Randolph County journal. [volume] (Winchester, Randolph County, Ind.) 1855-1862, 1860-07-12

- s'' oatrH Rftsb'Ctatl III. rAtit
argument was adopted as the excuse
for holding white serfs in bondage pre-
cisely as il is now put forward hy the
Senator. AMI that even 10 this day the
angry Polish noble addresses his white
peasant a. the son Of Ham,
II hardly COMFORTS with the gravity
OF this debate 10 dwell on such an ar
gument. and you cannot 20 wrong il.
for the sake of n much injured race. |
brush it away. To justify the Sena-
tor in his application OF this ancient
curse. he must maintain at least five
different propositions, rs essential
links in the chain of the Afric-Amer-
lean slave; first. that. 10y this maledic-
ton. Canaan himself was actually
changed into 'chatsel. whereas he is
simply made the servant Of his breth-
rem; secondly. that not merely Canaan,
bat all his pos;erity, to the remotest
generation was so changed. whereas
the language has o uch extent; thirdly
that the Afric- American actually be-
longs to the posterity OF Canaan-an
chronological assumption absurdly
difficult to establish; fourthly. that
each of the descendants Of Shem and
Jephelh has right to hold an Afric-
American fellow man as 'ehattcl'-
proposition which finds no sen-
blance Of support: and filthy, that
every slave-master is truly descended
from Shcm or Japheth-a pedigree
which no anxiety can establish. This
plain analysis. which may 6tly excite a
smile. shows the fvefold ab~urlity Of
an attempt to found this preicnsion
on
ANY successive title long and dark.
Drawn from the in1uidy rolls OF N0ah's
ark
From the character Of these two ar
guments for property in. man, ! am
brought again to its denial.
1t is natural that Senators who pre-
tend that. by the law of nature. man
may hold property in man, should find
this pretension in the Constitution.
But the prctension is as much without
Foundation in the Constitution as il is
without foundation in nature. 1t is
not too much to say that there is not
one sentence. hint or equivocation.
even-out Of which any such prcten-
sion can be implied; while great
national acts and important cotempo
raneous declarations in the Convcn
ton which framed the Constitution, in
different forms of language, and also
controlling rules of Interpretation,
render this pretension impossible.
Partisans, taking counsel of their de-
sires, find in the ! Constitution. as in the
Scriptures, what they incline to find;
and never was this more apparent than
when slave-masters deceive themselves
so far as to find in the Constitution q
pretension which exists only in their
own souls. Looking judicially for
one moment at this question, we shall
be brought TO the conclusion, accor-
ding to the admission of courts and
iurists, first in Europe. and then in
our own country, that Slavery can be
derived from no doubtful word or
mere pretension, but only from clear
and special recognition. The state Of
Slavery sal Lord Mansfield, pro-
nouncins judgment in the great case
of SOMERSET, is of such a nature that
it is incapable of being introduced on
any reasons, moral or political, but
only by positive law. 1t is 50 odious
that nothing can be suffered to sup
pr it but positive law that is. ex-
press words Of written text; and this
principle, which comments itself to
to the enlightened reason, has been a
dopted by several Courts in the slave
states. OF course, every leaning must
be against slavery. a pretension so
peculiar and offcnsive-so hostile to
reason-so rerugnant to the laws Of
nature and the Unborn rights of man;
which in all its iiyefold wrong, has no
other object than 10 compel fellow
men to work without wages; such a
pretension. so tyrannical, so unjust,
SO mean, so barbarous, can find no
place in any system of government,
unless by virtue of positive sanction.
1t must be declared by unambiguous
YArls. incapable of double sense.
&c ihe adoption Of the Constitution,
this rule. promulgated in the Court o:
Kings Bench. by the voice of the
most finished magistrate in English
history, was as well known in our
country as any principle OF the COM
mon law; especially was it known to
the eminent lawyers in the Convention
nor is it too much to say that the Con-
stitution was framed with this rule on
Slavery asa grilc. And the Su-
preme Court of the United States. at
later day, in the case Ct the United
Statet VS.. Fisher. > Cranch, 800. by
the voice of Chie,-Ju>tice Marshall
promulgated this same rule. in words
stronger even than those of Lord Mans
'iSt's S"s t"c
"Where rights are infringed. where funda-
mental principles are overthrown. where the
general system of the law is departed from,
the legislative intention must be expressed
with irresistible clearness To induce a Court
Of Justice to suppose design to effect such
Object
II is well known. however. that
these two declarations are little more
than new for the ancient rules of the
common law. as expressed by For
tescue: 1mprius ct crupelis indican-
ius est qui Hibernate non frvet He is
to be adjudged impious and cruel who
does not favor liberty: and. as ex.
pressed by Blackstone. The law is
always ready to catch at anything in