~ in half the States in the Union They won
g also inhibit Slavery in new States seeking IA
J. mission into the Union, and then receive the
e in, under the same Federal Constitution tina
r by their own concessions, protects the origin
d slave States in maintaining Slavery, in Writ
/ Of the constitutional doctorne of "Sta
rights"
-. How we'll this method OF warfare again
> Slavery has succeeded thus far, up to the da
y of the Nebraska bill or what are its prospec
> for the future, we will not now say nor COME
/, ture But it is in place here to say that tn
e policy and these co cessons belong togethe
t that the concessions cover no small nor unil
y portant portion of the claims of Slavery, ri
It ing it high vantage ground that the polio
lie the concessions. and the claims, grow out
+ substantially the same expostions of the Co
stitution, and that these expositions are {
founded upon the assumption Of thr Legah
Of Sac ~ IN Mr Statc$-an assumpti'
T. which we have found to be false.
- The prevailing theory seems to be thi
" Slavery WEATHER right or wrong, is legalize
y 1t is one Of the institutions of the sla
States. 1t was so before the Constitution
the United States was formed, and at the tin
DR. of its adoption This State institution"
Al i