Daily State sentinel. [volume] (Indianapolis, Ind.) 1861-1865, 1865-01-19

the isst session aid that in Die Judgment Il might
be done knox that the majority Of this house.
poult fepudiaie that doctrine. | would repuds
ate il myself Believing. a. / do, that the led
eFai ment can no more make a slave than
Il can make a king. I Tor one would be ready 20
resist il 10 the last extremity.
Nc. Thsyer / think the gentleman from
Ohio does not precisely quote the answer that ]
gave 70 the question that he has Just referred 10.
IL I r~ecolleci rightly the answer which | gave 10
the question upon the occasion referred %, il Was
hat so far as slsvery could be rendered aSful, a
constitutional provision making IL lawful in all
parts of the United States would have q binding
and legal eject upon the people Of The United
States
Ar. PenGleion. understood that 10 be Ibe
position OF the gentleman from PENNSYLVANIA
and If | expressed myself clearly / meant so 20
represent him correctly and ! meant in btlfslf Of
myself 10 repudiate that proposition. for | 10 net
believe that X lies within the power OF three
fourths Of the states 10 give 10 the federal GOV
eminent the power TO make the citizens OF a state
slaves within it, Jurisdiction.
Mr. Thayer. The gentleman still. | think,
fails 20 auprehend the character Of the answer
which | gave to his question / have never con
ceded that an amendment or a law Of the 5arbi-
roHs character suggested by the question, would
have a moral force or a monl obligation upon
the people Of the United Stats. But what | said.
in answer TO the question of the gentleman from
Ohio was, that it would have the force of law
the force OF an amendment of the constitution;
that the law. If it was opposed to the inalienable
rights of the people OF the United States. would
be. IL | may use a contradictory ex oppression, an
unlawful law, a law which YOU could not enforce,
a law contracting the inslienable rights of the
/ citizens OF this country.
| hope, sir, that | have made myself under
stood. i do not wish to be placed in the position
which the last remark Of the gentleman from
Ohio assigned to me-, of saying that either a law
OF Congress OF any amendment of the constitu
ton which could be adopted by the people of the
United States could introduce slavery into a
state, but | say that 30 far As il would have the
effect OF law 1t would legaiize it.
Mr. Pendleton Mr. Speaker, would not do
injustice to the gentleman from Pennsylvania, as
| believe he we'll knows. | go a step further
than he does. Isay that it would not be binding
in morals; | say that il would not be binding in
law. 1t would be illegal. 1t would be void. 1t
would have no more sanction than that which
the power Of those who chose TO impose j, would
be able to give to il. It would be binding on
those who would come within the power Of
The sword of those who made il, and on 10
other.
Mr.. Wilson. Will the gentleman permit me
TO ak him a question?
Mr.. Pendleson Certainly.
Mr.. Wilson. Mr.. Speaker, if that be the po-
siii0n which the gentleman designs to occupy. |
should like to have that gentleman inform the
House where any portion OF the people of this
country derived the power to make any other
portion OF The people slaves iu the first in
stance.
Mr.. Pendleton. They did not derive il from
the constitution of the United States.
Mr.. Wilson. | ask where they did derive il?
MIR Pendleton. They did not derive it from
the constitution of the United States. They did
not give 20 the constitution. or rather to the gov
eminent of the United States, which the consti-
tuition formed. the right to interfere with it where
it existed. / will not now be drawn into a dis
cussiou with the gentleman as to tie origin of
s~layerg, nor to the law, which lies behind the
constitution of the United States and behind the
governments OF The states, by which these people
are held in slavery. When that subject is per
tinent | will not hesitate TO enter into the debate.
Perhaps he and | might not differ about that.
Bat | am discussing the question which is put
forth so ostensibly by the other side OF the House,
that under the coustitution-not BY the right OF
reyolutiOn-under its clauses and provisions,
there exists the power to make this amendment.
Mr.. Kasson. Mr.. Speaker
The Speaker. Does the gentleman from
Ohio yieid to the gentleman from lowaf
Mr.. Pendleton. Certainly, sir.
Mr. Kasson. Mr.. Speaker, | rose a moment
ago, as the gentleman knows the esteem in
which | hold his ability on these questions, to
state this TO him., and TO make an inquiry. 1t
seems to me that ne ha. taken the extreme
ground of the EXTREMIST abolitionists, so fire.
quently denounced by his political associates on
this floor and at the other end of the capitol, of
a higher law than the constitution Itself. state
that as a preliminary to the inquiry which | pro
pose To make. He Is referring every proposed
amendment To the individual opinion OF a man as
TO whether it accords with the spirit which under
lies the constitution and irrespective OF its letter
IL that be so, il is a direct appeal TO and an
adoption of what has been obnoxiously styled the
higher law as maintained by extreme abOlitionists
time and again :
Now, | wish TO ask on this identical logical
point TO be derived from his premises, did not
those who framed the constitution affect the sub
ject which he declares now to be incapable of
amendment, when they prohibited every state
from increasing its interests in slavery by any
importation of the people from abroad who could
increase it, and in what respect this amendment
differs in kind from that incorporated in the con-
~stitution itself. which declares to the states they
shall not swell by one, after the year lcOS, the
slaves they then had within their bordersf ask
him on principle, not on detail, on kind, not IN
degree, what the difference is.
Mr.. Pendleton. Mr.. Speaker, it is well for
gentlemen To understand exactly the position
winch tnelr antagonists occupy before laey 90
into a discussion OF the kind suggested by my
friend from Iowa; and | would like him to an
swer the question whether or not he believes,
with the gentleman from Pennsylvania. Mr..
Thayer. that the adoption of an amendment OF
the constitution, such "a | alluded TO, would le-
gally carry the institution of slavery into the
northern states.
Mr.. kasson. | will answer that question di
rectly the gentleman frankly and clearly answers
mine.
Mr.. Pendleton. The gentleman says he will
answer my question ~ soon a. | answer his. |
say TO him that | was very unfortunate ii did
not make myself clearly understood in the prop
osition that | was arguing. | was considering
the powers guaranteed by the instrument itself
l was considering only those powers. and | eI-
pressly distinguished between the right OF revo-
luton and the right under which gentlemen
claim that they have the power to make this
amendment.
For all purposes of this argument l have only
sought TO place muself on the constitution OF the
United States, and not to invoke the authority
of any law that is higher than il. l hare taken
extreme cases. | told my colleague (Mr. Ash
ley that | intended TO take extreme cases, be
cause it is Only by extreme cases that the sound
ness of principles can be measured.
Mr.. Wilson. desire to ask the gentleman
from Ohio, Mr.. Pendleton,) in order fully TO
understand the theory upon which he is conduct
ing this argument. whether he believes that the