Congress, by an act of abolition, would change the condition of seven thousand “persons” in the District, but would “take” nothing.  To construe this provision so as to enable the citizens of the District to hold as property, and in perpetuity, whatever they please, or to hold it as property in all circumstances—­all necessity, public welfare, and the will and power of the government to the contrary notwithstanding—­is a total perversion of its whole intent.  The design of the provision, was to throw up a barrier against Governmental aggrandizement.  The right to “take property” for State uses is one thing;—­the right so to adjust the tenures by which property is held, that each may have his own secured to him, is another thing, and clearly within the scope of legislation.  Besides, if Congress were to “take” the slaves in the District, it would be adopting, not abolishing slavery—­becoming a slaveholder itself, instead of requiring others to be such no longer.  The clause in question, prohibits the “taking” of individual property for public use, to be employed or disposed of as property for governmental purposes.  Congress, by abolishing slavery in the District, would do no such thing.  It would merely change the condition of that which has been recognized as a qualified property by congressional acts, though previously declared “persons” by the constitution.  More than this is done continually by Congress and every other Legislature.  Property the most absolute and unqualified, is annihilated by legislative acts.  The embargo and non-intercourse act, levelled at a stroke a forest of shipping, and sunk millions of capital.  To say nothing of the power of Congress to take hundreds of millions from the people by direct taxation, who doubts its power to abolish at once the whole tariff system, change the seat of Government, arrest the progress of national works, prohibit any branch of commerce with the Indian tribes or with foreign nations, change the locality of forts, arsenals, magazines and dock yards; abolish the Post Office system, and the privilege of patents and copyrights?  By such acts Congress might, in the exercise of its acknowledged powers, annihilate property to an incalculable amount, and that without becoming liable to claims for compensation.

Finally, this clause prohibits the taking for public use of “property.”  The constitution of the United States does not recognize slaves as “PROPERTY” any where, and it does not recognize them in any sense in the District of Columbia.  All allusions to them in the constitution recognize them as “persons.”  Every reference to them points solely to the element of personality; and thus, by the strongest implication, declares that the constitution knows them only as “persons,” and will not recognize them in any other light.  If they escape into free States, the constitution authorizes their being taken back.  But how?