had done nothing in this respect. Now, for my
present purpose, and many of our statesmen say, for
nearly all purposes, the Federal Constitution is to
be regarded as a treaty between sovereign States.
But how much more does this treaty do for the abolition
of slavery, than that on which we were, a moment since,
bestowing our praise! It imposes a prohibition
similar to that in the supposed treaty between Great
Britain and Turkey, so that no slaves have been allowed
to be introduced into the United States since the year
1808. It goes further, and makes ample provision
for the abolition and prevention of slavery in every
part of the nation, save these States; so that the
District of Columbia and the national territories can
be cleared forever of slavery, whenever a majority
of the parties, bound by the treaty, shall desire
it. And it goes still farther, and clothes this
majority with the power of regulating commerce between
the States, and consequently, of prohibiting their
mutual traffic in “the bodies and souls of men.”
Had this treaty gone but one step farther, and made
an exception, as it should have done, in behalf of
slaves, in the clause making necessary provision for
the return of fugitives held to service in the States
from which they flee, none but those who think it is
fairly held responsible for the twenty years indulgence
of the unholy traffic, would have claimed any thing
more from it in relation to slavery. Now, this
instrument, which contains nothing more, bearing on
the subject of slavery, than what I have referred to,
and whose pages are not once polluted with the words
“slave” and “slavery,” is
abundantly and triumphantly cited, as conclusive authority
in favor of slavery, and against endeavors to abolish
it. Whilst we regret, that the true-hearted sons
of freedom in the Convention which formed it, could
obtain no more concessions from the advocates of slavery,
let us honor their sacred memory, and thank God for
those they did obtain.
I have supposed it possible, that you might number
yourself with those, who defend slavery on the ground
of its alleged conformity with human laws. It
occurs to me, that you may, also, take hope, that slavery
is defensible in the supposed fact, that a considerable
share of the professing Christians, in the free States,
are in favor of it. “Let God be true, but
every man a liar.” If all professing Christians
were for slavery, yet, if God is against it, that
is reason enough why you also should be against it.
It is not true, however, that a considerable share
of our professing Christians are on the side of slavery.
Indeed, until I read Professor Hodge’s article,
I had not supposed that any of them denied its sinfulness.
It is true, that a large proportion of them refuse
to take a stand against it. Let them justify to
their consciences, and to their God, as they can,
the equivocal silence and still more equivocal action
on this subject, by which they have left their Southern
brethren to infer, that Northern piety sanctions slavery.