jurisdiction—­that the nation had established by solemn ordinance memorable precedent for subsequent action, by abolishing slavery in the northwest territory, and by declaring that it should never thenceforward exist there; and this too, as soon as by cession of Virginia and other states, the territory came under Congressional control.  The south knew also that the sixth article in the ordinance prohibiting slavery was first proposed by the largest slaveholding state in the confederacy—­that the chairman of the committee that reported the ordinance was a slaveholder—­that the ordinance was enacted by Congress during the session of the convention that formed the United States Constitution—­that the provisions of the ordinance were, both while in prospect, and when under discussion, matters of universal notoriety and approval with all parties, and when finally passed, received the vote of every member of Congress from each of the slaveholding states.  The south also had every reason for believing that the first Congress under the constitution would ratify that ordinance—­as it did unanimously.

A crowd of reflections, suggest by the preceding testimony, press for utterance.  The right of petition ravished and trampled by its constitutional guardians, and insult and defiance hurled in the faces of the SOVEREIGN PEOPLE while calmly remonstrating with their SERVANTS for violence committed on the nation’s charter and their own dearest rights!  Add to this “the right of peaceably assembling” violently wrested—­the rights of minorities, rights no longer—­free speech struck dumb—­free men outlawed and murdered—­free presses cast into the streets and their fragments strewed with shoutings, or flourished in triumph before the gaze of approving crowds as proud members of prostrate law!

The spirit and power of our fathers, where are they?  Their deep homage always and every where rendered to FREE THOUGHT, with its inseparable signs—­free speech and a free press—­their reverence for justice, liberty, rights and all-pervading law, where are they?

But we turn from these considerations—­though the times on which we have fallen, and those towards which we are borne with headlong haste, call for their discussion as with the voices of departing life—­and proceed to topics relevant to the argument before us.

The seventh article of the amendments to the constitution is alleged to withhold from Congress the power to abolish slavery in the District.  “No person shall be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law.”  All the slaves in the District have been “deprived of liberty” by legislative acts.  Now, these legislative acts “depriving” them “of liberty,” were either “due process of law,” or they were not.  If they were, then a legislative act, taking from the master that “property” which is the identical “liberty” previously taken from the slave, would be “due process of law” also, and of course a constitutional act; but if the legislative acts “depriving” them of “liberty” were not “due process of law,” then the slaves were deprived of liberty unconstitutionally, and these acts are void.  In that case the constitution emancipates them.