FREE BOOKS

Author's List




PREV.   NEXT  
|<   1308   1309   1310   1311   1312   1313   1314   1315   1316   1317   1318   1319   1320   1321   1322   1323   1324   1325   1326   1327   1328   1329   1330   1331   1332  
1333   1334   1335   1336   1337   1338   1339   1340   1341   1342   1343   1344   1345   1346   1347   1348   1349   1350   1351   1352   1353   1354   1355   1356   1357   >>   >|  
of a colored friend early the next morning. It was still dark when we climbed up to his room, and the lamp was still burning by the light of which he was writing the last sentence of the declaration. We read it carefully, made a few verbal changes, and submitted it to the large committee, who unanimously agreed to report it to the Convention. The paper was read to the Convention by Dr. Atlee, chairman of the committee, and listened to with the profoundest interest. Commencing with a reference to the time, fifty-seven years before, when, in the same city of Philadelphia, our fathers announced to the world their Declaration of Independence,--based on the self-evident truths of human equality and rights,--and appealed to arms for its defence, it spoke of the new enterprise as one "without which that of our fathers is incomplete," and as transcending theirs in magnitude, solemnity, and probable results as much "as moral truth does physical force." It spoke of the difference of the two in the means and ends proposed, and of the trifling grievances of our fathers compared with the wrongs and sufferings of the slaves, which it forcibly characterized as unequalled by any others on the face of the earth. It claimed that the nation was bound to repent at once, to let the oppressed go free, and to admit them to all the rights and privileges of others; because, it asserted, no man has a right to enslave or imbrute his brother; because liberty is inalienable; because there is no difference, in principle, between slave- holding and man-stealing, which the law brands as piracy; and because no length of bondage can invalidate man's claim to himself, or render slave laws anything but "an audacious usurpation." It maintained that no compensation should be given to planters emancipating slaves, because that would be a surrender of fundamental principles; "slavery is a crime, and is, therefore, not an article to be sold;" because slave-holders are not just proprietors of what they claim; because emancipation would destroy only nominal, not real property; and because compensation, if given at all, should be given to the slaves. It declared any "scheme of expatriation" to be "delusive, cruel, and dangerous." It fully recognized the right of each state to legislate exclusively on the subject of slavery within its limits, and conceded that Congress, under the present national compact, had no right to interfere; though still contendin
PREV.   NEXT  
|<   1308   1309   1310   1311   1312   1313   1314   1315   1316   1317   1318   1319   1320   1321   1322   1323   1324   1325   1326   1327   1328   1329   1330   1331   1332  
1333   1334   1335   1336   1337   1338   1339   1340   1341   1342   1343   1344   1345   1346   1347   1348   1349   1350   1351   1352   1353   1354   1355   1356   1357   >>   >|  



Top keywords:
fathers
 

slaves

 
Convention
 

committee

 

difference

 

slavery

 

rights

 
compensation
 

invalidate

 
render

inalienable

 
asserted
 

privileges

 

enslave

 

imbrute

 

oppressed

 

brother

 

liberty

 

brands

 

piracy


length

 

stealing

 

holding

 
principle
 

bondage

 

fundamental

 

recognized

 

legislate

 

exclusively

 
dangerous

scheme

 

expatriation

 

delusive

 

subject

 

compact

 

interfere

 

contendin

 

national

 

present

 

limits


conceded

 

Congress

 
declared
 
principles
 

article

 

surrender

 

usurpation

 

maintained

 

planters

 
emancipating