The Virginia amendment used the word “freeman.” It proposed that no “freeman” should be deprived, &c. The New York amendment used the word “_person_.” And the amendment was adopted and ratified, almost in the words of the New York phraseology. The word _person_ was chosen, and therefore Congress has no constitutional power to deprive of life, liberty, or property, _without due process of law_, any being embraced in the definition of that word. By its own selection of words it is debarred not merely from depriving a “_freeman_,” but from depriving a “_person_” of this right. When Congress attempted to legalize and perpetuate slavery in this District, it violated the fourth article of the Amendments, which declares “the right of the people to be _secure_ in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures.” If Congress cannot authorize domiciliary searches and seizures against a single individual, can it degrade a whole race of men to the condition of slaves, and then say that _because they are slaves_, they shall not be “secure;” but shall be at the mercy of any alleged master, in regard to their persons,--to be commanded and restrained, to be bought and sold? If Congress cannot authorize searches and seizures of houses, papers, and effects, can it get round the constitution, by saying we will create a class of persons who shall have no power of owning any houses, papers, or effects, to be searched or seized? Again; Congress shall pass “no bill of attainder.” What is a bill of attainder? It is a bill that works corruption of blood. It disfranchises its object. It takes away from him the common privileges of a citizen. It makes a man incapable of acquiring, inheriting, or transmitting property; incapable of holding office, or acting as attorney for others; and it shuts the door of the courts against him. These disabling consequences may descend to a man’s children after him, though this is not necessary. Now, to pass such a bill is a thing which Congress cannot do. But when Congress undertook to legalize slavery in this District, it undertook to do all this, and worse than all this. It attainted, not individuals merely, but a whole race. A slave is an outlaw; that is, he cannot make a contract; he cannot prosecute and defend in court; property cannot be acquired by him, or devised to him, or transmitted through him. A white man may give his testimony against him, but he cannot give his testimony against a white man. He is despoiled of his _liberam legem_,--his birthright. He cannot own the food or clothes he has earned. What is his, is his master’s. And this corruption of blood, which the law of slavery works, does not stop with the first, nor with the second generation,--not with the tenth nor the ten thousandth; but by the theory of the law, goes on forever. Bills of attainder, during the history of the worst periods of the world, have applied to individuals only, or at most to a family. But