i860] AT COOPER UNION
23
all the rest had probably the same understanding. Such, unquestionably, was the understanding of our fathers who framed the original Constitu- tion; and the text affirms that they understood the question "better than we."
But, so far, I have been considering the under- standing of the question manifested by the framers of the original Constitution. In and by the original instrument, a mode was provided for amending it ; and, as I have already stated, the present frame of "the government under which we live" consists of that original, and twelve amendatory articles framed and adopted since. Those who now insist that Federal control of slavery in Federal Territories violates the Con- stitution, point us to the provisions which they suppose it thus violates ; and, as I understand, they all fix upon provisions in these amendatory articles, and not in the original instrument. The Supreme Court, in the Dred Scott case, plant themselves upon the fifth amendment, which pro- vides that no person shall be deprived of "life, liberty, or property without due process of law" ; while Senator Douglas and his peculiar adherents plant themselves upon the tenth amendment, pro- viding that "the powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution" "are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people."
Now, it so happens that these amendments were framed by the first Congress which sat under the Constitution — the identical Congress which passed the act, already mentioned, enforcing the prohibition of slavery in the Northwestern Ter- ritory. Not only was it the same Congress, but they were the identical, same individual men who, at the same session, and at the same time within
