The Union and journal. [volume] (Biddeford, Me.) 1858-1882, 1860-05-11
From the N. Y. Times.
Slaves rs Propcrty.-Thc Question really
Mt Issue.

one of his recent speeches In the Senate said h,
denied that eve at the South draw any distinc
ton between slaves and other property. w,
ask simply" said he, 'that slave propert,
shall be put upon the same footing as every 9th.
sr species ofproperty. We ask that, and VI
ask nothing more"
MIR Wigfall seemed to DO under the impces
sion that he was speaking in the spirit Of mod
Grafton and forbcarance. This simple demand
Of the South evidently struck him as the meres
trihe IN the world; and no language can pic.
ture his disgust and horror at finding that thu
people Of the North were unwilling to make
this slight concession. But neither Mr.. Wigfal
nor those Pro-Slaycry ultraists who are fond o.
dwelling upon the same point, are quite as sim.
pie as they would be thought. They know very
we'll that ifthey can establish this point, in the
law and public sentiment Of the country, they
will have everything they could possibly desire
conceded. All the planks In all tho platform:
of both parties-all the contests about Terrific
rial sovereignty, the extension Of Slavery, the
limits.of Federal power, &C., become utterly
empty and useless. II slaves are property, In
the same sense and to the same extent MS Glands,
horses, mules and hogs" as Mr. Wigfall, In
another part of his speech, declared that they
are-if they are to be thus regarded and treat
ed by the Legislatures Courts and people Of the
Union-if this is the status upon which they
arc placed, and upon which they are to be MAIN
tanned by the Constitution ofthe United States,
any further controversy on the subject Is either
the idlest of shams or the most fragrant injuss
ticc. In that case, Mr.. Wigtall need resort to
no elaborate argument to prove that neither
Congress nor the Territorial Legislatures can
exclude Slavery from Federal territory. It
cannot b, excluded anywhere. by any power,
or from my jurisdiction-State or Territorial.
What would Mr.. Wigfall say to law Of South
Carolina--or clause in the Constitution OF
property in land, in horses, in hogs and mules,
utterly invalid and voidl No State, no socie-
ty, has any right thus to confscate property
thus to destroy that which rests upon an older
and more solid basis than any form OF govern
ment-without which, indeed, there can be no
such thing rs government anywhere.
1t is easy to see that the Pro-Slavery Party
have selected this principle as the Malakotf OF
their peculiar institution. That the Federal
Constitution recognizes slaves as property, APP
pears to be plausible and comparatively inno-
cent proposition. It has been repeated 80 Of
Tents truth has been SO generally assumed,
and even Northern men have 30 frequently con-
coded il rs matter of fact, that Southern pol
iticians, not without reason, count upon estab-
fishing il rs point of Constitutional law
When they have done this, they have done ey-
erything. They have access both to Territories
and to States. They have established their
right to carry Slaves into Federal Territory,
and TO hold them there in spite OF Congress, in
spite of Territorial Legislatures, and in spite OF
Constitutions. They have virtually nnnulled
the laws and the action of oil States which have
abolished Slavery, and will have made their in
stitution and its code just rs universal, just as
permanent. just rs completely out Of the reach
of hostile legislation, rs that general law OF
property which lies ut the basis OF oil govern.
inent, and, indeed, of all society. Mr.. Wigfall
says, 1--WE ask that and VIC ask nothing more ~
What pattern of forbearance-whata model
of moderation Mr.. Wigfall is
The Constitution Of the United States does
not recognize slaves as property Mt ALL There
Is not q solitary section, phrase or syllable in
IL which countenances the assumption that
slaves are property precisely as lands, horses,
mules and hogs are property-to use the words
Of Mr.. Wigall. 1t does undoubtedly recognize
Slavery, but it does even that only silently and
by implication. But it gives not the slightest
color or countenanse to the doctrine that slaves
are only property-that they are to be govern
ed solely by the laws which govern property
and that they have none Of the rights which be-
long to persons. On the contrary, with stud
led and deliberate purpose, in each and every
allusion which 1t makes to slaves. the Constitu-
ton speaks ofthcm as psrsons-whch they cam
not possibly be il they are solely and exclusive
ly property. III they are persons, they have
personal rights; they are subjects Of moral law;
they have certain spiritual powers and faculties
of which no laws can divest them, anu which
no human power can ignore or disregard with
out committing n moral wrong. Property has
no such rights, mo such faculties The owner
of hog may fatten, kill and eat him If he pleas
es; the owner of slave cannot. slave may
be held accountable for his cts,-may be pun
ished for theft,-may be guilty Of murler;-a
horse cannot. 1t is perfectly absurd to speak
of the two being alike properfy,-as holding to
the law and the State precisely the same rela-
ton, in the same sense and to the same extent.
The very terms-person and property-exclude
the idea that they can be identical. A person
cannot be property, nor can that which is prop
crty possibly be clothed with the attributes and
rights which are inseparable from personality.
There may be property in certain faculties OF
a person, property in his labor, property in
the products of his genius,-property in his
time, his services and his earnings; but person.
atty itself cannot be owned.
This is the view ofSlayery which Is apparent
in the Constitution Of the United States No
man has ever designated but three clauses In
that instrument which refer to Slavery, direct
ly or indirectly; and in each ofthese slaves are
spoken of distinctly and deliberately as persons.
The clause which permits their importation
until 1908, simply forbids the prohibition OF
''the migration or importation of such persons
rs any of the States now existing shall think
proper to admit" The clause which fixes their
ratio of representation, merely declares that, to
the whole number OF. free persons shall be ad-
ded "three-ffths Of oil other persons;' and the
clause which provides for the return Of fugitive
slaves, declares, with equal precision, not that
fugitive property may be seized and reclaimed
but that "no person held to service or labor in
one State" shall be discharged therefrom by
the laws of any State into which he may escape.
In each and every one of these clauses special
care Is taken to designate slaves as persons,
and thus necessarily to exclude the idea that
they are property. Their service, their labor,
is due tots owned by-others; but they do
not, observation-disclosures they cannot-surren-
der any Of the rights which always belong in
alienably to persons everywhere.
people concede the legal existence and the Con.
stitutional immunity of Slavery. They regard
slaves rs persons owing service and labor to
their masters, by virtue of local laws or usages,
which are recognized rs valid by the Constitu-
ton of the United States. But they do not no.
gard them, nor does the Federal Constitution
regard them. as being thereby Invested OF the
rights of persons--as being merely property,
like Mr.. Wigfall's "horses, lands, mules, anu
hogs" They are still persons-nen ana wo-
men, having rights and owing duties-with
moral RESPONSIBILITIES and immnnities, of which
no law can deprive them, without being itself
an outrage upon the law of universal humani-
The North doe, not regard saves rs merely
property, and can never be brought to do so
under any circumstances; for such concession
would be TO surrender their own control over
Slavery within their own limits-to annul their
own prohibitions Of II, and 70 establish the law
Of Slavery like d the s os 10. sdSra Go,ern e
ment, but Of every State and every community
in the Union. The CLAIM Of the South, so far
as the South sanctions Mr.. WigfalPs views
as il seems inclined to do more and more every
day,-is extravagant. and will never be CONGO
ded. II really marks the line OF division be