been regarded as a matter of domestic policy, left with the States themselves, and with which the Federal government had nothing to do.  Certainly, Sir, I am, and ever have been, of that opinion.  The gentleman, indeed, argues that slavery, in the abstract, is no evil.  Most assuredly I need not say I differ with him, altogether and most widely, on that point.  I regard domestic slavery as one of the greatest evils, both moral and political.  But whether it be a malady, and whether it be curable, and if so, by what means; or, on the other hand, whether it be the vulnus immedicabile of the social system, I leave it to those whose right and duty it is to inquire and to decide.  And this I believe, Sir, is, and uniformly has been, the sentiment of the North.  Let us look a little at the history of this matter.

When the present Constitution was submitted for the ratification of the people, there were those who imagined that the powers of the government which it proposed to establish might, in some possible mode, be exerted in measures tending to the abolition of slavery.  This suggestion would of course attract much attention in the Southern conventions.  In that of Virginia, Governor Randolph said:—­

“I hope there is none here, who, considering the subject in the calm light of philosophy, will make an objection dishonorable to Virginia; that, at the moment they are securing the rights of their citizens, an objection is started, that there is a spark of hope that those unfortunate men now held in bondage may, by the operation of the general government, be made free.”

At the very first Congress, petitions on the subject were presented, if I mistake not, from different States.  The Pennsylvania society for promoting the abolition of slavery took a lead, and laid before Congress a memorial, praying Congress to promote the abolition by such powers as it possessed.  This memorial was referred, in the House of Representatives, to a select committee, consisting of Mr. Foster of New Hampshire, Mr. Gerry of Massachusetts, Mr. Huntington of Connecticut, Mr. Lawrence of New York, Mr. Sinnickson of New Jersey, Mr. Hartley of Pennsylvania, and Mr. Parker of Virginia,—­all of them, Sir, as you will observe, Northern men but the last.  This committee made a report, which was referred to a committee of the whole House, and there considered and discussed for several days; and being amended, although without material alteration, it was made to express three distinct propositions, on the subject of slavery and the slave-trade.  First, in the words of the Constitution, that Congress could not, prior to the year 1808, prohibit the migration or importation of such persons as any of the States then existing should think proper to admit; and, secondly, that Congress had authority to restrain the citizens of the United States from carrying on the African slave-trade, for the purpose of supplying foreign countries.  On this proposition, our early laws against those who engage in that traffic are founded.  The third proposition, and that which bears on the present question, was expressed in the following terms:—­