, 1860-02-07

Now, for the other side Of the picture. Let
us prove the proposition again BY reverse.
How does man hold his slave in Carolina
Not by this general. universal, uncontra-
dictcl right Of property:
Not by common right;
Not by title, which, like Tire title to the
horse, is good, recognized and enforced in all
civilized countries; -
Not by proving merely in any Court Of Ibis
world, possession or purchase. and resting
safely there Until better title is shown else
where:
By noue Of 1hescl
The right to hold slave depends, solely,
absolutely and entirely upon tho express pro-
visions Of tho Law u: the country in which he
is held, either Us set forth in terms in its lcgis-
lMive cnac.ncnts. or by its highest judicial
tribunals; aud it is mol found or pretended to
be found anywhere else. In other words, the
society in which Slavery is found creates tue
slave, ctsdows the master with the right of
ownership, compcls the slave to the burdens
Of lis position. and, within its limits, makes
that property, which out Of such limits may
or may not he, according to local law.
Property in tic slave. then, is purely the
creature Of human lava temporary not IN
eternal right-local not uuiyersa1-arbitrary
not natural-tEc expression Of power, not The
recognition Of TN existing riskt-and in MI
these particulars. differs from property in any
thing else held and owned by man-
Ido moi choose al this time to tollcl at all upon
the question Of the morality Or i,nrnoralitr, tile
iuuoce,Ne or cri,nina'ity Of Slavery in the ab~
s,sact, or in our own nation. 1purpose merely
to establish that its foundation, If it have any
is entirely different from tic foundation on
which other rights Of property are based. and
to treat these questions simply as propositions
Of law. We're it necessary, these views Of the
relative positions Of the right Of property in
slaves. at:d in other personally, can he enforced
By the judicial decisions Of tlle highest courts
and most venerable Judges Of the slavelo'dint.
States. Eut Tie common error Of the day: in
| my Judgment, consists in the idea that this
! question is complicated ior rs American citi-
zens 'r the Constitution Of this Union; and the
whole tenor Of the Southern argument in flyor
Of tile extension Of Slavery into Territories,
SO far as the South condescends TO use ars,l-
nscnt, is that the Constitution las acknowl-
edged property III slaves. and that, under the
| provisions o(, that instrument: the STAKEHOLDER
is rs 1nuc; protected as tie householder within
its limits. Now this assumes interpretations
as tr,sc, 10th Of which are false in fact. The
Constitution nowhere recognizes property III
| slaycs. Tho Constitution cnGorccs as to fi,gi-
tivrs from justice, by positive provision. that
which. ly the comfy of States, is generally
| yielded, and pcremptor1ly cilac:s that anon.
tic sister States Of the Confederation any Ic1-
son escaping from justice in oae State shall
upon proper demand he surrendered up -lnd
in strict analogy with the same provision that
persons bound to labor or service in one State
By tic laws thereof: escaping into another, shall
in like manner bc surrendered. Notice the
words in c1ch case, "persons not properly
}-thcy are nen-aot csiattc}s. They can es-
cape irun Justice i'll the one case they can es-
cape from l'bor and service in the other. They
are ancnable tojusticc in one parayrapll-they
can hc ''ho.snd to labor or service" in tie
other. They seek to avoid justice in the one
they seek to violate the law Of thc State
from which they escape i'll botll. THIS
| f1sn1u1f f1s raoo.,f1t- 1.aar Il
hy a distinguished gentleman from New
York in Congress, with mich force.
THUS the Constitution, III strict conformity
with the principles above laid down, and it
strict accordance with The Common Law o'
England and the United States and the judi
cial decisions Of all courts, recognizes merely
that "peFsons may he bound to labor or Str.
vice" in some Of the States Of this Union
by the laws Of such States, not otherwise;
may escape from such labor and SERVICE and
shall he delivered up.
In other words i. recognizes the state ot
Slavery us the creature Of limited local law
within Il State; and does not recognize tic
slave as property outside Of tha: local law,
Int commands him to DO delivered up as 4
"pcrsou'' capable Of violating, AID WHO las
violated law. The second proposition depends
upon the lrst, aud stands or laIIs with it.
II tue Constitution lad said that any one,
held as slave in aug State Of this. Union,
should DO slave still iii any other State or
Territory TO which the master and slave might
go; thus so far as that instrument could do it,
it would, within its limits, create the relation
Of master and slave III States and Territories
alike in spite oc and directly in the teeth Of
any provision Of the State Constitutions. But
have shown that it carefully guards against
any such imagination, even by the clear and
distinct differences drawn iu tho instrunle ut
itself: and it is certain that no such thing was
dreamed Of l,y its makers, or in1ag glucd b7 the
several conventions that adopted it. and get
those who contend that tie Constitution sane.
tions. recognizes aud protects Slavery in the
Territories are driven by tile force Of incxo1'
able logic, to admit that it docs the same in tic
States, fnE 10 the SAME exlcut tint lie Coustt.
tuition is the paramount law Of the Territory,
it is Of the State THUS then when that pro.
vision Of the Constitution is referred to which
secures each citizen in tue same enjoyment o!
his property, and is sought to he forced into a
guarantee Of title to that which is not by uni.
versal law property, it is manifest FeEversion
Of the intent aud meaning Of the phrase.
Those things III which man las property,
outside Of aud beyond positive law-1llose
things to Which his title does not depend upon
human grant, or tic expressions Of human
will-l',ose things, title to w]licl, is not given
by nan and which man caunct Justly take
away-lnose, aud those only, are the proper
t. intended and spoken Of in this clause; and
tue clausc is declaratory Of a pre-existiug
right, restricting all interference with such
right, and does not pretend TO confer: right
which had no prior existence. Without this
clause the right would exist, but the means
Of enforcing it, or, rather. the means Of restrain
ing impert5ncnt interference with il, would
not.
A -