Produced by the University of Michigan as part of the
"Making of America" digital library(http://www.hti.umich.edu/m/moa/).
By William Lloyd Garrison and Others
Extracts from the speech of John Quincy Adams, delivered in the U.S.
House of Representatives, April 14 and 15, 1842, on War with Great
Britain and Mexico:—
What I say is involuntary, because the subject has been brought intothe House from another quarter, as the gentleman himself admits. Iwould leave that institution to the exclusive consideration andmanagement of the States more peculiarly interested in it, just aslong as they can keep within their own bounds. So far, I admit thatCongress has no power to meddle with it. As long as they do not stepout of their own bounds, and do not put the question to the people ofthe United States, whose peace, welfare and happiness are all atstake, so long I will agree to leave them to themselves. But when amember from a free State brings forward certain resolutions, forwhich, instead of reasoning to disprove his positions, you vote acensure upon him, and that without hearing, it is quite anotheraffair. At the time this was done, I said that, as far as I couldunderstand the resolutions proposed by the gentleman from Ohio, (Mr.Giddings,) there were some of them for which I was ready to vote, andsome which I must vote against; and I will now tell this House, myconstituents, and the world of mankind, that the resolution againstwhich I would have voted was that in which he declares that what arecalled the slave States have the exclusive right of consultation onthe subject of slavery. For that resolution I never would vote,because I believe that it is not just, and does not containconstitutional doctrine. I believe that, so long as the slave Statesare able to sustain their institutions without going abroad orcalling upon other parts of the Union to aid them or act on thesubject, so long I will consent never to interfere. I have said this,and I repeat it; but if they come to the free States, and say tothem, you must help us to keep down our slaves, you must aid us in aninsurrection and a civil war, then I say that with that call comes afull and plenary power to this House and to the Senate over the wholesubject. It is a war power. I say it is a war power, and when yourcountry is actually in war, whether it be a war of invasion or a warof insurrection, Congress has power to carry on the war, and mustcarry it on, according to the laws of war; and by the laws of war, aninvaded country has all its laws and municipal institutions swept bythe board, and martial law takes the place of them. This power inCongress has, perhaps, never been called into exercise under thepresent Constitution of the United States. But when the laws of warare in force, what, I ask, is one of those laws? It is this: thatwhen a country is invaded, and two hostile armies are set in martialarray, the commanders of both armies have power to emancipate all theslaves in the invaded territory. Nor is this a mere theoreticstatement. The history of South America shows that the doctrine hasbeen carried into practical execution within the last thirty years.Slavery was abolished in Columbia, first, by the Spanish GeneralMorillo, and, secondly, by the American General Bolivar. It wasabolished by virtue of a military command given at the head of thearmy, and its abolition continues to be law to this day. It wasabolished by the laws of war, and not by municipal enactments; thepower was exercised by military commanders, under instructions