按键盘上方向键 ← 或 → 可快速上下翻页，按键盘上的 Enter 键可回到本书目录页，按键盘上方向键 ↑ 可回到本页顶部！
————未阅读完？加入书签已便下次继续阅读！
which now constitutes the States of Mississippi and Alabama。 In both
deeds of cession it was made a condition by the ceding States that
the Federal Government should not prohibit slavery in the ceded
country。 Besides this； slavery was then actually in the ceded
country。 Under these circumstances； Congress； on taking charge of
these countries； did not absolutely prohibit slavery within them。
But they did interfere with ittake control of iteven there； to a
certain extent。 In 1798； Congress organized the Territory of
Mississippi： In the act of organization they prohibited the bringing
of slaves into the Territory from any place without the United
States； by fine and giving freedom to slaves so brought。 This act
passed both branches of Congress without yeas and nays。 In that
Congress were three of the 〃thirty…nine〃 who framed the original
Constitution。 They were John Langdon； George Read； and Abraham
Baldwin。 They all； probably； voted for it。 Certainly they would have
placed their opposition to it upon record； if； in their
understanding； any line dividing local from Federal authority； or
anything in the Constitution； properly forbade the Federal Government
to control as to slavery in Federal territory。
In 1803； the Federal Government purchased the Louisiana country。 Our
former territorial acquisitions came from certain of our own States；
but this Louisiana country was acquired from a foreign nation。 In
1804； Congress gave a territorial organization to that part of it
which now constitutes the State of Lousiana。 New Orleans； lying
within that part； was an old and comparatively large city。 There
were other considerable towns and settlements； and slavery was
extensively and thoroughly intermingled with the people。 Congress
did not； in the Territorial Act； prohibit slavery； but they did
interfere with it take control of itin a more marked and extensive
way than they did in the case of Mississippi。 The substance of the
provision therein made in relation to slaves was：
First。 That no slave should be imported into the Territory from
foreign parts。
Second。 That no slave should be carried into it who had been imported
into the United States since the first day of May； 1798。
Third。 That no slave should be carried into it except by the owner；
and for his own use as a settler； the penalty in all the cases being
a fine upon the violator of the law； and freedom to the slave。
This act also was passed without yeas and nays。 In the Congress which
passed it there were two of the 〃thirty…nine。〃 They were Abraham
Baldwin and Jonathan Dayton。 As stated in the case of Mississippi；
it is probable they both voted for it。 They would not have allowed it
to pass without recording their opposition to it； if； in their
understanding； it violated either the line properly dividing local
from Federal authority； or any provision of the Constitution。
In 1819…20 came and passed the Missouri question。 Many votes were
taken； by yeas and nays； in both branches of Congress； upon the
various phases of the general question。 Two of the 〃thirty…nine〃…
…Rufus King and Charles Pinckney were members of that Congress。 Mr。
King steadily voted for slavery prohibition and against all
compromises； while Mr。 Pinckney as steadily voted against slavery
prohibition； and against all compromises。 By this； Mr。 King showed
that； in his understanding； no line dividing local from Federal
authority； nor anything in the Constitution； was violated by Congress
prohibiting slavery in Federal territory； while Mr。 Pinckney； by his
vote； showed that in his understanding there was some sufficient
reason for opposing such prohibition in that case。
The cases I have mentioned are the only acts of the 〃thirty…nine；〃 or
of any of them； upon the direct issue； which I have been able to
discover。
To enumerate the persons who thus acted； as being four in 1784； two
in 1787； seventeen in 1789； three in 1798； two in 1804； and two in
1819…20there would be thirty of them。 But this would be counting；
John Langdon； Roger Sherman； William Few； Rufus King； and George
Read； each twice； and Abraham Baldwin three times。 The true number
of those of the 〃thirty…nine〃 whom I have shown to have acted upon
the question which； by the text； they understood better than we； is
twenty…three； leaving sixteen not shown to have acted upon it in any
way。
Here； then； we have twenty…three out of our thirty…nine fathers 〃who
framed the Government under which we live；〃 who have； upon their
official responsibility and their corporal oaths； acted upon the very
question which the text affirms they 〃understood just as well； and
even better than we do now〃； and twenty…one of thema clear majority
of the whole 〃thirty…nine〃so acting upon it as to make them guilty
of gross political impropriety and wilful perjury； if； in their
understanding； any proper division between local and Federal。
authority； or anything in the Constitution they had made themselves；
and sworn to support； forbade the Federal Government to control as to
slavery in the Federal Territories。 Thus the twenty…one acted； and；
as actions speak louder than words； so actions under such
responsibilities speak still louder。
Two of the twenty…three voted against Congressional prohibition of
slavery in the Federal Territories； in the instances in which they
acted upon the question。 But for what reasons they so voted is not
known。 They may have done so because they thought a proper division
of local from Federal authority； or some provision or principle of
the Constitution； stood in the way； or they may； without any such
question； have voted against the prohibition on what appeared to them
to be sufficient grounds of expediency。 No one who has sworn to
support the Constitution can conscientiously vote for what he
understands to be an unconstitutional measure； however expedient he
may think it； but one may and ought to vote against a measure which
he deems constitutional； if； at the same time； he deems it
inexpedient。 It therefore would be unsafe to set down even the two
who voted against the prohibition as having done so because； in their
understanding； any proper division of local from Federal authority；
or anything in the Constitution； forbade the Federal Government to
control as to slavery in Federal territory。
The remaining sixteen of the 〃thirty…nine；〃 so far as I have
discovered； have left no record of their understanding upon the
direct question of Federal control on slavery in the Federal
Territories。 But there is much reason to believe that their
understanding upon that question would not have appeared different
from that of their twenty…three compeers； had it been manifested at
all。
For the purpose of adhering rigidly to the text； I have purposely
omitted whatever understanding may have been manifested by any
person； however distinguished； other than the thirty…nine fathers who
framed the o