Class Ll >?b Book 37^ AN EXAMINATION OF THE. EXPEDIENCY AND CONSTITUTIONALITY %■ OF PROHIBITING SLAVERY IN THE STATE OF MISSOURI. Homo sura, et humani nihil a me alienum puto. BY MARCUS. Y^" '^ NEW-YORK: PUBLISHED BY C. WILEY Sc CO. No 3 WALL-STREET J. Seymour, printer. 18J0. iS> <>y' ^ J./i^t^^ ^^/ AN EXAMINATION, ^c. A MEASURE, in which the republic is more deeply concerned, thai, in any which has been discussed since the adoption of the Federal Constitution, is abou: to be brought before our na- tional representatives. It will then be decided, whether Congress will give its sanc- tion to the extension of a system which is repugnant to the fundatnental principles of a republic. During the last session of this body, the inhabitants of Mis- souri pethioned for admission into the Union. As usual, the law authorising the erection of the territory into a state, was amended by annexing several conditions to the required per- mission. After several minor amendments had been pro- posed and adopted, a gentleman from New-York moved, that the further introduction of slavery or involuntary servitude be prohibited, except for the punislnuent of crimes, whereof the party shall have been fully convicted. This amendment was warmly opposed by the southern members. They exclaimed that it was unconstitutional, ap- pealed to those local prejudices, which, unfortunately for the wehare of tiiis republic, have too great influence upon the con- duct r>f statesmen ; and in the Senate, where the states are not represented according to the population or wealth, succeeded in reje<:ting the amendment. Since then the advocates of slavery have been unusually active; private interest has enlisted many as zealous support- ers of the system, and it is necessary that disinterested men, if they would not sec the general good sacrificed to local inter- ests, shouhl rouse themselves in defence of the principles of freedom. The clamours of a few interested individuals must not be mistaken for the general sei^timent of the comnumity. Twelve states, coutaining four-sevenths of the whole popu- lation, and two-thirds of the white citi/.ens, iiave clearly ex- pressed their opinions against slavery by making laws for its abolition ; and even in the slave states, if tlie question were put to tiie electors, Shall slavery be abolished, and the blacks ex- ported .'' 1 sincerely believe, if no arts were used to influence the passions and bias the judgment, that a majority would a>i- swer in the affirmative. That answer is prevented, at present, only by the fear that society would be overturned by tlie freedom of so many igno- rant degraded beings. This objection does not apply to the proposed restriction, which is to take effect only in future. A southern freeman, who is not an owner, is in reality injured by slavery : he cannot enter into competition with tliat man who has 50 or 100 workmen labouring for him, without any compensation except food and lodging, and those too of the worst kind. We may, therefore, add to the above mentioned majority, all those in the southern states who are not slave holders. Even many of these slave holdei's profoundly regret the existence of slavery, and express their determination to emancipate their slaves, the moment that it can be done consistently with their happiness and the good of societ3% I do not deny that many are zealously opposed to this re- striction, but their opinions being dictated by interest, are to be regarded only so far as they do not oppose greater interests. This, however, is not a question on which gentlemen should vote merely with a view to please their constituents : it is in- timately connected with the welfare of the whole union, and it is proper, before mevibers have dismissed their doubts, in the warmth of debate, that they should revolve the subject in their cooler moments, carefully discriminate between local interests and the common good, and, actuated by an enlightened policy, decide without that exfjuisite care and tenderness for their po- pularity, as if they considered it the spinal marrow of the body politic. But there are some who have really conscientious scruples with regard to the propriety or constitutionality of this restriction. To such the following remarks will be ad- dressed : Jn the first place, I shall inquire into the lawfulness and policy of slavery. Man was evidently designed by his Creator to be free from all restraint, except that imposed by natural and conventional law. The perfect harmony of his intellectual nature, his passions, prompting him to action ; hi;! reason, superintending and controlling the passions ; his jiidguicnt, discriminating between right and wrong; his con- science, punishing him for the least violation of that perfeci moral law, which is so adiwirably suited to direct him to hap- piness, all [)rove him to be the onlv free and accountable ere ated being. Slavery of any kind dcsiroys his acconniabilitv.. deprives him of that happiness rfsuhing from the well perform- ance of moral duties, and frustrates the cud of his existence, ("'rom these ju-einises, we m;'.y conclude that all men are born wiili a right to freedom. But as man is helpless in inf mcy, his parents protect and govern him until liis judgnicnt becomes j>ufiicienlly matured to direct his steps. 5 In a rude state of society nature dictates the proper time for separation; but in civili/ed life a certain age is des-iunaied by law for the minor to take npon himself the responsibilities of manhood. Even if it were otherwise, parental power does not extend to the perpetual deprivation of the liberty of children. It is delegated to the parent, for a special purpose, to keep the child from harm during the infancy of reason, and it ceases to exist with the occasion whicii gave it birth. From the same premises we may conclude, that an absolute power over them cannot be rightfully acquired by any other person, for they cannot sell themselves to perpetual bondfige. Society itself has no right to condemn them to slavery, unless they forfeit their liberty by their crimes. Now it is not pre- tended that negroes are criminal, or that they ever consented to the deprivation of their liberty. Therefore it follows, that all authority exercised over slaves is usinped in direct viola- tion of their natural rights, and in disobedience of that I'lVit and great command of God, that we should do to others, as we would that they should do unto us. I have adduced these arguments, that we may come to the examination of this question with a strong conviction in our minds of the unlawfulness of slavery ; that slave-holders may distinctly understand, that every year they wrongfully deprive their negroes of the annual proHt upon their work. Would to Heaven that this fraud or dishonesty, which, by a strange perversity of Justice, is under the protection of law, was the least of the charges against negro slavery. It is accompanied with oppression and cruelty, unexampled even by the heathen slave-holders of antiquity ; the Greeks and Romans treated their slaves with comparative humanity. An- cient slavery owed its existence to the absence of the conven- tional law of nations : after conquering a people, the victors were obliged, from motives of caution, to enslave them, trea- ties not being considered as sufiicient security. These ^l:lves were employed only as domestic servants, and often conliiled in as friends. Even the cruelty of the Spartans was less odious. They could plead as an excuse the provisions of the constitution, which prohibited labour, and the helots increased so fast, thai policy dictated their destruction. It was oidy death at last. A single blow was the beginning and end of their sutlcrings ; for while life lasted they were treated as men. But our inhumanity being caused by avarice, has no such e.xcuse, and is far less scrupulous. It does honour to its source. It calculates with the utmost nicrty how f:ir cruelly may be 6 proiitably carried. We urge slaves lo labour beyond their strength by stripes and torture. We buy them as beasts. We treat them as beasts. Our thanksgivings for tlie nation's prosperity are not so loud as the groans a:) 1 curses of our slaves. The foundation stones of our planters' palaces are cemented with the sweat, mingled with the blood, of negroes ; while we, with this charge of injustice and cruelty branded on our fronts, dare to raise our hands to heaven, and beseech the God of justice and mercy to preside over the destinies of the nation. 1 know that gentle- men from the South often say that the slaves are treated well, and that these accounts of cruelty are mere misrepresentations. It may indeed be true, that such men, men vvnose minds are eultivated and benevolent, treat tlieir household negroes with kindness and humanity. Tlie great mass of their slaves, those who cultivate the soil, are left to the care of their overseers. But do we believe that even this is generally the case ? Do Ave be- lieve that men will not abuse uncontrolled power.'* When di- recting men of the same complexion, while the law stands rea- dy to punish the least invasion of right, how difficult do we find it to restrain our anger at the stupidity of our inferiors. Hov/ often are courts called upon to redress the injuries in- flicted by men upon their fellows.'* Is human nature different in slave countries ? Or does the absence of restraint teach mo- deration t Will men show more kindness towards those whose ignorance is called wilfulness, than towards men of the same colour.'* Or when no law punishes injustice, when public opinion does not rebuke the exercise of the malignant passions, when the complaints of the sufiering are silenced or c(»r,/ined within the bounds of a plantation, wlsen all sympathy between master and slave is destroyed by education, pride, and the many contests of outraged humanity against relentless tyran- ny, will they not give free scope to revenge, lust, and al! ^e brutal passions nourished by long unpunished indulgence, and embitter the lives of their miserable slaves by pcts which hu- manity shudders to witness ? I appeal to experience. Look through the West Indies, and ask yourselves if my represen- tations be false.'* Look al the majority of negroes at the South. See their dov/ncast, listless looks. Incirious, devoid of all interest except ni their persona; feelings, they now and then steal a fearful glance ui dieir overseer. See them sweat- ing under their burthens, ignorant of all that concerns them as innnortal beings, cringing and trembling when before their white superiors. Or vi>.'vv them \y\iM>; on the b;ire ground, un- der a shed like so many cauie, and then svay that these men arc liapj)y. Compare these evicknices of misery with the cheer- fill looks of onr free blacks, and doubt, if you can, that their unhappiiiess is owitipr to their slavery. Tell me not of iheir joy when released from work ; of their songs and their dances. It is only the joy of a man freetl f.om torture. It is the pleasure of a sick man in the intervals of pain. Antl you cruelly mock them when you tell them that they are happy. Reader, are you now convinced of the injustice and cruelty of slavery.'' or will you go still further, examine tlie planters' books, and seethe horrid waste of heulth and life.^ Will you visit the prison-house, and learn all its cruel secrets ? Will you go on ship-board and witness its dreadful effects on the slave trade? For it is undeniable that slavery is its only and suffi- cient cause. Or will you travel to Africa, and see that vast continent distracted by civil wars; the human bloodhound huntinp- his prey alo.jg the const, or burstinc:, in the dead of night, into the hut of the peaceful negro, and, in spite of the most heart-rending shrieks and moans, tearing the parents from their helpless oflspriug, who are left to perisli. It is not necessary that I should enter into that painful de- tail. The southern planters are not charged with the crime of man-stealing: but I do solemnly charge many of them with abetting and encouraging it, by purchasing those blacks who have been kidnapped. Notwithstanding the exertions of our own and the British governments, this infamous traffic in human flesii, which, in the celebrated words of William Pitt, " has bound down this great continent in bloodshed, ignorance, and misery,'' still ex- ists, and is encouraged by the demand for slaves. During the year 1818, accordmg to the uncontradicted statement of a member of the last Congress, 14,000 slaves were imported into the United States. But setting aside all considerations of justice and humanity, we condemn sla;very, because, Istly. It impoverishes the country. 2dly. It has an immoral tiiulency. 3dly. It endangers the peace of tlie republic. 4thly. It paralyses our arm in time of war. Sthly. It is contrary to republican principles, and stains our national honour. Istly. If two states, of equal popula'.ion and equal nntural advantages, were not equally wcr.hhy, in conseciuence of some peculiar law in the poorer state, which discouraged ihe exer- tions of a part of its subjects, we should say that that law in>- poverished the state. That frrmien, possessing grra'.i r intt lli- gence, and feeling more interest ii» tlifir occupations, will labour to more advantage than slaves, will not be - - - 3,658,431 In 1817 the exports from Massachusetts exceeded by near $2,000,000 those from any southern state. In 1815 the net revenue from that state exceeded the total revenue iVoui all the states south of Maryland, and the revenue from New-York nearly trebled that from Massachusetts.* This superiority in national wealth is not to be attributed to the inferior number of blacks in the eastern states. New- York, wliich has more than 50,000 blacks, surpassed Massa- chusetts in the valuation of property, in the amount of the manufactories, and of the revenue in the same years; and in New-Jerse}', a state by no means favoured by nature, with one-tenth of jicr population black, the amount of property and nianuf;?ciures exceeded the same lists in either ol the states of Kentucky, Georgia, South or North Carolina. The objection, that blacks will not work unless compelled, is * 'lliesc years are average j-cars: they arc tlic years in the Gazetteer, and lot selected for this argument. i equally true of all men. No person labours from choice. Some are urged by one motive, some by anotlier. Love of consideration and wealth prompts the ambitious, and the fear of cold and hunger drives the indolent to work. \N e find that in our own city the free blacks are equally industri- ous, and more provident, than tlie lower order of whites. They feel an interest in society, and fi-eely labour lo increase the national wealth. From this statement the conclusion is inevitable, that slavery impoverishes a nation. 2dly. It demoralizes the people. So great a number of ig- norant, degraded beings must necessarily afiect the whole mass of society. When the lowest order of citizens is very ignorant and flepraved, the corruption gradually seizes tlie adjoining members, until the nobler parts are invaded, and the disease pervades the whole social body. Besides the natural tendency of absolute power over our fellow beings, to corrupt thi.' Imman heart by pride, and to harden it by eaiiy f;imili;nity v.'ih scenesof cruelty ; it udords too many opportunities to gratify the licentious passions. The female slave is prevented by no fear of scorn or loss of reputation, froui gratifying the desires of her master. Brt^ught lip in eiii le ignorance of the obligations of morality JU)d reli- gion, knowing no hw but her master's will, it is not surprising that she is easily persuaded to overstep the bounds of n odest}', and 10 consent to acts at which decency recoils. And when female modesty is destroyed, when that silken chain which re- strains the violent passi^ms of man within due bounds is bro- ken, his licentiousness is completely uncontrolled. 3uiy. I now proceed to consider the effects of slavery upon the domestic quiet of the Republic. The human mind is so constituted, that the cause of pain or misery is always regarded with aver>ion. Men invariably dislike those who have made them unhappy. If their uidiappiness is caused by undeserved oppression, if abused power rendeis them miserable, \hv hu- man slave, of whatever conjplexion, whose rights are trampled upon, while his passions exist, and his nature is unchanf^ed, must hate his tyrant, and endeavour to redress liis wrongs. He may curse in scciet, but he will take vengeance openly.^ Many are the melanclioly instances, scattered on the page of history, of the dreadful vengeance inlllcttd by slaves upon their masters. Every age has added testimony to this great moral truth, that man must respect the rights of man. The rebellion of the domestic slaves of the Scyiliians; the Spartans often called into the field to chastise the Helots j Rome nearly conquered by a servile army ; the insurrections of Wat Tyler and Jack Cade in England, and of the J^erfs in Flanders and France, in the middle of the 13lh and Uih cen- B JO Uines; the civil wars in Jamaica, St. Domingo, and in the Carribce Islands, and the many projected risings in tiie south- ern states, all prove that slavery is dangerous to the safety of a nation. They are so many warning voices, crying aloud to the southern planters, You are on the brink of ruin. Such, however, is the blind perversity of men, that gentle- men from the south, in argument, assert that there is no dan- ger of negro rebellions, though the}' act as if they apprehended an immediate rising. Laws are made to prevent the instruction of the blacks. The free people of colour are driven from the state of Georgia by law*, and the whole system of policy shows a great fear of immediate danger. With these facts staring them in the face, they still assert that the slaves would not rebel against tlieir masters. They feel no personal resentments. This is not, cannot be true, with regard to the great body of negroes. I do not doubt that many arc attached to their owners, and would not willingly injure them or their families. They may have no personal resentments to gratify. But general insurrections are not caused by personal feel- ings. The seeds of discontent must be sown far and wide. A general, deep-rooted aversion must be felt by the negroes, and is felt, not against their masters only, but against white men, for the contumely, oppression, and wrongs, that have been heaped upon all of their unfortunate colour. It is this social resentment that causes general revolts. Freed from selfish motives, it. becomes a holy anger against injustice. Men are then linked together by the strongest bonds of passion. It matters not, that owing to peculiar circumstances, individuals oftJie same class are exempt from the common fate. They look around them, they see men doomed to misery for possess- ing the same complexion ; and that sympathy which connects nations and classes of society, compels them to espouse tiie conunon cause. On such occasions they foci no fear at the disproportion of numbers. They owe no duty to govern- ment ; society has no claim upon them. They only listen to the voice of nature, calling upon them to assert their violated rights, and with one consent they rise in open rebellion. Some, prompted by allection, endeavour to save their mas- ters from the general massacre, but the elTort is unavailing. His complexion is evidence of his guilt, and the savage roar of vengeance triumphs over the pleadings of gratitude and love. It is uiisal',' lo argue, because all negro plots in the Southern Stales have been defeated, that dangc does not exist, and that * In tli.it state tlie slavns arc debarred by law from instruction in tlu' princi- ylee of the Chrifetiaii rcii^iuu. n a rising of llie slaves would be more fatal (o tlicm than to the wlirtes. In the two contiguous States of South Carolina and Geor- gia, there are 309,739 slaves, being nearly equal to the nmu- iter of whites. If these blacks should enter into a oombina- lion against their masters, they must enter the contest with a wonderful superiority. Habituated to labour and hardships from their infancy, their physical powers would be greater than those of the neighbouring whites. To this may bo add- ed the moral superiority given by a just cause. In effective numbers they would f\»r surpass the white citizens of the same States. The whole number of the militia of South (Carolina and Georgia, according to the returns, was, in 1817, 59,GSG ; and I am inclined to think that this far exceeds the truth. For every 5th white person is returned ; whereas in the .\liddle and Eastern States, only every 9th person is enrolkd in the militia. At the beginning of such a contest, a great part of the whites would be cut oft' without any warning. Many of the rest would be employed in removing the women and chil- dren, while the blacks could send their whole number into the field at once : even tiie black women, from their hardy habits, would be as dangerous as the men. As to discipline, the militia and the negroes, at the com- mencement of the rebellion, would be about equal. The li- mited military knowledge of a raw mililia-man, only confuses him in the day of battle. He often finds himself vvrong, feels conscious that he is in an error, but wants the ability to rcctifv it. While the negro, trusting to riature, would gain many battles before the whites could become disciplined. Arms ar»; scattered through the country, and, in such cases, are always in the power of the party that strikes the first blow. The only superiority of the whites woidd consist in their intelligence, which would be fully compensated bv the greater devotion of the blacks to their cause. They would be lighting for freedom, and we for slavery; and in such contest, this heavy sin " Would sit likr lead within our snldirri-' Imsoiu'^, "And weigh them down to luin, sliimir, auu deaih."' The result would be inevitable. The inhabitants of those two states would be destroyed, aufl the rcbrirKUi <(ud(l b(.' quell- ed only by the militia of the eastern and middle slates. But'suppose the insurrection to be general ; that the ne- groes of Alaryland, Virginia, Georgia, North and South (Jaro- lina, should c'onibine together in a revolt ; that these adjoiniug states, containing a populaliotj of2,r>7y,000 persons, of whoui i ,034,000 are people of colour, should be ravaged by a servile 12 r^■at ; could our united efforts entirely quell the revolt ? Two- thirds of the white popul.>l va would be destrojed before any assistance could reach them. Kentucky , Tennessee, Mississip- pi, Louisiana, and Alabama, would need the body of their militia to preserve quiet at home, an 1 the whole burthen of the contest njust fall upon *he middle and eastern states. The whole militia of these states amount only to 500,000 men, of whom not above one half can be brought into the field. This I am jn stifled in saying- by past experience. And in such a general revolt, the negroes could bring against them as many. Without, however, trusting to these details, it maybe confi- dently asserted, that such an insurrection would be the most dreadful calamity that could befol the repubhc. It may be objected, that it would not be possible for slaves to form so extensive a plot without discovery. But we knovv^ that in Mexico and in St. Domingo revolts of nearly eqaal magnitude were planned, and in the latter place successfully executed, by men of the same description. The unhappy vic- tims of that rebellion felt the most perfect security, until it was too late to escape. Let us not be betrayed by a foolish confi- dence into a situation equally hopeless. The fourth objection against slavery is, that it weakens the nation in war. But it is unnecessary to prove that a nation, one-sixth of whose subjects are discontented and rebellious, is unfit to enter into a contest with a foreign enemy. After the most impartial and careful consideration of the situation ol the southern states, 1 feel the most decided conviction, that they would find it necessary to employ all their citizens and re- sources in guarding against those rebellions which an active enemy m.ight exc.te among their slaves. 5thly. It is contrary to the principles of the republic, and stains our national honour. One of the clearest and most undeniable maxims of a repub- lic is, that every citizen should bear a share of the public bur- then, proportionate to the protection necessary to be allbrued him. The citizens of the United Stntes a.<- all liable to do militarv dutv in tlse common defence. All ihe staie>, except the slave states, having no domestic enemies, can employ their militia in distant service. But the negro population do not contribute any thing to the public defence; ihey rather aid the enemy, by employing a orreat number of the state troops in preserving domestic quiet. The slave states consequently can- not contribute their due proj ortion to the public service. Again : the grand principles to which our fathers appealed in th'^ beginning of the contest with Great Britain were, that nil men are created eq al, and endowed by ti:eir Creator with certain unalienable rights ; that among these are life, liberty, 13 and the pursuit of happiness. Upon the truth of those prin- ciples all their hopes rested, and plainly perceiving the in- consistency of fighting against England for violating their li- berties, while they enslaved the unhappy Africans, the first time they met in Congress, 1774, they agreed to discontinue, and on the 6th day of April, 1776, expressly prohibited the iaiportation of slaves. These resolutions express the opinion of the sage patriot fathers of the Constitution, that slavery is inconsistent with republican principles. The enlightened Europeans, who are well inclined towards our republic, are continually shocked at the glaring incon- sistency of our conduct and principles. They cannot conceive how men can reconcile slavery with the maxim, that all men are free and equal. They even doubt whether our boasts of freedom be true. Prejudiced men, hostile to the principles of civil and religious liberty, exult in reiterating the charge, that the American Re- public is the only civilized government that tolerates slavery within her boundaries ; and in spite of all that we can say in excuse, it is a foul stain upon our national character. The only answer that can be made to it is, th.it slaves were intro- duced to gratify the cupidity of the English proprietors of the colonies, and we shall lose the benefit of that palliation, when we solemnly adopt the principle in our national legis- lu.ture, after solemn debate, v;iihout the most urgent neces- sity. But to what purpose are these arguments adduced? We all know that slavery is an evil, and we wish to find a re- medy : why nnt propose one, instead of reasoning against a shadow, which nobody defends ? Because the momeni that a remedy is proposed, an advo- cate of the system brings forward some of the arguments that I have attempted to confute. It was proper that 1 should point out the evil, before I considered the remedies. Besides, I wished to show that on a question where so much feeling and warmth has been manifested by our southern brethren, it was not an inconsiderable thing that made us difler with them. I proceed to consider the remedies. Colonization on some foreign coast, though well intended, is not an adequate remedy. Toliiic and humane, ris it un- doubtedly is, to provide a place to which the captured slaves can be sent, yet when proposed as a suliicient remedy for the evils of slavery, sound reason must reject it. The whole navy and revenue of the United States would not suffice to transport the blacks of this country one half so fast as they increase in the natural way. U is well to send all those who arc willing to go, to a co- Ii 14 iony, but that i,^ not sufficient to extirpate slavery — some- ihiiii^ more is required. We must, consequently, resort to emancipation and instruction — these will cure the evil ; but individual emanci|)ati(>n will not be sufficient — the law must aid the work. Men AvitI not voluntarily relinquish the in- tercut they may have in the services of others ; christians and moral men may labour for ever and in vain to persuade planters to colonize or emancipate thcirslavcs. The winds will calm at your bidding; ; the miser's heart will overflow with charity ; the wolf will lay down with the lan)b; and then, but not till then, will the slave-holder, prompted by the gentle dictates of mercy, free his negroes from bondage. This great work must be effected by other means than persuasion — the law must interfere in the most energetic manner. With those states alreadv admitted into the union, we ouo;;ht not to in- terfcrc. By common consent, we have committed this system to the care of their lefiislaturcs. Those of the original states that tolerated slavery had suffered in a common cause, and ac- tuated by motives ofprudcnce. and a desire of conciliation, the sage framcrs of the Constitution avoided the expression of a direct prohibition of slavery. They designated 1808 as the period when the right to introduce new slaves into the union should be surrendered by the state legislatures into the hand.'i of Congress. The same motives of prudence and patriotism still prevent our attempting to disturb the constitutional arrangement re- specting slavery. We are obligated to leave the alleviation and extirpation of that system to the wisdom and philanthropy of the legislatures of the slave states. The efforts of bene- volent, enlightened men, may in time correct the evils, if not entirely destroy the system. But, say our opponents, if the evil is committed to the care of the legislatures of the states already admitted, why not give the same power to the legis- latures of future states? Because, i:i new stales the number of slaves is small, and it is better to crush the evil in its com- mencement ; to pull up the sapling before its roots have taken such strong hold as to bring the earth away wiUi them. Be- sides, in j)lain truth, this subject cannot be safely trusted to slave holders. Few of them will voluntarily relinquish that profit which is obtained from the uncompensated labour of slaves : they feel interested in the continuance of slavery, and experience proves that they will not exert much influence against if. In every southern state except Maryland, the slaves have increased in proportion to the increase of the whites. This has been invari.irily the case where a majority of the electors had on inlercst in their I ^bour : while in the middle ar:''' 15 eastern slates, wlwrc the electors had no private interest to bias their minds, and could impartially decide upon the question, laws have been enacted against slavery, and it has gradually passed away. But all our eiideavouis to extirpate slavery are in vain, unless you prevent its introduction into new states. You muai stop the spreading of the cancer be- fore you can convert the diseased parts into sound tlesh. We deceive ourselves in saying, that by spreading this slave po- pulation over a larger extent of country, we thin their num- bers and mitigate the evils of their condition. When slaves are wanted, ihey will be imported ; j)cnalties and revenue ofii- ccrs are too weak obstacles to the ini[iortation of an article the consumption of which is permitted. Neither is it true, that the number of slaves in the present slave states will be reduced by migration to new countries. The new state is settled by the emigrant, but the princi])le of population soon supplies the deficiency in the mother cou.ntry. Men increase according to the means of subsistence ; dis- ease and emigration may thin their numbers for a few years, but this principle soon repairs the mischief and stocks the soil with as many inhabitants as it will support. Witness an- cient Germany, which was continually pouring forth its swarms from this never-failing source : and at the present time the number of emigrants from Ireland do not depopulate it. I do not doubt that slaves would be sent into Missouri, for sale, and the planters would be careful to keep up the sup- ply. Slaves would be raised expressly for market, and we should soon hear of planters who kept negroes exclusively for breedino-. The painful feelings of children torn from their mothers, and husbands for ever separated from their wives, would be lightly regarded by men who would not and do not scruple to sell the otTspring of their own loins to perpetual slavery, that they may riot upon the proceeds of their own flesh and blood. Shall we then trust the abolition of this system in the new States, to the wisdom and policy of planters. God forbid ; unless, as gentlemen say, the constitution commands it. It is as easy to exclaim that a measure is unconstitutional, as it is to cry out, mad dog. Indeed it is quite common with some, when they do not know what to urge against a law. to call it unconstitutional. Now, though there may be no objection to check the precipitate passage of an act in this manner, yet at least, when ready to listen, we have a right to expect that some arguments will be adduced to prove the unconstitution- ality of the law — to show us how or why it is unconstitutional. Fori must confess that, upon the fii-st reflection, it appears strange that a great and enlightened people, who make an in- N'.nimetit, " in order to form a more perfect union, cstablisli 16 justice, ensure domestic trarsquillity, provide for the common dercnce, promote the general welfare, and secure the blessings , of liberty to themselves and posterity,'' should insert a clause, .| that ensures the extension, free from the control of govern- " ment, of a system which disunites, violates the fundamental rules of justice, disturbs domestic tranquillity, weakens the public arm, demoralizes and impoverishes the people, and finally denies the blessings of liberty to one sixth of the whole population. Prove to us that we have so blindly frustrated our inten- tions, and we will correct the error. Show us that clause in the constitution, and we will amend it. No, say the shiftless advocates of slavery, show us the clause in the constitution, authorizing Congress to impose this restriction. We contend that it has no right to impose any conditions. Let us try this principle by stating no very im- probable case. Suppose that this constitution had a clause, which allowed a citizen who had accepted of a pension from the king of England, to hold any office of trust or profit in the state government, or which excused the Judges from taking an oath to support the constitution of the United States, or which allowed the privileges of citizens of Missouri only to the citizens of 12 States of the 21 ; would not Congress have power to strike out the clause, as being contrary to the federal constitution ? Or suppose that the District of Maine should insert in its constitution an article protecting fugitive slaves : how cla- morous would these men be until Congress exerted that power which they now deny it. These cases show the extreme absurdity of denying Con- gress the power of imposing conditions on states applying for admission into the Union, and compelling them to conform to the provisions of the constitution, and to republican princi- ples. The constitution itself recognises the power of Con- gress to impose conditions on new states, in that article which declares, that " new states may be admitted into the Union," i. e. at the discretion of Congress. But Congress may insist on very unreasonable conditions. If such a ease should happen, though the character of that body is a suflicient safeguard against any improper restric- tions being imposed, the petition must lie over, until the peo- ple send reasonable men to represent their interests. The truth is, that no state can claim admission into the union, unless the right be granted to it by some stipulation or treaty. The only stipulation relative to this territoiy is an article in the treaty by which France ceded Louisiana to the United States. Missouri is part of that country, and claims the bene- 17 fit of that article, which declares, •' tliai the iiihabitanii. of the territory shall be incorporated in the union of the United States, and admitted as soon as possible, according to the principles of the federal constitution, to the enjoyment of all rights, advantages, and immunities, of citizens of the United States ; and in the mean time they shall be maintained and protected in the free enjoyment of their liberty, property, and the religion which they profess." Therefore the decision of this question, whether Congress has the power to impose this restriction, depends upon the construction of this article. The latter clause refers to Lou- isiana, before the inhabitants shall be admitted into the union. It is said that this clause, protecting the property of the inha- bitants, secures to them the right of slave-holding. This can- not be' true, unless the word property be so construed as to include the interest of owners in their slaves, which is contra- ry to the general construction of treaties, the words negroes or slaves being invariably used in stipulations referring to them. Moreover, this clause manifests a knowledge of the provisions of the federal constitutions, by the representatives of Louisiana in this treaty. We must, therefore, conclude, that the said territory was ceded to the United States so that the government could legis- late for it, and regulate it according to the constitution. By the 3d section of the 4th article, Congress has power to dis- pose of, and make all, needful rules and regulations respect- ing thel territory of the United States. Consequently it had the power to determine what regulations were needful, and actually did determine and make said rules for the govern- ment of Louisiana. If at that time it had thought it necessary to prohibit slavery in said country, it had the constitutional power, and could have done it consistently with the obliga- tions of the above treaty. But admitting what is not true, that by this claim the power of slave holding in Louisiana was designedly placed beyond the control of Congress. It was intended to apply only while Louisiana continued a territory. The words " in the mean time," in the original " en attendant," show that some time was des'gncd, when this clause would be unnecessary. By referring to the first part of the article, it appears that that time was understood, when they should be admitted according to the principles of the federal cunstiliction, to the enjoyment of the rights, advantages, and immunities of citizens of the U. S. No doubt exists that by complying with the constitution they are entitled to be admitted to the said rights and immunities. This phrase undoubtcdjy means those privileges that ".re ':oramon to all the citi^'ui) of this republic, not those depcnU- C 1^ uig up6n state laws. For these are different in different staife^v The militia officers of other states, when residing in New- York, are exempt from military duty, except as officers. In some other states this privilege is not granted. It is the pri- vilege, and a great and glorious one, of a c itizen of Massachusetts, that his security and comfort cannot be destroyed by a slave population. This privilege is denied to the citizens of Georgia. On this very subject the laws of different states grant different rights. Therefore they are not federal but state rights, and the inhabitants of Missouri may be admitted to the enjoyment of the rights, advantages, and immunities of citizens of the U. S. with or without the power of slave holding. We must therefore inquire if, according to the principles of the federal constitution, Congi-ess can impose that identical condition. Or in other words, is slave holding consistent \vith the pHrlciples of that constitution. Besides the article giving to congress a discretionary power over the admission of new members to ihe union, the 4th article of the same sec- tion compels the U. S. to guaranty to each stale a republican form of government. If Maine or Michigan should present a constitution securing the right of suffrage to a certain num- ber of land holders and their lineal descendants only, every person would justify congress in rejecting it as being aristo- cratic. Does not this constitution fall under the same objec- tion, with this difference, that the violation of right is greater. It is surprising that gentlemen should have objected, that a prohibition of slavery is contrary to th^ principles of the federal constitution. As has been justly observed. The mas- ter principle — the foundation stone of that instrument is equal rights, not of states, but of men. The people formed that compact in order to perfect union, establish justice, ensure domestic tranquillity, provide for the common defence, pro- mote the general welfare, and secure the blessings of liberty to themselves and posterity. These were their objects ; and slavery, so far from promoting, is inconsistent with, and sub- versive of, them all. Why then was slavery permitted in any of the original thirteen states ? Because at the time of proposing the consti- tution, the enemies of liberty were active ; the confederation was at the point of dissolution ; clashing interests had ren- dered many of its members hostile to each other ; and so many obstacles presented themselves to the formatioii of a government, that it was agreed to insert a clause permitting each state to regulate slavery, within its own boundaries, until the year 1808. This very limit shewed the opinion of the framers of that instrument, and proves that they yielded only to the most urgent necessity. They wisely gave up th^ liberty of part for the good of a greater part. 19 The history of those times explains the inconsistency of permitting slavery under a constitution which was protessedly formed to secure the rights of men. The whole sj^irit of this ^rand charter is hostile to oppression and slavery of any kind ; but peculiar circumstances rendered it necessary to restrain the application of its principles in the slave-holding states. Congress has since given its sanction to this view of the principles of the Constitution. The prohibition of slavery was made a condition of the admission of Ohio, Illinois, and Indiana into the union. Ken- tucky being part of Virginia, was entitled to admission upon the same terms as the state from which it was separated. The territory comprehendiog the states of Tennessee, Missis- sippi, and Alabama was ceded to the United States by North Carolina and Georgia upon the express condition, that Con- gress should not jirohibit slavery in said territory. From this short statement of the practice of the national Legislature, it appears that whenever Congress had the power to prohibit slavery, it acted as if the principles of the federal constitu- tion required it so to do, except in the erection of Louisiana into a state in 1812 without this prohibition. If they reflect upon the situation of the country at that time, our opponent will not draw any conclusion from that fact in supjiort of their cause. At the commencement of a war wiih a [powerful and enterprizing enemy, a territory inhabited by people fo- reign in their feelings, language, and habits, and not yet re- conciled to their new situation, applied for admission into the union. To have insisted at that juncture upon j)rohibiting slavery among those whose habits rendered them dependent upon slaves for comfort, would have dissatisfied the inhabit- ants, and ])erha|)S have thrown them into the arms of the enemy. Many important conditiuiii. however, were annexed to the constitution, and the regulations made by Congress were considered as suflicient to secure the establishment of civil and religious liberty. The prohibition of negro slavery would undoubtedly have been added to the comlitions, if the number of the slaves, the habits of the people, and the situ- ation of the country had not rendered it ex})edient to consign the evil to the care of the state Legislature. The practice of Congress, then, has been, when some compact or paramount necessity did not prevent the prohibi- tion of slavery, to compel the state applying for admission to conform to the principles of the federal constitution, — ihar is, to those of civil and religious freedom ; and consequentlv slavery has been abolished in those new stales, over wllo^e constitutions Congress could, with good faith, and a proper regard for the welfare of the union exercise such power. 20 Of course, this territory not being entitled to admission except according to the principles of the federal constitution, is subject to such a prohibiting power; and if Congress shall decide that the necessity which would authorise a suspension of those principles does not exist, must submit to the propos- ed condition. It is not pretended that any such necessity exists. The republic is flourishing, and at peace with the whole world. Tihe number of slaves in Missouri is small ; only one sixtii of the whole population, there being at the census of 1810 but 3618 ; and the white inhabitants since that time chiefly emigrating from other parts of the union, lead us to believe that the disproportion between the number of freemen and slaves is at present still greater. If under these circumstan- ces Congress is compelled to tolerate slavery in that state we deceive ourselves in boasting that our institutions are favourable to freedom. It has been said that this condition would be unavailing, for that the citizens of Missouri if they inserted this clause in their constitution, would amend it the amount they were ad- mitted into the union, and abolish this very provision against slavery. The principles of slave holders may permit and justify such a breach of faith ; we had thought it inconsistent with the ordinary rules of morality, which prohibit injustice, cruel- ty and perfidy. Such common rules are too mean and low for the high minded aristocratic planter ; he only acknow- ledges the authority of a nice gentlemanly sense of honour and dispenses with these vulgar precepts of good faith and honesty. But unfortunately, the members ©f the judiciary respect these vulgar precepts, and would undoubtedly declare such a revocation imconstitutional and void. Then this state is restricted in its liberty. Undoubtedly It is : and very properly restricted. It is deprived of the liberty of acting unjustly. Suppose that the inhabitants of Missouri were robbers and freebooters ; that instead of subsist- ing upon the produce of the labour of slaves, they obtained a livelihood by levying blackmail upon the citizens of the ad- joining states, and that the sacred right of {plundering their neighbours was recognized by the constitution. When they applied for admission into the union, would not Congress have a right to make it a condition of their admission, that theft should be prohibited. Nobody can deny it : any con- dition prohibiting the exercise of an unlawful power may be imposed, and the only question that remains, is : Is it ex- pedient ? Some have told us that if this restriction be persist- ed in, it will be disregarded, and that the citizens of Missouri 21 * will form a separate independent power, and oj)enly defy the power of Congress. Such threats are childish and vain. There is but one answer to them all. If factious men array them- selves against the laws, government knows how to compel obedience. I proceed to consider the question of expediency. With regard to the state itself, the arguments already urged in favour of the prohibition, are strong and conclusive. But there arc some relating to the other states, which give addi- tional force to the conviction, that the restriction ought to be imposed. To secure the establishment of the Constitution, it was conceded to the slave states, that three-fifths of that property claimed in slaves should be represented in the po-* pular branch of C'ongress. The Constitution intended that this greater portion of power in the slave stales should be accompanied by a greater share of direct taxes, in proportion to the number of freemen. But, in progress of time, the. whole revenue of the nation was derived from indirect taxa- tion, and so great an inequality is caused by that very pro- vision which was intended to proportion representation to taxation, that the ten slave-holding states, containing a popu- lation of 2,272,000 free persons, and yielding a revenue of $8,802,381, ^6,000000 less than the revenue of New-York alone, send 19 more representatives than the same number of freemen in the middle or eastern states. Although in the states where slavery is prohibited, only one representative is allowed for every 35,000, yet in South Carolina every 24.41G persons are represented by a member in Congress. This inequality of power is greater when two states arc compared together. Virginia, vviih a free population 118,641 less than that of MassacJiusetts, not yielding one-fiflh of the revenue, sends three more representatives, and has more than one- eighth greater power in Congress. This argument is not ad- duced to j)ersuade Congress to take from the slave states their constitutional privileges. This disproportionate power was conceded in a spirit of conciliation, to men descended from the same ancestors, pro- tessing the same religion, and who had poured out their blood in defence of a common cause, with tlic inhabitants of those states wliere slavery did not exist. The obligations of good faith prevent our disturbintj this constitutional arrangement: but a prof)er regard for our own rights prohibit any further concessions. The reasons which prompted us to make them in former instances, do not apply to the present case ; and to grant this unequal power to this new state, would be doing injustice to many old members of the union. Again ; by prohibiting slavery in Missouri, th« slave states ♦ 22 being surrounded by bodies of freemen, will be in less danger from ii- as ion or insurrection. The western frontier, which is beyond the immediate protection of the eastern and middle States, will be strengthened, and revolts among the slaves more easily quelled by the presence of a free state in this ex- posed part of the union. Slavery itself will be more under the dominion of religion and benevolence, when its limits are determined. Philan- thropists no longer disheartened by the undefined magnitude of the evil, will earnestly endeavour to extirpate it. The disproportion between the number of slaves and free- men will every day become greater. A free population will be extended over this boundless territory, and in the present slave states, enlightened men, encouraged by the then compa- rative small number of negroes, will dare to emancipate and instruct them. The influence of example, every day becom- ing more powerful, will silence the clamours of those slave- holders, who are actuated only by avarice, and the legisla- tures in the slave states will successively give their aid to the cause of freedom, by gradually emancipating the blacks, until this cruel system is entirely destroyed. Then may we truly boast of our free institutions. Then will this great western empire, inhabited by men possessing equal rights, be emphatically called the laud of liberty. Discontents and revolts will no more be engendered by the iU-treatment and oppression of this class of its inhabitants, but all orders and conditions of men live peaceably and hap- pily under one general government. Statesmen of America, it belongs to you to decide whether freedom or slavery shall exist in this vast unoccupied territo- ry : whether its acquisition by the United States shall be deemed a blessing or a curse. The reputation, the welfare, the security, and I may add the permanency of the republic, all depend upon your deci- sion of this great question. The attention of your constitu- ents is turned upon you. They await with trembling anxiety the result of this contest between freedom and slavery, of which you are the arbiters. No pride of opinion, no love of popularity, no attachment to local interests, no unworthy pas- sion or prejudice, will justify an improper choice of parties 10 the country and to the world. Let reason and patriotism influence your conduct ; decide according to the principles of the constitution, and we do not fear the result. MARCUS, * V II 'V r '^^