Slavery and the Constitution

     Over the past week I have heard many on the news who are picking on the Republicans for leaving out the parts of the Constitution that pertain to slavery. In my opinion they should have read those parts but I can also understand why they did not read them. Those items were abolished by the Thirteenth Amendment. So why read it? I get that. Now that is dispensed with I have read discussions on various news sources of people who say that the original intent of the Founders when writing the Constitution was to limit blacks from voting or owning property or that its purpose was to enforce slavery. Once and for all my friends that is an utter lie.
      Under the Articles of Confederation there was no defense system, no power to raise money, no executive, no Judiciary and any amendment was to be passed by every State. States had the power to tax other states and trade froze. The point is there was no unified system to hold any State to. One would think that is a good thing, but think on slavery… just how long would slavery had lasted without a united federal government to change that law throughout the entire country.
      The Constitution did not support slavery in any means. The word “slave” is never mentioned in the text, instead a slave is referred to as a person and duly so. There are three areas in the Constitution where slavery is talked about; the Three-fifths Compromise (the Enumeration Clause), the service and labor clause (the Fugitive Slave Clause) and the prohibition of the importation of slaves into the United States. There were two definite divisions in government the Free States and the Slave States. During the Constitutional Convention in 1787 those who realized that the unrest in the United States could not go on much longer there was a need for a stronger, more robust National Government. Instead of revising the Articles of Confederation they set to start from scratch and the United States Constitution was born. The free states wanted to see slavery abolished and of course the slave states disagreed. After several attempts for one side to appease the other the above mentioned clause were added. In my opinion it was the beginning of the end of slavery.
      Some have said that the Enumeration Clause was added BECAUSE blacks were considered on three-fifths of a person. That is a load of nonsense ladies and gentlemen. The clause reads, “Representatives and direct taxes shall be apportioned among the several states which may be included within this Union, according to their respective numbers, which shall be determined by adding the whole number of free persons, including those bound to service for a term of years, and excluding Indians not taxed, three-fifths of all other persons.” The clause was added because the slave states wanted each slave, none of whom could vote and a vast majority could neither read nor write, be counted when it came to apportionment of Representatives and electoral votes for the presidency. They would have had an overwhelming majority for much longer then they did with the Three-fifths Compromise. As it stands the free states said that if you consider those people property than you cannot count them all. It turns out that it had differing effects. The South had seven more seats in the House of Representatives than they normally would have based on voter population. Their largest victory was in electoral votes. It is said that had the South not gotten this compromise that northern abolition-minded Presidents would have been elected as early as 1800 and Slavery would have been abolished sooner. I believe had not the compromise been added there would have been slavery much much longer for there would be NO United States at all! It took a Civil War to end slavery and I am certain that there is no way that the slave states prior to that would have gone with the abolishment of slavery.
     On further note, the free states won a victory with the abolishment of the importation of slaves by 1808. Yes, there was a provision that the Federal Government could Tax Slaves being imported which was a punishment for importing them and NOT a statement of worth. It was also a compromise with the slave states. This clause reads, “The Migration or Importation of such Persons as any of the States now existing shall think proper to admit, shall not be prohibited by the Congress prior to the Year one thousand eight hundred and eight, but a tax or duty may be imposed on such Importation, not exceeding ten dollars for each Person.”
      Lastly there was the Fugitive Slave clause that said, “No Person held to Service or Labour in one State, under the Laws thereof, escaping into another, shall, in Consequence of any Law or Regulation therein, be discharged from such Service or Labour, But shall be delivered up on Claim of the Party to whom such Service or Labour may be due.” Yet another compromise to the slave states. The whole point is that there was no way for the Framers to get all the States to ratify the Constitution without these compromises and without that Slavery could probably have gone on for many years after the date of the Civil War.
     Slavery is an abomination to mankind and its practice goes against the intent of the Founding Fathers. Thomas Jefferson, a slave owner, wrote in the Declaration of Independence that “We hold these truths to be self-evident, that ALL MEN [emphasis added] are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.” Thomas Jefferson also said, “There must doubtless be an unhappy influence on the manners of our people produced by the existence of slavery among us. The whole commerce between master and slave is a perpetual exercise of the most boisterous passions, the most unremitting despotism on the one part, and degrading submissions on the other. Our children see this, and learn to imitate it; for man is an imitative animal. This quality is the germ of all education in him.”
     This from George Washington, also a slave owner, in a letter to the Marquis de Lafayette; “[Y]our late purchase of an estate in the colony of Cayenne, with a view to emancipating the slaves on it, is a generous and noble proof of your humanity. Would to God a like spirit would diffuse itself generally into the minds of the people of this country; but I despair of seeing it.” Washington and his wife owned over 300 slaves and upon his death all his slaves were freed and taken care of by the Washington estate.
     Benjamin Franklin also owned several slaves over his lifetime and said this in 1789, “Slavery is such an atrocious debasement of human nature, that its very extirpation, if not performed with solicitous care, may sometimes open a source of serious evils.”
Almost all of the Founders realized that slavery was a horrible if not completely evil condition and many wished to do away with its practice. If only it had never come to the continental United States to begin with but alas we cannot undue what was done and now must continue to strive forward. Those clauses were redacted by the Thirteenth Amendment which states, “1. Neither slavery nor involuntary servitude, except as a punishment for crime whereof the party shall have been duly convicted, shall exist within the United States, or any place subject to their jurisdiction. 2. Congress shall have power to enforce this article by appropriate legislation.” It is our sole responsibility to grow from the past by learning and revisiting it in the light of objective thought and by the grace of our own Creator and not to continue to fight over issues that no longer exist. We are reasoning creatures because we were created that way to think and to find ways to better our lives. So why pick on the GOP for leaving out a redacted part of the Constitution? Was it a historical reading to learn our past or was it a reading to remind all our elected officials that the Constitution is still and, God help us all, will forever remain the Supreme Law of the Land.

Advertisement