Footnotes 21-30: William Wiecek, "Chapter 11: Radical Constitutional Antislavery: The Imagined Past, the Remembered Future" in The Source of Antislavery Constitutionalism in America, (Cornell University Press: 1977)
<fn21> [*255] Emancipator, 7 June 1838.<fn22> [*255] "The Constitutional Debate" summarizes their arguments in Emancipator, 17 May 1838. <fn23> [*255] Stewart to wife, 7 May 1838, in Alvan Stewart Papers, New York State Historical Association, Cooperstown. <fn24> [*255] See "Judge Jay's Examination" and "Remarks of Wendell Phillips, Esq. on the Same Subject," in Friend of Man, 13 June 1838. Bailey's arguments are in Cincinnati Philanthropist, 22 May 1838, 30 April 1839, 10 Dec. 1839.<fn25> [*256] Speech of Henry B. Stanton, 7 May 1939, reported in Sixth Annual Report of the . . . Amerkan Anti-Slavery Society . . . (New York: William S. Dorr, 1839), 16; see also "Ohio and a National Convention," Cincinnati Philanthropist, 1 March 1842.<fn26> [*256] G. W. F. Mellen, An Argument on the Unconstitutionality of Slavery, Embracing an Abstract of the Proceedings of the National and State Conventions on This Subject (Boston: Saxton & Pierce, 1841).<fn27> [*256] Henry B. Stanton, Random Recollections (New York: Harper, 1887), 70.<fn28> [*257] State v. Post, 20 N.J. Law 368 (1845). Stewart's effort was unsuccessful; the court, by a 3-1 vote (Hornblower, C. J., dissenting without opinion), held that the abstract propositions of the states' new Declaration of Rights did not derange the extant social or legal orders.<fn29> [*257] "Argument, On the Question Whether the New Constitution of 1844 [of New Jersey] Abolished Slavery in New Jersey," in Marsh, ed., Writings of Stewart, 272-367; henceforth cited: Stewart, "New Jersey Argument."<fn30> [*257] For a thoughtful reconsideration of this case from the viewpoint of the majority judges, see Cover, Justice Accused, 55-60.