Corwin Amendment

• 1. Origins And Context

  ›

  The deepening rift between slave states and free states erupted into a secession crisis in December 1860. The second session of the 36th Congress convened during this turmoil. Senator William H. Seward and Representative Thomas Corwin introduced a proposal to shield slavery from federal power. This effort aimed to prevent the outbreak of war following the 1860 presidential election. Several Southern states had already begun their withdrawal from the Union. They eventually formed the Confederate States of America. Federal legislative measures sought to reconcile the sections or avoid further secession. More than 200 resolutions regarding slavery were introduced in Congress that winter. Most represented compromises designed to avert military conflict.

  45

• 2. Legislative History And Passage

  ›

  On the 14th of January 1861, the House committee submitted a plan calling for an amendment to protect slavery. Mississippi, Florida, Alabama, Georgia, Louisiana, and Texas joined South Carolina in seceding from the Union. Congressman Thomas Corwin introduced his own text as a substitute on the 26th of February 1861. The House voted 123 to 71 against the original resolution on February 27. That vote fell below the required two-thirds majority needed for passage. On February 28, the House returned to approve Corwin's version by a vote of 133 to 65. This margin barely exceeded the two-thirds threshold. The Senate took up the proposed amendment on the 2nd of March 1861. Debates continued without a recess through the pre-dawn hours on March 4. The final vote passed with exactly the needed two-thirds majority of 24 to 12. Soon afterward, it was sent to the state legislatures for ratification.

  58

• 3. Semantic Euphemisms In Text

  ›

  The text refers to slavery with terms such as domestic institutions and persons held to labor or service. It avoids using the word slavery entirely. This approach followed the example set at the Constitutional Convention of 1787. That draft referred to slavery with comparable descriptions of legal status like Person held to Service. Madison succeeded only in getting through a semantic change that kept the slave-trade clause from stating directly that there could be property in men. During debates, abolitionist Republican Owen Lovejoy questioned the amendment's reach. He asked if the measure included polygamy, calling it the other twin relic of barbarism. Missouri Democrat John S. Phelps answered whether he would be prohibited from committing that crime. These exchanges highlighted the deliberate ambiguity embedded within the legislative language.

  17

• 4. Presidential Endorsements And Actions

  ›

  Outgoing President James Buchanan endorsed the Corwin Amendment by taking the unprecedented step of signing it. His signature on the Congressional joint resolution was unnecessary since the President has no formal role in the constitutional amendment process. Abraham Lincoln addressed the proposal in his first inaugural address on the 4th of March 1861. Just weeks prior to the outbreak of the Civil War, Lincoln sent a letter to each state's governor transmitting the proposed amendment. He noted that Buchanan had approved it. His letter did not say anything opposing or supporting the amendment itself. The outgoing president and the incoming president both lent their names to this failed compromise effort.

  78

• 5. State Ratification Efforts

  ›

  The Corwin Amendment has been ratified by Kentucky on the 4th of April 1861. Ohio ratified it on the 13th of May 1861 before rescinding ratification on the 31st of March 1864. Rhode Island approved the measure on the 31st of May 1861. Maryland ratified it on the 10th of January 1862 but later rescinded its approval on the 7th of April 2014. Illinois ratified the amendment on the 2nd of June 1863 and subsequently rescinded ratification on the 4th of April 2022. An Illinois state constitutional convention purported to ratify the amendment on the 14th of February 1862. That action was of questionable validity since lawmakers were sitting as delegates rather than meeting as the actual state legislature. The Restored Government of Virginia voted to approve the amendment on the 13th of February 1862. West Virginia did not ratify the amendment after it became a state in 1863. In 1963, a joint resolution to ratify it was introduced in the Texas House of Representatives by Dallas Republican Henry Stollenwerck.

  9121314

• 6. Post-War Abandonment And Withdrawal

  ›

  On the 8th of February 1864, during the 38th Congress, Republican Senator Henry B. Anthony of Rhode Island introduced Senate Joint Resolution No. 25. This resolution aimed to withdraw the Corwin Amendment from further consideration by the state legislatures. It sought to halt the ratification process entirely. That same day, Anthony's joint resolution was referred to the Senate's Committee on the Judiciary. On the 11th of May 1864, Illinois Senator Lyman Trumbull received permission to discharge the resolution from committee. No further action was taken on Anthony's joint resolution. By this time, prospects for a Union victory were improving. The amendment fell out of favor during the Civil War and never achieved its goal of preventing conflict.

  1014

• 7. Legal Theories On Validity

  ›

  The Corwin Amendment never became law but could theoretically still be adopted by state legislatures today. Under the plain meaning rule, it would have made slavery immune to constitutional amendment procedures and interference by Congress. As a result, later Reconstruction Amendments like the Thirteenth, Fourteenth, and Fifteenth would not have been permissible. A competing theory suggests that only entrenched clauses of the original constitution can be protected from subsequent amendments. Under this view, a later amendment conflicting with an already-ratified Corwin Amendment could either explicitly repeal it or supersede it. The Twenty-first Amendment explicitly repealed the Eighteenth Amendment as one example of such a repeal. Modern legal arguments explore whether the amendment remains legally binding or was superseded by later changes.

  1718