"that the migration or importation of such persons, as any of the existing states think proper to admit, shall not be prohibited till 1808." — Art. 1, sec. 9. And it is provided elsewhere, that persons held to service by the laws of any state, shall be given up by other states, to which they may have escaped, etc. — Art. 4, sec. 2.
These provisions effectually recognized the right in the states, which at the time of framing the constitution held the blacks in slavery, to continue so to hold them until they should think proper to meliorate their condition. The constitution is a compact among all the states then existing, by which certain principles of government are established for the whole, and for each individual state. The predominant principle in both respects is, that all men are free, and have an equal right to liberty, and all other privileges; or, in other words, the predominant principle is republicanism, in its largest sense. But, then, the same compact contains certain exceptions. The states then holding slaves are permitted, from the necessity of the case, and for the sake of union, to exclude the republican principle so far, and only so far, as to retain their slaves in servitude, and also their progeny, as had been the usage, until they think it proper or safe to conform to the pure principle, by abolishing slavery. The compact contains on its face the general principle and the exceptions But the attempt to extend slavery to the new states, is in direct violation of the clause, which guarantees a republican form of government to all the states. This clause, indeed, must be construed in connection with the exceptions before mentioned; but it cannot, without violence, be applied to any other states than those in which slavery was allowed at the formation of the constitution.
The honorable speaker cites the first clause in the 2d section of the 4th article, "the citizens of each state shall be entitled to all the privileges and immunities of citizens of the several states," which he thinks would be violated by the condition proposed in the constitution of Missouri. To keep slaves, to make one portion of the population the property of another, hardly deserves to be called a privilege, since what is gained by the masters must be lost by the slaves. But, independently of this consideration, I think the observations already offered to the committee, showing that holding the black population in servitude is an exception to the general principles of the constitution, and can not be allowed to extend beyond the fair import of the terms by which that exception is provided, are a sufficient answer to the objection. The gentleman proceeds in the same train of reasoning, and asks if congress can require one condition, how many more can be required, and where these conditions will end? With regard to a republican constitution, congress are obliged to require that condition, and that is enough for the present question; but I contend, further, that congress has a right, at their discretion, to require any other reasonable condition. Several others were required of Ohio, Indiana, Illinois and Mississippi. The state of Louisiana, which was a part of the territory ceded to us at the same time with Missouri, was required to provide in her constitution for trials by jury, the writ of habeas corpus, the principles of civil and religious liberty, with several others, peculiar to that state. These, cer-
