New-York daily tribune., 1861-02-19
cad of the Constitution itself, Of


catching. Where con we find 1t in the literal one
The canon OF legal Interpretation oriis the interpret.
ing 0 law IN favor Of fundamental wrong unless the
wrong be expressed with irresistible clearness. Tbs
Supreme Conrt Of the United States says: "Whsse
rghts infIinged, where fundamental principles are
overthrowD, where The general system Of the Laws 10
departed from, the legislative intention must be ex-
pressed with Irresistible cearness TO induce court Of
justice to suppose design to effect such objects. q
Cranch, 1907 But Slavery is the preeminent wrong,
and it Is not expressed at al in the eConstitEtion-muck
less with Irresistible clearness. President Buchanan
az otbers in their present endeavrs to get the Goa.
situiion ameDded that il shall expressly contain
slavery, do in the light Of this rule Of the Supreme
CONT virtually admit that h does not contain II at all.
Who believes that bad it been expressed the Const-
tuition would have been adopted Wonld such Slavery
hatlDg States as Dassachns etfs and ewHampsbire,
and just coming out of for Liberty, have voted
with their eye open for the most shameless outrage
upon heri Had the Constitution provided In plain
terms Tor running down innocent men aud women TO
nk them into Slavery, would such States have voted
for the enormously gully proysiOni
Again, the fugiives referred to in the Constitution
are held to service nnder the lars" of State But
not all enactmens laws; and it must not be sumed
that the PruSavery enaetmeuts under which fugtves
are pursued among are laws, until il has been
shown that the Constitution is also Pro-Sayery Isit
held that we have tight to go back OF these enact
uents to inquire wte ler they are laws and that We
must receive them as laws sipply because they are
enactments Imagine for a moment what variety
of horrible obligations such doctrine might lay rs
under Ii we must, because Of bare enaciments, be
they constitutional or unconstitutional, laws or 10
aw let innocent brotlers and sisters go back into
Slavery then must we prepare ourselves TO let 90
back ~ the South tbeir accomplished White women,
who sbal fee TO us from suppcsaIle fotnre enact
ment, eniiild " An AT to Promote MaIrisgc, that
elm doom all ladies' who refuse 10 marry TO be tie un
paid domesiics Of those who DO marry Then, too we
must prepare OnIeeles 10 let tLese unmarried ladies'
go back TO herloTy, if that be ito serNie 10 which an
enactment 8 all devote them: And then, akc, we
l. IL hi tl.a lifslf
huiIed men Of Tie South 10 be TIE unpaid domcscs Il
Ler dark k-haired men.
Is there flaw in tbs reasoningl Say you thst our
fathers had not III their eye any "sergice or labor
more degrading cruel than Slavery, and that they,
therefore DID rot bind themselves return furitiyes
from any olheri The Con,titntion dose not say it.
Moreover q service or labor Ia my supposed cgses
falls far short OF the sweeping eXactons Of ShYeTy
o. say You that tue iws spoken of III TINS cloo the
Constitution are such opls existed at the time of s
adoption! Would this were 20! For then In the case
of most Of the sayes-inclGGing, Of course, all in The
new Statee-tbeIe cOnd be no possible plea of obliga
ton TO return any, But the clause has such l1iita
ton If binds by force Of paft enactments TO send
our poor brObers aud sisters to however horrible ser
vice equally does it bind and our Children TO 90 50
by force Of future enac,ments. La the light OF all tbs
how obvious it E that the service IL Is clause cannot
be due Oh the mere ground aud by the force Of
leplntou. Tits ,ause # Interpreted on the principle
that reryice be due oUly admiue equiaen
i. reasonable useful, Innocent. Blt interpreted on
Il ptluClie nat lclrdtlOn i'ftl
" defiant and conempIuous Of reason and justice, can
create Obgai Bs OF service, is 10 the last degree
wicked and absurd. close under this head with the
rena that for tn ackne ledge oGnelyee ready to
carry ont tie guilty accepted Interpretation Of Tins
clause s % ackuOn leJge ourselves 10 DC servants at
comm nd II is stand re.dy to DO greas variety OF
dirty or deyii-h work, vi ich N isers may at any
time take il into their heads TO Bet us about.
Another Of the macy Teas why the seryicD re-
ferred to in tLi5 clause cannot be that Of slave is,
that il is due frum person: and that PTS0A Cannot,
in the constu nal Genre of tie word mean stare, IL
NANTES, from the Constitutional Declaration: " nor
shall any IenoD be ceprNed of life, liberty OF prop
erty, without due process Of llw."e
We will now pa from the real Constitution 70 zee
whether the Lii tOrial cne gives any eo1htenance 70
slave, aching. Our flint remark s, that we have no
right pass iron no rIhi because tue people voted
upon aud adopted ihe nple letter of the Conitut on
Neither the motives If its trainers no. their discussions
even had tie discussions been olen as ihey were
secret, are any part Of tue Constitution. Where
legal p4per - eks pnly for iself there is night TO
20 out II il iio history anytLIg e'e fos tine pnr
pose modify ing the in'erpreia ion Of It's words. The
Con,tiluiiou i,such PAPER. Bot even were IT. words
obscure, there 30 Liberty to go yond them To 'ep
then, sleak an behalf OF Fundamental wI0ng. We
will however break through these objections TO see
wleher ave,aicliDg finds any favor ia tie history
Of the CODsiui.n. Ddt how can II, sluce one OF the
reJuiog purI OF is trainers WAS 10 have it IN all
eyes a Cons tuition for FleedOnl Slavery could not
be smuggled into il in 81 ite OF such purpose. Fortke
avowed re son hat il doth "eXpTess tie condition ot
saves the trainers Of the Constitution refdsed let
tue word "ser,itudc be in the Constitution Fosihe
avowed reason that service DOH "express the ob-
lgariJn OF fee persOns" they unani noufy subsnej
il for "seryitude." am aware, yOu may say, tdat in
all this The trainers of lie Constitution were Lypo Iiles.
But am also aware that tie moment you siy 20 You
cut yourselves oil firm quoiUg any Of their words in
favor of a Pro.Savery conslr ton Of the Consuu-
ion and your historical Constitution falls quite TO the
ground.
do not forget that it is continually declared ia
l. sLa -U.sAa and
unleared that the fugi i've sev,nt clarse Is orc ot
tie compromises Of the Const,u.ion Even thi highly
Intelligent gentleman Mr.. John Bill OF Tennessee IN
Lis letter OF 9Th December Ia T. 20 Mr. burwell OF BIG
own State, says tlat we should Lave had no feteia,
Union if the objections TO tie rendition chuss had
not been yielded, aud that the Convention was at
one time upon the point of breaking up IN confsion
on his subject Pretident Buchanan, in Is LIST
Annusl Message says: Without this provision tis
ell known bistori al fact tina, the CoD.titu,ion IL
self could never have heeB adopted by the Conven-
tion." And South Carolina, Ia her recent Declaration
says; The stipulation was so material 10 the com
pact that without IL the compact would not have been
made" Now, in what histories records these rar.-
ties find all tbis or little Of al this do not
know nor can so much as conjecture. They c TOO
honorable 20 have sid il without yeyingit; and yet
G fny persuaded that lave picked from such
vague aud gromdlss learsays intelligent men
can never believe unless they lave strong desiea to
believe them. l do not See either IN tie Madison
PAPERS, or any where else, that there was, in any ot
the numerous plans oI IousluiOh slouliteu 10 tho
Convention, tie slightest reference 90 fugiiiyes fcm
service nor shat there was any reference 10 them In
the Convention until the molon made bat twenty days
before its close for the surrender of fugve slaves.
This motion, we learn from tie Macison Papers,'
was Immediately aud indignantly seou'ed out 81 TIE
Convention. from the source We learn that the
Subsequent motion for returning fers0a from "hom'
"se vice or labor may be due" was adopted nnan-
mously and without discussion. The clause IN me
Constitution being substantially the latter motion,
what a g uing i,.iicaion is it Of history TO call
conn, omise for returning fugitive slaves, or ndeeo