There are three ways, and three only, in which it is contemplated that it can be removed; by insurrection—the action of Congress—or the action of the slave States. Probably all would deprecate an attempt on the part of the slaves to obtain their liberty by insurrection. This, if ultimately successful, would be attended with much bloodshed and misery, and a vast loss of life, both of the colored people and of the whites.
Some suppose, that Congress have power to abolish slavery in the slave States. They have undoubtedly power to abolish it in the District of Columbia, and in the Territories. And the constitution might be so amended as to give Congress power to abolish slavery within the States where it exists. But, as it now stands, it appears to me that it does not give Congress any such power. Whatever may be said, and though the constitution does not name slaves or slavery, it manifestly sanctions it.
Among other provisions, that respecting representation in Congress is conclusive, where “three-fifths of all other persons,” besides citizens—who are to be reckoned in apportioning the number of representatives—can only mean slaves. And when the constitution went into operation, while the framers were alive and among the leading politicians of the day, the representatives were chosen in this proportion in the slave States; and have always continued to be thus chosen.
And Congress were forbidden by the constitution to prohibit the foreign slave trade within twenty years. And when these twenty years were expired, Congress immediately passed laws to put a stop to this trade. But, how absurd to suppose that the constitution forbid Congress to abolish the slave trade within twenty years, and yet, gave that body power to abolish slavery itself immediately!
But it is pleaded, that this power is given to Congress in the fifth article of the amendments, where it is said, “No person shall be deprived of life, liberty or property without due process of law.” And does this refer to slaves? Manifestly not. Can persons be deprived of that which they do not possess? To deprive a person of something, implies that he possessed it. And do slaves possess liberty, or property? And can they be deprived of property, when they have none? And would an article have been adopted by Congress and the States, so manifestly contrary to other parts of the constitution? But it is said, that the most liberal construction ought to be given to the clause in favor of liberty. True, when there can be any reasonable doubt as to the real meaning of a constitution or law. But where the meaning is plain, there is no room for construction.
And when we have substantial and efficient weapons enough, it is not good policy to seize those which are feeble, and which may be wrested from us, and turned against us.
But, if slavery must be abolished by the action of the slave States, then it is an important question—How can they be brought to put forth this action? This they will not do till they are convinced that their duty, their interest, or their safety, or all these, demand the emancipation of their slaves. It is evident then, that arguments must bring them to the adoption of this measure. These may be addressed to their reason, their conscience, their interest and their fears; and more especially, to the two former.[A]
But by whom, and in what manner, must these arguments be addressed to them? Are there those among themselves, who will do this work, and labor effectually to convince the people of the slaveholding States, that they ought immediately to “break every yoke?”
As there is so much in those States from self-interest, education, long cherished habits, and familiarity with slavery, to lessen the evil in the public estimation, and counteract the efforts and influence of those who might desire its abolition, an external force from the free States is necessary to bear upon this fearful evil. And that this force may be powerful and effectual, it must be combined and general. It must be a united testimony against slavery.
How then can this union in sentiment and action be secured? Those who attempt to secure this object need to be “wise as serpents, and harmless as doves.” Meekness, prudence and decision are all highly necessary. The more difficult the object to be attained, the more needful are wisdom, prudence and firmness. A fiery zeal not tempered with meekness may do much injury, by irritating those whom we would wish to gain, and exciting in them prejudice, and thus repelling them instead of gaining them. And there is great danger of this.