Dayton daily empire. [volume] (Dayton [Ohio]) 1850-1865, 1865-01-30
S = Il E @ II
Hon. GEORGE II. PENDLETOs,
ON THE +F
Proposed Amendment 10 the COnstitu-
lion for The Abolition Of glaVery.

/ Mr. ePkNDLETON Mr. Speaker, shall
not detain the House long 20 day When
this subject wes under discussion at tho last
/ session Of Congress / endeavored 10 main
tain BY argument that pree tourlhs Of the
States did not possess constitutional power
ITO pass this amendment bad arrived at
that Conclpsiop ailer matgpsi Liberation. -
! endeayUted % ehow wheteni the proposed
amendment, 10 lar coutraveued the spirit
aud intent Of the constitution as to be be-
yond the power granted. | shall not need TO
touch that poiut to-day. have listened with
\ great attention TO the opinions OF gentlemen
on the other side OF the House who disagree
with me. | have heard the gehueinaH from
! from Maryland, Mr. Oresweil and have
listened tgthe sweeping declarationto oTamy
colleague Mr.. Coz, OF Ohio who sits be.
| hind DE, I have epdeayored to weigh i'm
partially tho arguments which they have ad.
duced 10 SUPPORT Of their opinions an
constrained TO say that have heard nothing
which has in the least degree weakened my
faith Ia the conclusion at which ! had arrv-
ed II il because | cannot 90 beyond this
/ question Of power because am not at liber-
srty TO consider any other question, that |
shall confine myself exclusively to it, consid
| eration. .I...,. .r....i. ..
| will not do my colleague from the Toledo
district, Me Ashley Tie Injustice TO SUP
pose that IN his argument on ktiiay he iu-
tended to make n complete reply to the pr,
position which ! endeavored TO sustain at the
i andrrsrihd, NJ. spehker, the right OF
revolution. know what are its limitations
aud lts sanction It's origin is not in human
institutions ils sanctions Rre not in penal
enactmenls. It's home is iu the human hear
it's origin IL ia the aspirations OF man for
progress its sanction is the Ntiimd ratio
from whose dread judgment there is no ap
peal The mirOriiy Of the people may, #
they can, subyert :his Confederation. aud rs-
iahlish in ils stead n consolidated unity -
Much more maya majority. Three fourths
OF the States may abolish this republican
form Of government, mud, to use the llIustra
ton OF my colleague, Mr.. COY may elect
the King OF Dahomey To he their autoerar;
and then responsible in the present only to
the nations and to God, and responsible in
the future only 10 the ages and to civilization
they may draw their sword, aud il they have
the power impose that form oi government
upon the dissenting Statcs.
Bnt beg my colleagues tMr Cox and Mr.
Ashley to remember, and | beg gentlemen
who differ ftom me 10 remember, that the
right OF resist lnco is as perfect; that the duty
of resistanceis is more absolute; and that the
cause Of those who resist s sacred in the eyes
Of God and man, aud WILL IL they are sue
cessful, command the ldmiration of the world,
and crown them with the fame which belongs
to patriots and heroes
i5ut sir we aro not discussing that right Of
revolution, nor yet the right OF all the S,lies
- a.l al l.. W.
ing the powers of change which are granted
by this written Constitution. We are dis
cussing the powers Of change which by that
inslru Uent are givea 10 tbs majority, andiha
obligation of obedience and OF acquiescenee
which is imposed upon the minority l sup
pose it will be admitted ps maxim, subeet|
to no controversy, that wherever there is a
constitutional power in the majority to change
the Cunsti, ution, there is CorIelatiye duty
on the part Of the minority, silently, peaca 2
fully, and Immediately to acquiesce Wher-
ever there is the right Of resistance in the
minority, there is W right Of amendment in
the majority. -teg aa.es.nss
| have endeavored to maintain that the
right OF amendment granted by this Consttu-
tion is limited in two ways, First, by the lot
ter OF the Constitution itself, and next by the
spirit aud intent mud scope ofIhat instrument
aud by the idea vi ich underlies it all as II
foundations. ,isl. j.sr.r sr .,rrI,.i
NV colleague who sits behind me, fMr.
Cox, aud my colleague from the Toledo dis,
triet, Mr.. Ashley, admit that the power OF
amendment il admitted by the letter OF ths
Constitution i'lelf, but they assert that il is
limited only by that rule aud no other.
beg gentlemen - remember that this is not a
question OF revolution or OF physical force
IL is not question of abstract right or OF
natutal JUSTICE but of power delegated by the
written text of the Consultation itself From
the times of the ancient prophets he was an
honorable and upright man who stood by his
word though it le,lto his own Injury
Now desire TO ask gentlemen wliother il
is true that the power OF change in that Con
stitulionls limited only by its written Jan
euage There are but three points in which
that Constitution, By its letter, could be chang
| ed--fhe first was the'right OF importation OF
slaves before lsgY !, the second was the rule
oftaxaliou, and thethird was the equality
bof representation in the Senate, The prohib.
/ tion Of change in one article was necessaii Z
ly limited BY the Rttinle itselfto The year sos.
hMy colleague from the Toledo district, in the
! speech whieh he made ths other day, told us
with reference TO this point :, q5 ,,n ,,gtta,
! .hIf read the 1Oonsiitntion Alright and IN
| derstand the force Of language, the section
/ which have just quoted is to-day free from
/ all limitations and conditions sayn Two, one Of
! which provides that the suffrage of the sever
Al States in the Senate shall1bs equal, and
that no State shall lose this equality by any
amendment Of tho CobstitulIon Itkdut It's
: consent the other relates to taxation These
are the only conditions and limitations"
! | deny il ! assert that there is another
lirnitation stronger even than the letter of The
Constitution and that is to be Il d in its in.
tent aud It's spirit aud its foundation idea |
put the question which has h zen puL before n
this dnhaLn , nnn Ihrne-fnnr rfha nf Tho -Hininn