Browsing named entities in C. Edwards Lester, Life and public services of Charles Sumner: Born Jan. 6, 1811. Died March 11, 1874.. You can also browse the collection for Elbridge Gerry or search for Elbridge Gerry in all documents.

Your search returned 6 results in 4 document sections:

the clause touching the African slave trade, which reveals the definitive purposes of the Convention. From the report of Mr. Madison we learn what was said. Elbridge Gerry, of Massachusetts, thought we had nothing to do with the conduct of the States as to Slavery, but we ought to be careful not to give any sanction to it. Acco will be remembered, that, among the members of the Convention, were Gouverneur Morris, who had said that he never would concur in upholding domestic slavery; Elbridge Gerry, who thought we ought to be careful not to give any sanction to it; Roger Sherman, who was opposed to any clause acknowledging men to be property; James Madis clause, which was not in the original Constitution when first adopted, was suggested by the very spirit of Freedom. At the close of the National Convention, Elbridge Gerry refused to sign the Constitution, because, among other things, it established a tribunal without juries, a Star Chamber as to civil cases. Many united in his
pholding domestic slavery. It was a nefarious institution. It was the curse of Heaven on the State where it prevailed. Oliver Ellsworth, of Connecticut, said: The morality or wisdom of Slavery are considerations belonging to the States themselves. According to him, Slavery was sectional. At a later day, a discussion ensued on the clause touching the African slave trade, which reveals the definitive purposes of the Convention. From the report of Mr. Madison we learn what was said. Elbridge Gerry, of Massachusetts, thought we had nothing to do with the conduct of the States as to Slavery, but we ought to be careful not to give any sanction to it. According to these words, he regarded Slavery as sectional, and would not make it national. Roger Sherman, of Connecticut, was opposed to any tax on slaves imported, as making the matter worse, because it implied they were property. He would not have Slavery national. After debate, the subject was committed to a Committee of eleven,
roposition. Had it been distinctly made, it would have been distinctly denied. The fact that the provision on this subject was adopted unanimously, while showing the little importance attached to it in the shape it finally assumed, testifies also that it could not have been regarded as a source of National power over Slavery. It will be remembered, that, among the members of the Convention, were Gouverneur Morris, who had said that he never would concur in upholding domestic slavery; Elbridge Gerry, who thought we ought to be careful not to give any sanction to it; Roger Sherman, who was opposed to any clause acknowledging men to be property; James Madison, who thought it wrong to admit in the Constitution the idea that there could be property in man; and Benjamin Franklin, who likened American slaveholders to Algerine corsairs. In the face of these unequivocal statements, it is absurd to suppose that they consented unanimously to any provision by which the National Government, th
operty, without due process of law; that is, without due proceedings at law, with Trial by Jury. Not stopping to dwell on this, I press at once to the other provision, which is still more express: In suits at common law, where the value in controversy shall exceed twenty dollars, the right of Trial by Jury shall be preserved. This clause, which was not in the original Constitution when first adopted, was suggested by the very spirit of Freedom. At the close of the National Convention, Elbridge Gerry refused to sign the Constitution, because, among other things, it established a tribunal without juries, a Star Chamber as to civil cases. Many united in his opposition, and on the recommendation of the First Congress this additional safeguard was adopted as an amendment. Now, regarding the question as one of property, or of Personal Liberty, in either alternative the Trial by Jury is secured. For this position authority is ample. In the debate on the Fugitive Slave Bill of 1817– 1