The Continental Monthly, Vol. 1, No. 6, June, 1862: Devoted To Literature and National PolicyVarious
History
The Continental Monthly, Vol. 1, No. 6, June, 1862: Devoted To Literature and National Policy
Various
Literature, Modern -- 19th century -- Periodicals; United States -- Politics and government -- 19th century -- Periodicals
order that we may come to a right decision respecting the duties that
grow out of our Federal Union, to consider what language the
Constitution makes use of, in relation to slavery, and how was this
instrument interpreted by the framers. The great question is, was
slavery regarded as a political and moral evil, to be restricted and
circumscribed within the States existing under the Constitution, or was
it looked upon as a blessing, a social relation of society, proper to be
diffused over the territories? It can be clearly shown that there was no
such state of feeling, respecting slavery, as to lead the originators of
our Constitution to look upon it as a thing in itself of natural right,
useful in its operation, and worthy of enlargement and perpetuation.
Rather, the universal sentiment respecting slavery, North and South,
was, that as a great moral, social, and political evil, it should be
condemned, and the widely prevalent impression was, that through the
peaceful operation of causes that evinced the immeasurable superiority
of free institutions, slavery would itself die out, and the whole
country be consecrated to free labor. Never did it enter the minds of
the framers of the Constitution, that slavery was a thing in itself
right and desirable, or that it should be encouraged in the territories.
It was looked upon as exclusively local in its character, the creature
of State law, a relation of society that was to be regulated like any
other municipal institution. It is not to be presumed that the authors
of our government would, in the Declaration of Independence, assert the
natural rights of all men to life, liberty, and the pursuit of
happiness, and then contradict this cardinal principle of the revolution
in the Constitution. They found slavery existing in the Southern States;
they simply left it as it was before the Revolution, with the idea that
in time the local action of the State legislature would do away with the
system. But so far as the extension of slavery was concerned, the
predominant feeling, North and South, was hostile to it. The security
of the country demanded the union of the States under one common
Constitution. The dangers of foreign war, the exhausted finances of the
different States, the evils of a great public debt, contracted during
the Revolution, made it advisable, as soon as the consent of the States
could be got, to have a Constitution that should command security at
home and credit and respect abroad. It was regarded as indispensable for
union, that slavery should be left as it was found in the States. The
thirteen States that first formed our Union under the Constitution, with
the great evils that grew out of war and debt, agreed, for their own
mutual protection, that slavery should be permitted to exist in those
States where it was sanctioned by the local government, as an evil to be
tolerated, not as a thing good in itself, to be fostered, perpetuated,
and enlarged.
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.
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account