d as soon as possible, _according to the
principles of the federal constitution_, to the enjoyment of all the
rights, advantages, and immunities of _citizens_ of the United
States; and, in the mean time, they shall be maintained and protected
in the free enjoyment of their liberty, property, and the religion
which they profess."
The cession of Florida to the United States was made on the same terms.
The words of the treaty, on this point, are as follows:--
"Art. 6. The _inhabitants_ of the territories, which his Catholic
majesty cedes to the United States by this treaty, shall be
incorporated in the Union of the United States, as soon as may be
consistent with the principles of the federal constitution, and
admitted to the enjoyment of all the privileges, rights and
immunities of the _citizens_ of the United States."
To allow _any_ of the "inhabitants," included in those treaties, to be
held as slaves, or denied the rights of citizenship under the United
States' constitution, is a plain breach of the treaties.
The constitutions of some of the slave states have provisions like this,
viz., that all laws previously in force, shall remain in force until
repealed, unless repugnant to this constitution. But I think there is no
instance, in which the slave acts, then on their statute books, could be
perpetuated by this provision--and for two reasons; 1st. These slave
acts were previously unconstitutional, and therefore were not, legally
speaking, "laws in force."[30] 2d. Every constitution, I think, that has
this provision, has one or more other provisions that _are_ "repugnant"
to the slave acts.
[Footnote 30: This principle would apply, as we have before seen, where
the change was from the _colonial_ to a state government. It would also
apply to all cases where the change took place, under the constitution
of the United States, from a _territorial_ to a state government. It
needs no argument to prove that all our territorial statutes, that have
purported to authorize slavery, were unconstitutional.]
CHAPTER XIII.
THE CHILDREN OF SLAVES ARE BORN FREE.
The idea that the children of slaves are necessarily born slaves, or
that they necessarily follow that _natural law_ of property, which gives
the natural increase of property to the owner of the original stock, is
an erroneous one.
It is a principle of natural law in regard to property, that a calf
belongs to the owner
|