From: erics@netcom.com (Eric Smith)
Subject: Re: Lincoln & slavery (Was Re: Top Ten Tricks...)
Organization: NETCOM On-line Communication Services (408 241-9760 guest)
Lines: 53

cramer@optilink.COM (Clayton Cramer) writes:

>judy@technology.com (Judy McMillin) writes:

>>cramer@optilink.COM (Clayton Cramer) writes:

># #Can you provide some evidence that the slave states regarded slaves as
># #not humans?  They were "outside our society" and similar phrases that
># #basically meant that they didn't have to recognized as having the same
># #rights as a free person, but they were never considered "not human" to
># #my knowledge.
 
># 	Isn't the fact that slaves were "purchased" as opposed to
># 	"hired" enough evidence that they were not thought as humans?
># 	Didn't the Bill of Rights provide basic freedoms to humans
># 	that were not available to slaves?

>Not necessarily.  Distinctions were made between "citizens" and
>"persons" throughout the U.S. and various state constitutions.
>For example, free blacks had some rights of citizens, but not all
>the rights of citizens.  I'm curious if there was an additional
>level of distinction made by the slave states to rationalize their
>treatment of slaves, or if they just ignored the theoretical
>problems of slave ownership.

The Bill of Rights, as far as I can see, does not once refer to "citizens",
but it makes several references to "people". For example, Article IV:
"The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers,
and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be
violated"; Article V: "no person shall be held to answer for a capital,
or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment by
a Grand Jury ...  nor shall any person ... be deprived of life, liberty,
or property, without due process of law"; Article VIII: "excessive bail
shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual
punishments inflicted".

Now I've never heard that Constitutional rights apply only to citizens;
aren't they meant to apply equally to all *persons* living in the U.S.?
Whether slaves were considered "not human" I don't know, but it seems
that a case could be made that they weren't treated as "people" as defined
in the Bill of Rights. And since the nation is nominally based on the
Declaration of Independence which states that "all Men 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",
it would also seem that slaves would not follow under this definition
of humanity.

-----
Eric Smith
erics@netcom.com
erics@infoserv.com
CI$: 70262,3610

