Richmond enquirer. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1815-1867, 1859-09-06
For tt.s Enquirer.
The African Slave Trad. I'D the Constitution.

tt.ited anu lcar:ied and Statesman-like as
have been the arguments employed by the just
ly distinguished Sanford and Iancey OF Ala
bama, t. prove the unconstitutionality OF the
Act Of Congress making the African slave trade
"pir acy,' nevertheless, my instincts of logic and
NV and political economy, wiring from my lips
an unqualified negative There is truth in ioglG,
aud mathematical certainty in facts. wiz wiz,
these stones" in my sling" the GoaiiS ln, ,;
look TO their aurelS. Facts are outside Oh u'e'
| tionaries, rhetoric is inside Of books e .,,o
The Constitution, and every ciau't ,,', ~ snc.
Constitution has its written hislols ,,.c,;orn *
ton 10 Of Article (the slave''riue ,,,',. Ills
peculiarly historical. History sn w., E.1eral
section was adopted ana put INV W I,,c;dly and
Compact The facts have been SO ''Iiu,y a
ennn;no,ir ,;vcn by another, that ! Will mere
49,. -. The question (Aircan Save
u.s. .nr;ousy disturbed the harmony oil the
l,''e'l -, ,:an ,yhich framed the Constitution
Ton, ,he delegates divided into parties, un.
Sl'o.;; o,,,nstanccs which, for time, rendered
"e e.',n,,;ous action hopeless. The one demand
- instant and unconditional prohibition oi
~. trade. OH moral and religious grounds;
While the other insisted that 1t wasa Legitimate
commerce, involving no other consideration
than a sound policy, which each State ought 10
he permitted to determine for itself, 50 long rs
il was sanctioned by its own laws. Each party
stood firmly and reSolutcly by its own question
until both became convinced that THIS vcNed
question would break up the convention, de-
stroy the Federal Union, blot out the glores
of the revolution and throw away all Its bless
incs. unless some fair and just compromise
would be formed Oh the common ground oil such
mutual concession as was Indispensable TO the
preservation of their liberties, union and lnde.
pendencc Such Il compromise was cllecteu
and incorporated into the Constitution, by
which il was understood that the African Slave
Trade might continue rs legitimate commerce
| i'm those States whose laws sanctioned 1t, until
! the wear 1905, from and after which time
Congress might prohibit it throughout
the dominion and limits of the United
States, and pass such laws which might
become necessary to make such prohibition
eflsctual The harmony of the Convention
was restored, and the Union saved by this
compromise. without which the Constitution
| would never have been made.
Such is the history Of the adoption Of the
10th section of Article Of the Constitution;
and it speaks with an emphasis. 1t is not i'll
art;culate. 1t is practical, truthful solution
of all that is predetermined i'll connection with
either the language of the section or the pow
crs granted in it; yet men OF Spcndld powers
usc their splendid rhetoric TO confront history,
logic and law, making 1.-THE better worse and
worse better.
That these gentlemen be not mlSrepreSented,
| refer to the following extract taken from Mr..
! Yancry's Meadows letter. He says:
at further appears that feeling the need of
more slaves than were then in tl.e country, to
cultivate their waste lands and fearing North
crn hostility 10 Southern power and industry,
and anticipating that the North might amend
the Constitution SO as to prohibit the trade i'll
slaves with Africa, the Southern States sue
cecded in making it apart OF the constitutional
compact-that Congress should not prohibit
the African slave trade prior to the year lsuS-
thus in effect making it Il part Vi the compact,
that the States should have an unmolested en-,
ioyment of the foreign trade i'll slaves at least
until 1905, and as long after that as the Constl-
tuition remained unchanged.
"Thcsc provisions conciusivcly prove that the
institution of African slavery, as it then existed
in the States, received an express and an
especial protection i'll the Constitution; and
that It's increase 10y foreign supply received an
express and especial protection, even to the
extent that, While in reference TO all other sub
iccts, the Constitution might DC amended at
|
in good faith, for twenty years. so rs to enable
Congress to prohibit the trade before 1865. As
far AS slavery is concerned the Constitution Is
| the same now, as it was when 1t was adopted
by the Convention that framed it. The rights
which belong to the institution under it, and
the powers Of Congress in relation to it, have
not been altered, and are the same now as
then-are neither greater nor less.
-. boil man a " "a
and he speaks the utteranccs of his conscience
and his judgement. But opinions are but
opinions. And If mere opinions were 4
fair and legitimate mode of reasoning,
and were conclusive against him,
might close this article by substituting the
opinio,,s of the Supreme Court Judges i'll the
.Dred Scott case, where this question is Incl
deotly settled. But counter opinions TO his
shall not by reason of their judicial sanctity en-
force triumph winch is not otherwise won
by the forces Of logic and history. The opin-
| ions of Mr.. Iancey shall be thrown into the
! crucble and carried through the ordeal OF doc;,
mcntary adjudication. ltshall prove twenty
! four carrots fine or not one. He is all right
or all wrong But lets to the law and tcSti-
mony.
The 7th section Of article ! Of the Consti-
tuition contains the grant of power to the Con-
gress to prohibit the African slave trade, and
to declare it 3.iracy, while section 10 of arti-
Gle restraints the crercise of tue power up to
| the year 1905. The section granting the pow
| or to Congress reads, The Congress shall
have power to dtfne and punish pracics and
felonics committed on the high seas, and Of
| fences against the law Of nations" 1t is az.
firmcd by the antipiracy writers that this sec
ton does not give to Congress any original
iuridiction over the African slave trade, or
any other trade upon the high seas. That the
only power here granted is the power to as
certain and determine what the common law
had dcnominated piracy and felony. Such an
opinion will not stand the trial of criticism.
II converts the Congress into IL Judiciary
bench of JudgeS-instead OF Legislature 1t
is the proper and constitutional function of
! Congress to make Mns-of the Supreme Court
to eipound and dppiy them-and of the Pre>i-
dent to erecu,e them. If Congress has only
the power to ascertain land, if that is the mean
ing of the word, Define what was piracy
under the common law. or law of nations then
Congress is both legislatiee and jadiciol tri-
bunal-an idea destructive to our form Of gov
crnment and palpably unconstitutional. II is
not the object or end Of Congress to decide
what arc laws but to make laws. The object
| and end of the courts are to say what the laws
arc 1t is the power Of the Congress to dedae
what acts upon the high seas shall constitute
a piracy, and it is the duty of, and the Courts
have the power, to ascertain what the law is
and apply it to the facts. Here is the clearly
defined constitutional duties and powers of the
respective departments of Government Why
should the Constitution have granted to the
Congress the power to ascertain what the Eng
lish common law or the law Of nations, said
was piracy, when the Constitution had estab
liShcd courts for the only purpose of ascertain
ing what are and what are not laws9 Is
Congress more capable of determining what
| the law is than the Supreme Court. Certainly