The enquirer. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1804-1815, 1805-01-15


felvcs pay the tax? No doubt there may be
objections to this arrangement but it is almoa
better To do any thing, than TO aboliih the glo-
ross right of emancipation.
There were other considerations of boi.ty
which deierved attention. Our laws ought %
give general fatisfaeton and il would be un-
wife and impotic, to pats a law without fone
hyperion benefit which may be expected TO arfe
from it. There a vaf number of people,
who labour under the fcrupes of confidence
and think it wrong to keep their fellow creatures
IN ilavery. Such law as this would dtturb
their feelings and interrupt the general har-
mony. During lait ieiiion, law was paled to
prevent the unlawful meeting of ilaves. It is
fact well known from every mans perional ex-
perience, and IT'LL further from the various De-
titiops brought from different parts OF the coun-
try againn it that this law was obnoxious To
many confcientious perfons. Butthe bill upon
the table would DC more 70, as it more directly
tended to wound the confidence of the fcrupu-
lous.
But let us enquire, faid Mr.. 3. how it will af.
fed The ilaves themtelves. Gentlemen will fay,
that thofe who are in bondage will fuffer more
becauie they fee others free. But would it be
any amslioration in the condition of fave to
fee others placed in the fame condition Are we
not rather pleafed 10 fee our friends happy even
if we ourieves are miferabie And if this be
true in any other Guation in life is it not equal
ly true, OF the condition of fave It might be
Gated, in the fecond place, that thcft negroes
would be worfc, becaufe they were free: or, in
other words, that free negroes worfe than
F! ilaves. IT'S true that thefc negroes are fome-
times idle, and addicted to fteang. But even
theie evils are not 70 pernicious as the one which
emancipation may prevent. The principal
iource of our approximations ought to coniift in
! inturrcction. And from whom is this to he
looked for ! Not from freetnen becaufe tine
| notive Tor iuch an attempt would be to acquire
| freedom and it would be paradoxical to fay,
that thoie who already polTefsthis benefit would
make any exertions to obtain it. Ifnot from
treemen then that this evil is to he apprehended,
will it be neceiiary to fay from whom
! Again, faid MIR. B. let us enquire how the
ilaves will be affected by this hill What motive
have they for obervi.g regular and friendly
| department As ito overt acts, fear will refrain
them. But as 10 thofc private aGfs, which vio-
late no law, and which confilt rather in what
| they might have done than in what they actual
! ly do, what motive operates upon them It is
the hope ofreward and what reward is more
fcductive than the acquiftion of freedom IF
this were deRroyed, what fecuritv can we have
OF the fidelity Of our llaves? Suppofc fervant
knows that tome harm is to happen 10 his maj
ter; can he have itronger Indictment 70 inform
him Of i and put him upon MS guard, than the
! Proipe6t of emancipation !: Experience too con-
firms this petition. The infureGtion that was
meditated within the laft few wears, was pre-
vented by the information Of fome who were
concerned in it; and their fidelity was after
wards rewarded by the prerent of their free
dom. In every point of view, then, it would
appear beft for the ilaves, to expect and to OBJ
tain this privilege from their matters.
But how will this fubieGt ftand as 20 our 90
4 MI
mott iacred, Detroy a Jingle PANEL in our
contribution and you deitroy the whole. The
lift ciauie iays, that all men are by nature equal
aud independent. Already have we violated
this declaration. But the prefent meafure
would do fill more. BY adopting it we fhould
not only permit, but promote 1avery. And
why ihould we blacken our Journals with a
law, which mutt tend to perpetuate it a-The
lait clauie declares that confidence ought to be
free. But confidence whifpers to many men,
that they ought not to maintain man in bon
dage. lfthen the prefent bill is pafed, will it
not conflict with confidence? Thefe men conf
der tfer religion rs the law Of God: and If we
pals this bill, we hall place them between two
contrary and conflicting laws. IF they turn to
the right, they rlcct the law or God and If TO
the left, then our law will and directly in their
way. It is immateTial whether thefe men are
right or wrong in theirbelief: for in either cafe,
thtir confidence would be equally wounded.
Why then faw and abufe their feelings There
would be only one alternative left to them
They muft fly our country. IF they remain
among US, they muf aGt contrary to their con-
tcience: and we ihoud thus banilh from our
country, many of thole very men who took I'D
arms in its defence, and contributed to eftablifh
our independence.
Mr.. Bird concluded by faying, that he had
attempted to prove that the prefent bill ought
not to pats, whether he con6dered its influence
upon our revenne the policy Of it as it refpeets
mqRerJj its policy as it refpe6s the Raves
and the fdcred proviGions Of the contribution.
Mr.. Smyfb(of Wythe) was forrry to rife up
on this floor to oppofe any part of the liberty of
the human race. Should any apology be requir-
ed for this apparent dereli6tion of his political
principles, he would rel his vindication upon
the desperate necef1ity of the cafe itfelf. He
was notoPpolcd on abhrae principles to the
freedom OF this melancholy race. Were it fri
made quefion before the Legislative body,
whether iervitude fhould be tolerated here
Whether thefs unfortunate victims hould be
introduced into our country, he fhoud not he
htate to give it his mott decided negative. He
as well as other men had abhorred that pernici-
Gus policy, which dragged the innocent Afri-
cans from their native plains, and fibie6ted
them to thedeipotic power of foreign country.
Dsrlng the prefent FELTON, he hoped he had al
IN. ii