But the guaranty of a republican form of government must have a meaning congenial with the purposes of the Constitution. If a government like that of Turkey, or even that of Venice, could come within the scope of this guaranty, it would be of little value; it would be words, and nothing more. Evidently, it must be construed so as to uphold the Constitution, according to all the promises of its Preamble; and Mr. Madison has left a record, first published to the Senate by the distinguished Senator from Vermont [Mr. COLLAMER], of the Committee on the Library, showing that it was originally suggested in part by the fear of Slavery,[278] so that in construing it we must not forget the disturbing influence. The Preamble and the record are important, disclosing the real intention. But no American need be at loss to designate some of the distinctive elements of a republic, according to the idea of American institutions. These are found, first, in the Declaration of Independence, by which it is solemnly announced “that all men are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights; that among these are life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.” And they are found, secondly, in that other guaranty and prohibition of the Constitution, in harmony with the Declaration: “_No person_ shall be deprived of life, _liberty_, or property, _without due process of law_.” Such are essential elements of “a republican form of government,” which cannot be disowned without disowning the very muniments of our liberties; and these the United States are bound to guaranty. But all these, when set in motion, make Slavery impossible. It is idle to say that this result was not anticipated. It would be, then, only another illustration that our fathers “builded better than they knew.” * * * * * 4. Independent of the guaranty, there is the other clause just quoted, in itself a source of power: “_No person_ shall be deprived of life, _liberty_, or property, _without due process of law_.” This was part of the Constitutional Amendments proposed by the First Congress, under the popular demand for a Bill of Rights. Though brief, it is a whole Bill of Rights. Liberty can be lost only by “due process of law,”--words borrowed from the ancient liberty-loving Common Law, illustrated by our master in law, Lord Coke, but best explained by the late Mr. Justice Bronson, of New York, in a judicial opinion:-- “The meaning of the section, then, seems to be, that _no member of the State shall be disfranchised, or deprived of any of his rights or privileges_, unless the matter shall be adjudged against him upon trial had according to the course of the Common Law.… The words ‘due process of law,’ in this place, cannot mean less than a prosecution or suit instituted and conducted according to the prescribed forms and solemnities for ascertaining guilt or determining the title to property.”[279]