Slavery and the ConstitutionBowditch, William I. (William Ingersoll)
Religion
Slavery and the Constitution
Bowditch, William I. (William Ingersoll)
Enslaved persons -- United States -- Social conditions; Slavery -- United States
"I never entertained a doubt that the principal, I will not say the
only, objects that the framers of the Constitution contemplated, as
falling within the rule of apportionment, were a capitation-tax and
a tax on land. Local considerations, and the particular
circumstances and relative situation of the States, naturally lead
to this view of the subject. _The provision was made in favor of the
Southern States._ They possessed a large number of _slaves_; they
had extensive tracts of territory, thinly settled, and not very
productive. A majority of the States had but few _slaves_; and
several of them, a limited territory, well-settled, and in a high
state of cultivation. The Southern States, if no provision had been
introduced in the Constitution, would have been wholly at the mercy
of the other States. _Congress, in such case, might tax slaves at
discretion or arbitrarily_, and land in every part of the Union.
After the same rate or measure, so much a head in the first
instance, and so much an acre in the second. _To guard them against
imposition in these particulars was the reason of introducing the
clause in the Constitution_ which directs that representatives and
direct taxes shall be apportioned among the States, according to
their respective numbers."
Page 178: "The rule of apportionment is of this nature: it is
radically wrong; it cannot be supported by any solid reasoning. Why
should slaves, who are a species of property, be represented more
than any other property? The rule, therefore, ought not to be
extended by construction."
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, makes use of the following language:--
"The Act passed in 1803 (Act Const. 1803, c. 63), prohibiting the
importation of slaves into any State which shall itself prohibit
their importation, implies, it is said, an admission that the States
possess the power to exclude or admit them; from which it is
inferred, that they possess the same power with respect to other
articles.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account