Indiana State sentinel. (Indianapolis, Ind.) 1861-1865, 1861-02-27
QOlrhtal.
From Recent Letter Of Bishop Hopkins, of Vermont
Are All Wen Born Free and Equali

Are All JIen Born Free and Equalt
Political equality, if it means anything, must
mean that every man enjoys the same right to
political Office and honor; because the poiIcy OF
any government consists in its system of admin
istrtion, and hence it results, OF necessity that
those who cannot possible be admitted TO share
in this administration, have political equality
with those who can We do, indeed, say that the
people are sovereign. But every one knows, full
well, that the comparative few who are qualified
TO take the lead, by talent, by education, by nat
ural tact and by conjunction of favoring cir
cumstances, are practical sovereigns over the
people The man who carries hOd gives his
vote for the candidate. The candidate himself can
do no more, so far as it concerns the mere form
of an election. Are they, therefore, politically
equal? Who formed the party to which the can
didate belongs2 Who ruled the convention by
which his name was put upon the listl Who ar
ranged the orators for the OecasiOnl Who sub
sidized the Press2 Had the poor holman any
share in the operation, any influence. any voice
whatever? No more than the hod which he
carries. Can any human power ever manutac
.ure a candidate out of him? The notion
would be prep0sterous. Where, then, is the po
litical equality! Even here, in our happy land
of universal suffrage, how does it appear that
'that all men are born equal" The proposition
is a sheer absurdity. Ali men are born unequal,
in body mind, and social privileges. Their in
tellectual faculties are unequal. Their educa-
ton is unequal. Their opportunities are un
equal And their freedom is as unreal their
equality. The poor are compelled to serve the
rich, and the rich are compelled to serve the
poor BY paying for their services. The political
party is compelled to serve the leaders, and the
leaders are compelled to scheme and toll, in order
to serve the party. The multitude are depend
ent ON the few who are endowed with the talents
to govern. And the few are dependent on the
multitude for the power, without which all gov
ernment is impossible. From the top to the
bottom of the social fabric, the whole is thus
seen to be inequality and mutual dependence.
And hence although they are free from that
special kind of slavery which the Southern States
maintain over the posterity of Ham, yet they are
all, from the highest to the lowest in bondage
quite as real from which they can not escape
the slavery of circumstance, called, in the ordi-
nary language Of the word necessity.
/ have been, / tear, unreasonably tedious in
thus endeavoring to show why utterly discard
these famous propositions of the Declaration OF
Independence Ii is because am aware of the
strong hold which they have gained over the or
dinary mind of the nation. They are assumed by
thousands upon thousands, as if they were the
very doctrines of divine truth. And they are
mace the basis Of the hostile feeling against the
slavery Of the South, notwithstanding their total
want of nationality. Yet do not wonder that
such maxims should be popular. They are ad-
nFably calculated to crafty the pride and am
bicion so natural to the human breast, and are,
therefore, powerful incentives in the work of po-
ltical revolution. twas for this purpose, pre-
sumo that they were introduced in that famous
Document, which publicly cast off the allegiance
of the Colonies to the British Crown. And the
same doctrines were proclaimed, few years later,
in similar service, by the French Directory, in
the midst of n far more terrible revolution Lib
were then the watchwords of the excited populaee,
while their insane leaders published the decree of
Atheism, and a notorious courtezan was enthroned
as the goddess Of reason, and the guilotine daily
massacred the victims of democratic fury till the
streets of Paris ran with blood.
do not state this fact because desire to place
the revolutions in the Colonies and in France on
the same foundation, with respect to the spirit
and the mode in which they were conducted God
forbid that should forget the marked features OF
contrast between theml On the one side, there
was religious reverence, strong piety, and pure
6isinterested patriotism. On the other, there was
the madness Of atheism, the brutality Of rufhan-
ism, and the ''reign of terroEs to all that was
good and true. In no one mark or character, in
deed, could deem that there was any comparison
between them, save in this that the same false
assumption of human equality and human rights
was adopted in both. Yet how widely different
was their result on the question of negro slavery
The American Revolution produced no effeci
whatever on that institution. While the French
Revolution reused the slaves of their colony In
St. Domingo TO general insurrection, and .
scene of barbarous and cruel butchery succeeded
to which the history Of the world contains no par
aIIe
This brings me to the last remarks which
have to present on this famous declaration. Ans
respectfully ask my readers to consider then
maturely.
First, then, it seems manifest that the signer
Of this document (they assumed that "aH me,
were born equal, did not take the negro rae
into account at all. 1t is unquestionabe that tn
author, Mr. jefferson, was a Shareholder at tn
time, and continued so to his lfes end 1t Is Ger
tain that the great majority of the other signer
of the Declaration we're shareholders likewise
No one can be ignorant of the fact that slaver
had been introduced into all the colonies Ion
before, and continued to exist long after, in ever
State save one. Finally, then, it can not be pre-
sumed that these able and sagaciOus men in
tended to stultify themselves by declaring tina
the negro race had rights, which nevertheless the
were not ready to give them. And yet it is evi
denr that we must either imp1te this crying in
justice to our revolutionary patriarchS, or SUI
pose that the case of the slaves was not contem
plated
Nor is this the solitary example, for we have
complete parallel to it in the preamble to tn
Constitution, Wnere the Important phrase, w
the people Of the United States" !" must be undel
stood with the very same limitation. Who wer
the people? Undoubtedly the free citizens VIII
voted for the Constitution Were the slave
counted as part of the peoplel By no mean
The negro race had no voice, no vote no Unfit
ence whatever in the matter. Thus, therefore,
seems perfectly plain that both these instrument
must be understood according to the same rul
of interpretation The slaves were not include
in 20 Docls inn of Inda m
reason precisely that they were not include
amongst the people" who adopted the Constitl
tion Of the United States
Now it is the established maxim of the Law
that every written document must be understood
according to the true intent of the parties whe
it was executed The language employed ma
be such that it admits of different sense; b.
there can be only one lust Interpretation, and tn
is Fixed unalterably by the apparent meaning
It's authors at the time. On this ground alon
therefore, respectfully contend that the Declar
ton of Independence has no claim whatever TO
considered in the controversy of our day. ha'
stated at some length my reasons for rejecting
famous propositions, as being totally fallacio
and untenable. But even if they were ever
'-self evident or capable ofthe most rigid demo
stratiOn, the rule of law utterly foTbids us TO a
peal to tem in a sense which they were not d
signed to bear.
In the second place, however, it should be r
mernbered that the Declaration of Independenc
whether true or false, whether it be interpret,
legally or illegally, forms no part of our prese
system. As great historical document, it STAN
ard must ever stand, prominent before the n
tions of the world. But it was put forth mo
than seven years anterior to the Constitution.
language was not adopted in that Constitutio
and il has no place whatever in the obligatory Ia
Of the United States. When our orators, o
preachers and our politicians, therefore take
propositions about human rights and hum
equality and set them up as the supreme law, owe
ruling the Constitution and the acts of Congre,
which are the real law of the land can not wo
der enough at the absurdity of the proceedin
And doubt whether the annals Of civilized ma
kind can furnish stronger instance of unmi
gated perversity-
Thirr.Y. and lastly / am utterly onnosed