These provisions obviously recognize the natural right of all men "to keep and bear arms" for their personal defence; and prohibit both congress and the state governments from infringing the right of "the people"--that is, of _any_ of the people--to do so; and more especially of any whom congress have power to include in their militia. This right of a man "to keep and bear arms," is a right palpably inconsistent with the idea of his being a slave. Yet the right is secured as effectually to those whom the states presume to call slaves, as to any whom the states condescend to acknowledge free. Under this provision any man has a right either to give or sell arms to those persons whom the states call slaves; and there is no _constitutional_ power, in either the national or state governments, that can punish him for so doing; or that can take those arms from the slaves; or that can make it criminal for the slaves to use them, if, from the inefficiency of the laws, it should become necessary for them to do so, in defence of their own lives or liberties; for this constitutional right to keep arms implies the constitutional right to use them, if need be, for the defence of one's liberty or life. _Seventh._ The constitution of the United States declares that "no state shall pass _any_ law impairing the obligation of contracts." "The obligation of contracts," here spoken of, is, of necessity, the _natural obligation_; for that is the only real or true obligation that any contracts can have. It is also the only obligation, which courts recognize in any case, except where legislatures arbitrarily interfere to impair it. But the prohibition of the constitution is upon the states' passing any law whatever that shall impair the natural obligation of men's contracts. Yet, if slave laws were constitutional, they would effectually impair the obligation of all contracts entered into by those who are made slaves; for the slave laws must necessarily hold that all a slave's contracts are void. This prohibition upon the states to pass _any_ law impairing the natural obligation of men's contracts, implies that all men have a constitutional right to enter into all contracts that have a natural obligation. It therefore _secures_ the constitutional right of all men to enter into such contracts, and to have them respected by the state governments. Yet this constitutional right of all men to enter into all contracts that have a natural obligation, and to have those contracts recognized by law as valid, is a right plainly inconsistent with the idea that men can constitutionally be made slaves. This provision therefore absolutely prohibits the passage of slave laws, because laws that make men slaves must necessarily impair the obligation of all their contracts.