Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: betty boop
And I stand corrected, that the US constitution in its Deal with the Devil did mention "persons held to service".

I accept the ritual flogging with a wet noodle in good grace.

This seems to be the point that Walt chooses to overlook, donmeaker.

Walt???

I have never flogged anybody with a wet noodle.

The point was that it was suggested that slavery was not mentioned in the Constitution, but that document clearly protects the institution.

Walt

222 posted on 06/16/2003 3:02:55 AM PDT by WhiskeyPapa (Virtue is the uncontested prize.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 214 | View Replies ]


To: WhiskeyPapa
[Walt] The point was that it was suggested that slavery was not mentioned in the Constitution, but that document clearly protects the institution.

Walt, we agree about something. The Constitution protected the institution of slavery. At one time slavery was legal. Let me quickly add that it was always wrong, indefensible, and morally repugnant.

I have provided a review of pertinent sections of the Constitution, and Lincoln's comments from his First Inaugural Address.

As the Constitution protected slavery, does it not logically follow that to uphold the Constitution as it existed would have required Lincoln to have upheld the protected right of slavery?

Assume the Union army had crushed the Confederates prior to issuance of the Emancipation Proclamation. Would that not have defeated the alleged purpose of war? It would seem that the institution would have then continued to be Constitutionally protected.

Article 1, Section 2, Clause 3:

Representatives and direct Taxes shall be apportioned among the several States which may be included within this Union, according to their respective Numbers, which shall be determined 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. ...

Article 1, Section 9, Clause 1

The Migration or Importation of such Persons as 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 Importation, not exceeding ten dollars for each Person.

[see Article 5, below]

Article 4, Section 2, Clause 3

No Person held to Service or Labour 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 Labour, but shall be delivered up on Claim of the Party to whom such Service or Labour may be due.

Article 5

The Congress, whenever two thirds of both Houses shall deem it necessary, shall propose Amendments to this Constitution, or, on the Application of the Legislatures of two thirds of the several States, shall call a Convention for proposing Amendments, which, in either Case, shall be valid to all Intents and Purposes, as Part of this Constitution, when ratified by the Legislatures of three fourths of the several States, or by Conventions in three fourths thereof, as the one or the other Mode of Ratification may be proposed by the Congress; Provided that no Amendment which may be made prior to the Year One thousand eight hundred and eight shall in any Manner affect the first and fourth Clauses in the Ninth Section of the first Article; and that no State, without its Consent, shall be deprived of its equal Suffrage in the Senate.

LINCOLN FIRST INAUGURAL ADDRESS

I have no purpose, directly or indirectly, to interfere with the institution of slavery in the States where it exists. I believe I have no lawful right to do so, and I have no inclination to do so.

. . .

There is much controversy about the delivering up of fugitives from service or labor. The clause I now read is as plainly written in the Constitution as any other of its provisions: 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.

It is scarcely questioned that this provision was intended by those who made it for the reclaiming of what we call fugitive slaves; and the intention of the lawgiver is the law.

. . .

I understand a proposed amendment to the Constitution-which amendment, however, I have not seen-has passed Congress, to the effect that the Federal Government shall never interfere with the domestic institutions of the States, including that of persons held to service. To avoid misconstruction of what I have said, I depart from my purpose not to speak of particular amendments so far as to say that, holding such a provision to now be implied constitutional law, I have no objection to its being made express and irrevocable.

. . .

The Slavery Amendment cited by Lincoln

In 1861, an amendment prohibiting the Congress from making any law interfering with the domestic institutions of any State was proposed and sent to the states. The amendment apparently was ratified by two states, the last being in 1862.

The text:

No amendment shall be made to the Constitution which will authorize or give to Congress the power to abolish or interfere, within any State, with the domestic institutions thereof, including that of persons held to labor or service by the laws of said State.

352 posted on 06/17/2003 1:07:57 AM PDT by nolu chan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 222 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson