The Lansing state Republican. [volume] (Lansing, Mich.) 1855-1874, 1864-06-22
Constitutional Prohibition Of slavery

Ii ia now about SIX months since Wendell
Phillips, in a public meeting in New York City,
first called attention TO the necessity Of eItin-
gushing Slavery by constitutional provision.
He argued that until this was done, there was
no security that not only the Proclsmstons of the
President, but any acts of Congress- on the sub
ject, however legitimate or Important, we're liza
Die to be set aside any time by five or six judges
of the Supreme Court whereas a constitutional
provision would put a quietus on the agitation OF
the question of slavery by aunihilAting the nsti-
tuition itself
These views have met with very general ac-
ceptance-perbaps We might say with universal
acceptAnce-witb all the opponents OF Slavery
Sometime since, the constitutional amendment
on Slavery passed the Senate by vote of six to
one. The National Convention at Baltimore ap-
proved the msasure without word OF dissent
Every Republican paper 40 far as We have seen,
favOrs the measure; the President has signi6ed
his approval OF il; and it may be truly said that
all who hold TO Republican principles, from the
extreme abOtiouists Of the East to the loya
holders OF slaves in the South, are entirely unan-
imOus for the measure. Even at the mongre
Cleveland Convention, which was composed oil
the greatest possible extremes. the old and earn
est AbOltonists extorted from the Democrats q
resolution declaring that " the rebellion has de-
stroyed Slavery, aud the Federal Constitution
should be amended to prohibit its re-estabEsh-
meut, aud TO secure to all men absolute equality
before the law" Fremont, in consistency with
his prOfessed principles, felt obliged to say, in
his letter of acceptance. This element of slave
ry may be consde red practically destroyed in the
country, and it needs Only,yOsr proposed amend
ment to the Constitution to make the extinction
complete"
But this general unAnimity on one side has
been met by very large ard general opposition
on the other. All the present Adherents of the
Democratic party. almost without exception, are
opposed to the abolition OF Slavery by constitu.
tional provision. We do not know Of paper Of
either wing Of that party which has ever sx-
pressed the least favor for the amendment. In
all Conventions and legislative bodies, where the
subject has come up, the Democrats have acted
as solid body against the proposition.
Thus in the New Hampshire House of Repre-
entatives, June l6. in vote on the question,
there were les nays against % yeas. When
the Joint Resolution came into the House OF
Representatives, at Washington, its reAdiug a
second time Was objected to by Mr. HOLMAN, an
Indiana Democrat On the question of rejecting
the Joint Resolution, 6fty-6ve Democrats. ali
but one of those present and voting, were in IA
vOr of rejecting it without discussion.
When, afterwards, the question came I'D in
the House, it was opposed on every ground that
sophlstry and ingenuity could devise. IL vas
argued that the Constitution could not be anne.
ded so as to increase its powers; that il was no
time to make such change when the country
was excited BY civil war that the excitsmep,
would thereby be made greater; that it made
social institutions subject to the government
that 1t was unjust; that it was breach Of GOOD