Yale University Library

39002002221860

Cb75
57ni 1

YALE UNIVERSITY
LIBRARY

ANTI-SLAVERY TRACTS. Nb. 1.
Ml

THE UNITED STATES CONSTITUTION.
I THE CONSTITUTION IS A PRO-SLAVEEY INSTEUMENT,
ACCORDING TO THE NECESSAEY MEANING OP ITS
TEEMS.
Admitting, as we do, that the words of any written instrument
constitute the only legal evidence of its meaning, we ask, What is
the meaning ofthe following clauses in the Constitution ofthe United
States ?
Art. I, sec. 2 : " Representatives and direct taxes shall be appor
tioned among the several States which may be included within this
Union, according to their respective numbers, which shall be deter
mined by adding to the whole number of free persons, including
those bound to service for a term of years, and excluding Indians
not taxed, three fifths of all other persons."
This section distinguishes between free persons and slaves, be
cause to the whole number of free persons are to be added three
fifths of all other persons ; that is, persons not free, or slaves. By
excluding from the class of free persons those bound to service for
life, without — as in case of Indians not taxed — assigning a reason
for such exclusion, it declares them to be slaves, within the meaiung
of the Constitution.
This article, therefore, recognizes slavery as explicitly as if the
word slave itself had been used, and gives to the free persons in a
slave State, solely because they are slaveholders, a larger repre
sentation, and consequently greater political power, than the same
number of free persons in a free State. A bounty on slavb-
HOLDING !
Art. 1, sec. 9 : " The migration or importation of such persons aq
any of the States now existing shall think proper to admit, shall not
be prohibited by the Congress prior to the year one thousand eight
hundred and eight ; but a tax or duty may be imposed on such im
portation, not exceeding ten dollars for each person."
1 *ALt (1)

m

55 ANTI-SLAVERY TRACTS.
A person who migrates does so of his own accord ; he cannot be
said to be migrated by any other person. He is wholly a free agent.
But a person who is imported does not import himself; he is im
ported by some other person. He is passive. The importer is the
free agent ; the person imported is not a free agent. The Virginia
slave laws of 1748 aud 1753 proceed on this distinction when they
say " all persons * imported * shall be slaves.'' Whenever we hear au
importation spoken of, we instantly infer an owner, and propert^y im
ported. This distinction between the force of the words migration
and importation is, then, real.
That the Constitution also makes o distinction is evident, because
only persons imported can be taxed. And that it adopts the dis
tinction we have just pointed out is also evident, because this alone
can afford us a sufficient reason why persons imported may be taxed,
and persons who migrate cannot be.
By this clause, therefore. Congress was prevented, during twenty
years, from prohibiting the foreign slave trade with any State that
pleased to allow it. But by Art. 1, sec. 8, Congress had the general
power "to regulate commerce with foreign nations." Consequently,
the slave trade was excepted from the operation of the general power,
¦with a view to place the slave trade, during twenty years, solely under
the control of the slave States. It could not be wholly stopped, so
long as one State wished to continue it. It is a clear compromise in
favor of slavery. True, the compromise was a temporary one ; but
it will be noticed, that Congress, even after 1808, was not obliged
to prohibit the trade. Even now we are discussing the expedieucy
of reopening the accursed traffic ! whilst, in point of fact, until I8I9
the laws of Congress authorized the States to sell into slavery, for
their own benefit, negroes imported contrary to the laws of the
United States ! (Act Congr. 1807, c. 77, § 4, 6 ; 1818, o. 86, § 5 and
7; 10 Wheat. Rep. 321, 322.) So unmixed should be our satisfac
tion at the oft-repeated boast, that ours was the first nation to pro
hibit the African slave trade !
Art. 4, sec. 2 : "No person held to service or labor in one State,
under the laws thereof, escaping into another, shall, in consequence
of any law or regulation therein, be discharged from such service
or labor, but shall be delivered up, on claim of the party to whom
such service or labor may be due."
No one can be illegally "bound" to service, and one who is
legally bound is legally "held" to that service. The expressions

UNITED STATES CONSTITUTION. 3
a person " bound " to service and a person " legally held " to service
are, therefore, equivalent. This section evidently embraces, not
only persons held to service for a term of years, but also those held
to service for life, and therefore includes not only free persons, but
those who are declared to be slaves within the meaning of the
Constitution. (Art. 1, sec. 2.)
That the expression used in this section legally includes slaves is
also evident on other grounds. The ordinance of 1787 calls a slave
a person " from whom labor or service is lawfully claimed." (Art. 6.)
It is a criminal offence in all the States, except Maryland, Virginia,
and Texas, to entice a slave to leave his master's " service." In
Maryland, and Virginia, and other States, the owner has a civil
action for damages against the person who thus entices away his
slave. And tbe laws of all the States recognize the master's right
to enforce the labor ofthe slave.
If, however, it is a crime to entice a slave to leave his master's
" service," and if such act subject a man to an action for damages
by the owner, it is evident that the master must have a legal right
to the " service " of his slave ; for it is the infringement of this right
which makes the crime and gives ground to claim damages. The
slave is, therefore, a person legally held to service or labor. And as
if to remove all doubt, the very expression is applied to slaves in
the laws of all the States except Tennessee, Georgia, Alabama, and
Texas. By this section, therefore, it is provided that no person held as a
slave in one State under the laws thereof, escaping into another,
shall, in consequence of any law or regulation therein, be discharged
from his slavery, but shall be delivered up on claim of his owner.
The laws of one State, whether they support slavery or any other
institution, have no power in another State. Consequently, if a
slave escape into a free State, he becomes free. This is the gen
eral rule of law. In virtue of it, thousands of slaves are now free
on the soil of Canada. In virtue of it, a fugitive slave from South
Carolina would be free in this State, were it not for this section in
the Constitution. But this section declares that he shall not thereby
become free, but shall be delivered up. Again : the Constitution
makes an exception from a general rule of law in favor of slavery. It
gives to slaveholders and slave laws a power which the general
rule of law does not give. It enables a South Carolina slaveholder
to drag from the soil of Massachusetts a person whom the general

4 ANTI-SLAVEET TRACTS.
rule of law pronounces free, solely because South Carolina laws
declare the contrary. It makes the whole Union a vast hunt
ing GROUND FOR SLAVES !
Art. 1, sec. 8 : " Congress shall have power * * * to provide
for calling forth the militia * * * to suppress insurrections.'"
Art. 4, sec. 4 : " The United States shall guaranty to every State
in this Union a republican form of government, and shall protect
each of them against invasion, and, on application of the legisla
ture, or of the executive, (when the legislature cannot be convened,)
against domestic violence."
All insurrections and all cases of domestic violence are here pro
vided for. To constitute an insurrection there must be a rising
against those laws which are recognized as such by the Constitu
tion; and, to make out a case of domestic violence, the violence
must be exerted against that right or power which is recognized by
the Constitution as lawful. But by Art. 1, seo. 2, and Art. 4, seo. 2,
the Constitution admits that some persons may be legally slaves.
Consequently, if these persons rise in rebellion, or commit acts of
violence contrary to the laws which hold them in slavery, their
rising constitutes an insurrection ; such acts are acts of violence
within the meaning of the Constitution, and consequently must be
suppressed by the national power.
The self-styled owners are not the only slaveholders. All persons
who voluntarily assist or pledge themselves to assist in holding
persons in slavery are slaveholders. In sober truth, then, we are a
nation of slaveholders ! for we have bound our whole national
strength to the slave owners, to aid them, if necessary, in holding
their slaves in subjection !

n. THE FRAMEES OF THE CONSTITUTION INTENDED
TO MAKE A PRO-SLAVERY INSTEUMENT.
On the 17th of September, 1787, the Philadelphia Convention
adopted the plan of the present Constitution. The draft thus made
was submitted to the people, assembled in State Conventions, " for
their assent and ratification." President Madison has preserved a
record of the debates in the Philadelphia Convention ; and we have
also published accounts of the debates in several of the State con
ventions. We draw our evidence mainly from these sources,

UNITED STATES CONSTITUTION.

Apportionment of Representatives. (Const., Art. 1, seo. 2.)
Rufus King, of Massachusetts, one of the framers, said of the ex
pression " three fifths of all other persons," " These persons are the
slaves." Alexander Hamilton, of New York, another of the framers,
referring to this clause " which allows a representation for three
fifths of the negroes," said, " without this indulgence no union could
possibly have been formed." Luther Martin, also a delegate to the
Philadelphia Convention, objected to this clause because "it in
volved the absurdity of increasing the power of a State in making
laws for freemen, in proportion as that State violated the rights of
freedom." William R. Davie, a delegate from North Carolina, says
that the Southern States, " to acquire as much weight as possible
in the legislation of the Union," insisted "that a certain propor
tion of our slaves should make a part of the computed population."
General Charles C. Pinckney, another of the framers of the Constitu
tion, said, "We determined that representatives should be ap
portioned among the several States by adding to the whole num
ber of free persons three fifths of the slaves."
Permission op the African Slave Trade. (Const., Art. 4, seo. 9.)
Luther Martin, speaking of this section, says, " The design of
this clause is to prevent the general government from prohibiting
the importation of slaves ; but the same reasons which caused them
to strike out the word ' national,' and not admit the word ' stamps,'
influenced them here to guard against the word 'slaves.' They
anxiously sought to avoid the admission of expressions which might
be odious in the ears of Americans, although they were willing to
admit into their system those things which the expressions sig
nified." * * *
" The Eastern States, notwithstanding their aversion to slavery,
were very willing to indulge the Southern States, at least with a
temporary liberty to prosecute the slave trade, provided the Southern
States would in their turn gratify them, by laying no restriction on
navigation acts."
Mr. Madison says, " The Southern States would not have entered
into the Union of America without the temporary permission of
that trade." Mr. Spaight, of North Carolina, one of the framers,
says that the Southern States would not consent "to exclude the
1*

b anti-slavery TRACTS.
importation of slaves absolutely ; that South Carolina and Georgia
insisted on this clause as they were now in want of hands to culti
vate their lands ; that in the course of twenty years they would be
fully supplied ; that the trade would be abolished then, and that in
the mean time some tax or duty might be laid on." Hon. Rawlins
Lowndes, of South Carolina, thought it almost inhuman to put any
limit to the trade. General Charles C. Pinckney said, " By this set
tlement we have secured an unlimited importation of negroes for
twenty years ; nor is it declared that the importation shall be then
stopped ; it may be continued ; we have a security that the general
government can never emancipate them."
Restoration of Fugitive Slaves. (Const., Art. 4, sec. 2.)
In the Virginia Convention, Mr. Madison said, —
" Another clause secures us that property which we now possess.
At present, if any slave elopes to any of those States where slaves
are free, he becomes emancipated by their laws ; for the laws of
the States are uncharitable (!) to one another in this respect. But
in this Constitution, [then he quotes Art. 4, sec. 2.] This clause
was expressly inserted to enable owners of slaves to reclaim them. This
is a better security than any fhat now exists."
In the North Carolina Convention, Mr. Iredell begged leave to
explain the reason of this clause : —
" In some of the Northern States they have emancipated all their
slaves. If any of our slaves," said he, " go there, and remain there a
certain time, they would, by the present laws, be entitled to their
freedom, so that their masters could not get them again. This
would be extremely prejudicial to the inhabitants of the Southern
States ; and to prevent it this clause is inserted in the Constitution.
Though the word slave be not mentioned, this is the meaning of it.
The northern delegates, owing to their particular scruples on the
subject of slavery, did not choose the word slave to be mentioned."
In the South Carolina Convention, General Pinckney thus ex
presses his gratification at this clause : —
" We have obtained a right to recover our slaves in whatever part of
America they may take refuge, which is a right we had not before. In
short, considering all circumstances, we have made the best terms
for the security of this species of property it was in our power to
make. We would have made better if we could ; but, on the whole,
I do not think them bad." (!)

united states constitution. 7
Suppression of Slave Insurrections. (Const., Art. I, sec. 8;
Art. 4, sec. 4.)
In the Virginia Convention, Mr. George Nicholas said, —
" Another worthy member says there is no power in the States to
quell an insurrection of slaves. Have they it now ? If they have,
does the Constitution take it away ? * * * No ; but it gives
an additional security ; for, besides the power in the State govern
ments to use their own militia, it will be the duty of the general
government to aid them with the strength of the Union, when called
for. No part of this Coii;*itution can show that this power is taken
away." Mr. Madison, respecting these clauses, says, —
" On application of the legislature, or executive, as the case may
be, the militia of the other States are to be called to suppress domes
tic insurrections. Does this bar the States from calling forth their
own militia? No ; but it gives them a supplementary security to sup
press insurrAtions and domestic violence."

111. THE CONSTITUTION HAS BEEN TREATED AS A
PEG-SLAVERY INSTEUMENT, BY THE GOVEENMENT, IN
PRACTICE.
Apportionment of Representatives. (Const., Art. 1, sec. 2.)
In every census which has been taken by the government, the
only distinction sanctioned has been between freemen and slaves ;
and on every occasion of apportioning representatives, according
to the representative or federal number, such number has been
invariably determined by adding to the whole number of free per
sons three fifths of the slaves. If this, the pro-slavery interpretation
of this section of the Constitution, be not right, then, since March 3,
1793, there has not been a single House of Representatives constitu
tionally elected, or a single statute or resolve constitutionally passed !
Who is ready to make this admission ?

a anti-slavery tracts.
«
Permission of the African Slave Trade. (Const., Art. 1,
sec. 9.)
On the 13th of May, 1789, in Congress, —
" Mr. Parker, of Virginia., moved to insert a clause in the bill, im
posing a duty on the importation of slaves of ten dollars each person.
He was sorry that the Constitution prevented Congress from prohibit
ing the importation altogether ; he thought it a defect in that instru
ment that it allowed of such actions ; it was contrary to the revolution
principles, and ought not to be permitted; but, as he could not
do all the good he desired, he was willing to do what lay in his
power." Messrs. Sherman, of Connecticut, and Schureman, of Nev/ Jersey,
thought the subject should be taken up independently. Mr. Madison
thought otherwise : —
" I conceive the Constitution, in this particular, was formed in
order that the government, whilst it was restrained from layini a
total prohibition, might be able to give some testimony of the soise
of America with respect to the African trade. We have liberty to
impose a tax or duty upon the importation of such persons as any
of the States now existing shall think proper to admit ; and this lib
erty was granted, I presume, upon two considerations. The first
was, that, until the time arrived when they might abolish the impor
tation of slaves, they might have an opportunity of evidencing their
sentiments on the policy and huraanity of such a trade."
The motion of Mr. Parker was afterwards withdrawn.
In 1794, "An Act to prohibit the carrying on the slave trade from
the United States to any foreign place or country " was passed, (Stat.
1794, c. 11.) In 1800, an act in addition to the last was passed,
(Stat. 1800, c. 51.) That both these laws were framed with reference
to this section of the Constitution is apparent, because the latter act
expressly refers to it. Sec. 6 reads thus : " That nothing in this act
contained shall be construed to authorize the bringing into either
of the United States any person or persons, the importation of whom
is, by the existing laws of such State, prohibited."
See also Stat. 1803, c. 63.
And, not to multiply proof, on the 2d day of March, 1807, Presi
dent Jefferson approved (Stat. 1807, c. 77) " An Act to prohibit the
importation of slaves into any port or place within the jurisdiction of
the United States from and after the Jirst day of January, in the year

united states constitution.

of our Lord one thousa-nd eight hundred and eiglit." That is, at the
very earliest day allowed by the Constitution (Art. 1, sec. 9) for the
passage by Congress of an act prohibiting the importation of per
sons, a law is passed totally prohibiting the importation of slaves.

Restoration of Fugitive Slaves. (Const, Art. 4, sec. 2.)
That the fugitive slave law of 1793, (Stat. 1793, ^. 7,) entitled "An
Act respecting fugitives from justice, and persons escaping from the
service of their masters," and the act of Sept. 18, 1850, "to amend,
and supplementary to " this act, are both framed to carry out this
clause of the Constitution, is too apparent to need comment.

Suppression or Slave Insurrections. (Const., Art. I, seo. 8,
Art. 4, sec. 4.)
The " Act to provide for calling forth the militia, to execute the
laws ofthe Union, suppress insurrections, and repel invasions," (Stat.
1792, c. 28, sec. 1,) provides that, "In case of an insurrection in any
State against the government thereof, it shall be lawful for the Pres
ident of the United States, on application of the legislature of such
State, or of the executive, (when the legislature cannot be con
vened,) to call forth such number of the militia of any other State
or States as may be applied for, or as he may judge sufficient to
suppress such insurrection.'' Precisely the same language is made
use of in Stat. 1795, c. 101. Byact, approved March 3, 1807, (Stat.
1807, c. 94,) the President is authorized, "in all oases of insurrec
tion," " when it is lawful for him to call forth the militia for the pur
pose of suppressing the same," " to employ for the same purpose
such part of the land or naval force of the United States as shall be
judged necessary."
That these laws have been held to include an insurrection of slaves
is indisputable. On receipt of the intelligence of Nat Turner's
insurrection in Southampton, Va., Colonel House, then commanding
at Fortress Monroe, set out with three companies of United States
troops, for the purpose of suppressing the revolt. He was reenforced
by a detachment from the United States ships Warren and Natchez,
amounting in all to about three hundred men. With our troops and

10

anti-slavery tracts.

ov.r officers, we have actually aided the slaveholder in holding his
fellow-man in slavery ! We have actually done what our fathers
engaged in the Constitution that we should do, namely, aid with the
national strength in keeping the slaves in subjection !

IV. THE CONSTITUTION IS PRO-SLAVERY, ACCORDING TO
THE EXPOSITION OF ITS FINAL INTERPRETER.
The Constitution declares itself to be "the supreme law of the
land," (Art. 6, sec. 2.) It cannot possibly be such unless there is a
final interpreter of its meaning. Now, to expound what the law is
is a judicial act. " The judicial power " extends to all oases arising
under the Constitution, and laws, and treaties, (Const., Art. 3, sec. 2.)
It therefore extends to the exposition of the meaiung of the Constitu
tion, when the case before the court properly calls for such exposi
tion. This judicial power, and. consequently, this power to expound
the meaning of the Constitution, is " vested in one Supreme Court,"
(Const., Art. 3, sec. 1.) The decision of this court, being supreme,
must be final.
Apportionment of Representatives. (Const., Art. 1, seo. 2.)
In Hylton vs. United States, (3 Dallas's Rep. 177,) Mr. Justice
Paterson, delivering the opinion of the Supreme Court, says that the
provision contained in this clause, that direct taxes shall be appor
tioned between the States according to their federal numbers, " was
made in favor of the Southern Stales," and to prevent Congress from
taxing "slaves at discretion, or arbitrarily." He also says, (p. 178,)
" The rule of apportionment is radically wrong ; it cannot be sup
ported by any solid reasoning. Why should slaves, who are a spe
cies of property, be represented more than any other property ? "
Permission of the African Slave Trade. (Const, Art. 1,
sec. 9.)
In the great case of Gibbons vs. Ogden, 9 Wheaton's Reports, pp.
206 and 207, (1824,) Chief Justice Marshall, delivering the opinion
of the Supreme Court, says that the act of Congress, (1803, c. 63,)

united states constitution. 11
"prohibiting the importation of slaves into any State which shall
itself prohibit their importation," was passed in virtue of power con
ferred by this clause in the Constitution.
Restoration of Fugitive Slaves. (Const., Art 4, sec. 2.)
The foUowing extracts are taken from the opinion of the Supreme
Court in the well-known case, Prigg vs. The Commonwealth of Penn
sylvania, (16 Pet. Rep. 609, &c.) Judge Story delivered the opinion.
" Historically, it is well known that the object of this clause was
to secure to the citizens of the slaveholding States the complete
right and title of ownership in their slaves, as property, in every
State in the Union into which they might escape from the State
where they were held in servitude. The full recognition of this
right and title was indispensable to the security of this species of
property in all the slaveholding States ; and, indeed, was so vital
to the preservation of their domestic interests and institutions, that
it cannot be doubted that it constituted a fundamental article, without
the adoption of which the Union couldnot have been formed," (p. 613.)
" We have not the slightest hesitation in holding, that, under and in
virtue of the Constitution, the owner of a slave is clothed with entire
authority, in every State in the Union, to seize and recapture his
slave, whenever he can do it without any breach of the peace, or
any illegal violence. In this sense, and to this extent, this clause
of the Constitution may properly be said to execute itself, and to
require no aid from legislation, state or national."

Suppression of Slave Insurrections. (Const., Art 1, sec. 8;
Art. 4, sec. 4.f
We are not aware of any decision of the Supreme Court upon the
meaning of these clauses ; but it seems difficult to conceive that
they would hold that the word " insurrections " did not include all
insurrections. Such_is the Constitution, according to the plain, obvious, and
common meaning of its terms ; such it was intended to be made by
its framers ; such has been the interpretation constantly followed in
the practice of the government, from the time of its adoption until
S.-f
i ¦!¦ * t

12 ANTI-SLAVERY TRACTS.
now ; and such it is according to the decision of the final interpreter
of its meaning. As reasonable men, seeking the truth, we cannot
say that there is the slightest doubt whatever on the subject. The
Constitution very materially supports slavery.
" Yes ! it cannot be denied — the slaveholding lords of the south
prescribed, as a condition of their assent to the Constitution, three
special provisions to secure the perpetuity of their domin
ion OVER THEIR SLAVES. The fiist was the immunity for twenty
years of preserving the African slave trade ; the second was the
stipulation to surrender fugitive slaves — an engagement positively
prohibited by the laws of God, delivered from Sinai ; and thirdly,
the exaction, fatal to the principles of popular representation, of a
representation for slaves — for articles of merchandise, under the
name of persons, * * * in fact, the oppressor representing the
oppressed ! * * * To call government thus constituted a de
mocracy, is to insult the understanding of mankind. It is doubly
tainted with the infection of riches and slavery. Its reciprocal oper
ation upon the government of the nation is to establish an artificial
majority in the slave representation over that of the free people, in
the American Congress ; and thereby to make the preservation, prop
agation, and perpetuation of slavery, the vital and animating spirit of
the national government." — John Quincy Adams.
It is because the Constitution is thus a pro-slavery
instrument that the radical abolitionists refuse to vote
OR TAKE OFFICE UNDER IT. CaN YOU, READER, GIVE IT COUNTE
NANCE OR SUPPORT, EY VOTING OR ACCEPTING OFFICE UNDER IT?

Published for gratuitous distribution, at the office of the American
Anti-Slavery Society, No. 138 Nassau Street, New York. Also
to be had at the Anti-Slavery Offices, No. 21 CornhiU, Boston, and No. 31
North Fifth Street, Philadelphia.

•VAtt

YALE UNIVERSITY

_a_39002 002221860b