The Heritage of The South: A History of the Introduction of Slavery; Its Establishment From Colonial Times and Final Effect Upon the Politics of the United StatesEarly, Jubal Anderson
History
The Heritage of The South: A History of the Introduction of Slavery; Its Establishment From Colonial Times and Final Effect Upon the Politics of the United States
Early, Jubal Anderson
Slavery -- United States; United States -- Politics and government -- 1861-1865
The Constitution of the United States left slavery in the states precisely
where it was before, the only provision having any reference to it
whatever being that which fixed the ratio of representation in the House
of Representatives and direct taxation; that in reference to the foreign
slave trade, and that guaranteeing the return of fugitive slaves. Had it
been proposed to insert any provision giving Congress any power over the
subject in the states, it would have been resisted, and the insertion of
such provision would have insured the rejection of the Constitution. The
government framed under this Constitution being one of delegated powers
entirely, those powers were necessarily limited to the objects for which
they were granted, but to prevent all misconception, the 9th and 10th
amendments were adopted, the first providing that "The enumeration in the
Constitution of certain rights shall not be construed to deny or disparage
others retained by the people," and the other that: "The powers not
delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it
to the states, are reserved to the states respectively, or to the people."
* * * * *
It has now been shown how slavery originated in the United States and that
the Federal Constitution left its regulation in every particular, where
it belonged, that is to the several states where it existed, save only
in regard to the foreign slave trade and the guarantee for the return of
fugitive slaves as mentioned.
State action had already provided for the removal of slavery from several
of the northern states, and this was followed, later, by a law adopted in
New York in 1799, providing that all children of slaves born after the
4th of July of that year should be free, males at 28 and females at 25
years of age, and a law adopted in New Jersey in 1804, providing that all
children of slaves born after the 4th of July of that year should be free,
the males at 25 and the females at 21 years of age. This was the last of
the acts for the emancipation of slavery where it previously existed and
therefore, so far as regarded the original thirteen states, slavery was
confined to Delaware, Maryland, Virginia, North and South Carolina and
Georgia, except as to the remnants left in the other states by the acts
for gradual emancipation, which lingered in some of them for a long time.
If African slavery was a crime, who was responsible for it? Did the sole
guilt or the greater part of it rest upon the shoulders of the colonists
who purchased the slaves already ravished from their homes in the plains
and wilds of Africa, or on the shoulders of the descendants of the
original purchasers who found the institution already established as a
settled policy, or did it rest with those who procured the enslavement of
these ignorant and degraded barbarians and reaped the enormous profits
resulting from their sale in their persons?
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