Delaware gazette. [volume] (Delaware, Ohio) 1855-1886, 1860-07-06
-oa p SPEECH OF 9 g zaiaJ ..
ABRAHAM EINCOENT,,
or ILLINDIS. = =


} New 1YoEK The facts With which I sba
deal with this evening are msinly old and e
miliar nor is there anything new in the ger
: eral use shall make of them. IF there shal
be any novelty, it will be in the mode of pre-
senting the facts, and the faferences aud OF
servationsI following that presentation. g'ss
!, In his speech last autumn, at Columbus
Ohio, as reported in the New York Times
Senator Douglas said
''Our fathers; when they framed the Govern
ment under which we live, understood fhi
question just as well, and even better than Vi.
do now 5i aotr..tapg as zEl as7e45s ~
i Il fully endorse this, and adopt it As a tex
for this discourse. I so adopt it because i
furnishes precise and agreed starting. point
for discussion between Republicans aud that
wing of Democracy headed by Senator Deugg
las. 1t simply leaves the inquiry - NJ hat Rsas
the understanding those fathers had of the ques,
| ton mentioned?"
What is the frame of Government. under
which we live?" a. q =
The answer must be "The Constitutions oi
the United States" That Constitution con-
sists of the original, framed in l787 land un-
der which the present Government first went
into operation,) and twelve subsequently, franz
ed amendments, the first ten of which were
framed in 1889. .2s 81
| Who were the fathers that framed the Con-
stitution? suppose the 'thirty- mine" who
signed the original instrument may be fairly
called our fathers who framed that part of the
present Government. 1t is almost exactly
true to say they framed it, and it is altogether
| true to say they fairly represented the opinion
and sentiment of the whole nation at that time
Their names, being familiar to nearly all, and
accessible to quite all, need not now be repeat
| ed. tl s}s~
| take these "thirty-nine," for the present,
as being 'our fathers who framed the Govern
ment under which we live" <z-4
What is the question which, according to
the text, those fathers understood just as well,
and even better than we do now? # -
1t is this: Does the proper division of local
from federal authority. or anything in the Con-
stitution, forbid our Federal Government to
control as to slavery in our Federal Terrific
ries e? A7 "sT
Upon this, Douglas holds the affirmative,
and Republicans the negative. The afirma-
tive and denial from an issue and this issue
this question-is precisely what the text de
clares our fathers understood better than we.
Let US now enquire whether the thirty
nine," or any of them, ever acted upon this
question and if they did, how they acted up
on it-how they expressed their better under
standing. - BIZ" Hi = s33s
In l784-three years before the Constitu.
tion-the United States then owning the
Northwestern Territory, and no other-the
Congress of the Confederation had before them
the question of prohibit ng slavery ia that Ter
FH6fy 5rnU r5uF of ne, " e af-
tcrward framed the Constitution were in that
Congress, and voted on that question. or
these, Roger Sherman, Thomas AIiffln, and
Hrgh Williamson voted for the prohibition
thus showing that, in their understanding, no
line dividing local from federal authority, nor
anything else, properly forbade the Federal
Government TO control as 10 slavery in federal
territory. The other Of the four-J ames Nc
Henry-voted against the prohibition, show
ing that, for some cause, he thought it improp-
er to vote for it.
In 1857, still before the Constitution, but
while the Convention was in session framing
it, and while the Northwestern Territory still
was the only territory owned by the United
States-the same question of prohibiting slay-
cry in the territory again came before the Con
gress of the Confederation, ard three more Of
the "thirty-nine" whe afterwards signed the
Constitution, were in Congress and voted on
the question. They were William Blount.
William Few and Abraham Baldwin and
they all voted for the prohibtion-tElu show
ing that, in their understanding, no line divid-
ing local from Federal authority. nor anything
else. properly forbids the Federal Government
to control as to slavery in federal territory
This time th. prohibition became a law, being
part of what is now well known as the Ordin-
ance of 81.
The question of federal control of slavery in
the territories seems not to have been directly
before the Convention which framed the origi-
nal Constitution; and hence it is not recorded
that the "thirty-nine" or any of them, while
engaged on that instrument, expressed any
opinion on that precise question.
In 1889, by the first Congress which sat un-
der the Constitution, an act was passed to en-
force the Ordinance of '97, including the pro-
hibition of slavery in the Northwestern Terri
tory. The bill for this act was reported BY
one of the ''thirty-nine,' Thomas Fitzimmons,
then member of the House of Representa-
tives from Pennsylvania. 1t went through all
its stages without word of opposition, and
finally passed both branches without yeas and
nays, which is equivalent to an unanimous pas
sage. In this Congress there were sixteen of
the 'thirty-nine" fathers who framed the orig
inal Constitution. They were John kangdon.
Nicholas Gilman, VIM. S. johnson. Roger
Sherman, Robert Morris. Thomas Fitzimmons,
William Few, Abraham Baldwin, Rufus King.
William Patterson, George Olymor, Richard
Bassett, George Read, Pierce Butler, Daniel
Carroll james Madison.
This shows that in their understanding, no
line dividing local from federal authority, nor
anything in the Constitution, properly forbade
Congress to prohibit slavery in the federal ter
ritory; else both their fidelity to correct prin-
cipe and their oath to support the Constitu-
ton, would have constrained them to oppose
the prohibition.
Again. George Washington, another of the
-'thirty-nine, - was then President of the Unit
ed States, and, as such, approved and signed
the bil thus completing its validity as a law.
and thus showing that, in his understanding,
no line dividing local from federal authority,
nor anything in the Constitution, forbade the
Federal Government to control as to slavery
in federal territory.
No great while after the adoption of the
original Constitution, North Carolina ceded to
the Federal Government the country now con-
stituting the State of Tennessee; and a few
years later Georgia ceded that which now con.
stitutes the States of Mississippi and Alabama
In both deeds of cession it was made condi
ton by the ceding States that the Federal
Government should not prohibit slavery in the
ceded country. Under these circumstances.
Congress, on taking charge of these countries
did not absolutely prohibit slavery within them
But they did interfere with it-take control of
it-even there, to certain extent. In 1898,
CONGRESS ORGANIZED the Territnrr of Missirs