Natural Rights

The object which every man his in view in the surrender of his natural sovereignty is that he may be protected in this rights from the abuse of the same in other men.  He does not yield by conventions, rights which the social state can neither give nor deprive him of.  Under pretence of that surrender, whenever more is demanded of him than the compact justifies or than is dearer to him than safety, protection and life itself, then it becomes a usurpation – an unmitigated despotism.  The surrender of rights must be equal among all who enter into the social state, as the objects secured by it are the same.  There must be, for the sake of securing the peaceful enjoyment of the equal rights possessed, and inequality in civil matters, as there must be the rulers and the people; but this of itself is the result of the political equality which exists in the body and we cheerfully acquiesce in it.

The criminal code of all governments consists in prohibitions, as whatever is not prohibited by law, the subject deems himself safe to do.  Thus, we retain rights which no human institutions can deprive us of, which are not the gifts of society, but are inherent by nature.

We know that there are some governments which do not recognize the inalienable rights of humanity.  Our own does; but the South, by degrading men into chattels, virtually disavows it, and this has been the fatal mistake that has occasioned the evils which are now upon us.  Jefferson, Washington, and others saw it, and so have many since their day.  Slavery was in the country, some disposition must be made of it, and this, as a temporary device, was deemed the only one practicable.  It was never thought, by the founders of our Constitution, that slavery would remain under it as a fixture.  It was then, as now, a “peculiar institution.”  It was the clay mixing with the iron in the toes of the great metallic image.  It never was, it never can be, the normal condition of a free and enlightened people.  It ignores and neglects the rights of nature, which no local compact can do with safety, because it neither had the right nor fully the ability to do it.  If “life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness” are not enjoyed by all men, then they are not enjoyed by any man.  Society cannot and ought not to attempt to confer them as privileges.  It should admit them as rights; but this can never be done where slavery exists, and therefore, the necessity of abolishing it as a most unnatural and oppressive institution among any people, and especially a people claiming to be free.  But we are not of those who would sever the States of this Union to accomplish the object nor would we do it by unjust or arbitrary measures.  The growth of free principles, and the evils growing out of slavery, will kill it as soon as the safety of the Union and the country will admit.

If the appeal is made to the many in the decision of this question of slavery, the utmost impartiality ought to be exercised, and the strictest adherence to justice ought to be demanded.  The Judge, who pronounces his verdict should be bound down to the strictest rules, for whenever expediency convenience or presumption is taken into the account, the decision may be warped by prejudice, and the flood-gates of despotism may be opened still wider.  Nothing but an inflexible adherence to the principles of general right can preserve the purity, consistency and stability of a free state.  The slaves should themselves be heard in their own defence, as they are an important party in this suit.  This has been overlooked, but is the chief matter to be considered in the adjustment of the case.  The North and the South can never settle this difficulty in the absence of the party suffering.  They must be heard, unless both determine to destroy or ignore their manhood and reduce them, not by civil law but by natural law to chattels – and this can never be done.

– Published in The Davenport Daily Gazette, Davenport, Iowa, Tuesday Morning, April 1, 1862, p. 2