Lancaster gazette. [volume] (Lancaster, Mass.) 1828-1830, 1830-03-16

South. said only that it was highly wise
and useful in legislating for the north-wes-
tern country, while it was yet wilderness,
to prohibit the introduction of slaves and
added, that presumed, in the neighbouring
State of Kentucky. there was no rejecting
and intelligent gentleman, who would doubt,
that if the same prohibition had been extern
ded, at the same early period, over that
commonwealth, her strength and population
would, at this day, have been far greater
than they are. Ifthese opinions be thought
doubtful, they are, nevertheless, trust,
neither extraordinary nor disrespectful.
They attack nobody, and menace nobody.
And yet, sir, the gentleman's opticks have
discovered, even in the mere expression of
this sentiment, what he calls the very spirit
of the Missouri question! He represents
me as making an onset on the whole South,
and manifesting a spirit which would inter-
fere with, and disturb their domestick con-
dition! Sir, this injustice no otherwise
surprises me, than as it is done here, and
done without the slightest pretence ground
for it. say it only surprises me as being
done here; for know, full well, that it is,
and has been the settled policy of some
persons in the South, for years, to represent
the people of the North as disposed to inter-
fere with them, in their own exclusive and
peculiar concerns. This is delicate and
sensitive point, in southern feeling and of
late years it has always. been touched, and
generally with effect, whenever the object
has been to unite the whole South against
Northern men, or Northern measures. This
feeling, always carefully kept alive, and
maintained at too intense heat to admit
discrimination or reflection, is lever Of
great power in our political machine. 1t
moves vast bodies, and gives to them one
and the same direction. But the feeling is
without adequate cause, and the suspicion
which exists, wholly groundless. There is
not, and never has been, disposition in the
North TO interfere with these interests Of
the South. Such interference has never
been supposed to be within the power of
Government; nor has it been, in any way,
attempted. 1t has always been regarded
as matter of domestick policy, left with
the States themselves, and with which the
Federal Government had nothing to do.
Certainly, sir, am, and ever have been of
that opinion. The gentleman, indeed, ar
CUES that slavery, in the abstract, is no evil.
Most assuredly, need not say l differ with
him, altogether and most widely, on that
point. | regard domes.ick slavery as one
of the greatest of evils, both moral and po-
litical. But, though it be a malady, and
whether it be durable, and if so, by what
means or, on the otheihand, whether it be
vulnus immedicabiie ofthe social system,
leave it, to those whose right and duty it is
to inquire and to decide And this believe,
sir, is, and uniformly has been, the senti-
ments of the Nnrth. Let US look little at
the history of this matter.
When the present Constitution was SUBJ
mitted for the ratification of the People,
there were those who imagined that the
powers of the Government which it propos-
ed to establish might, perhaps, in some pos
sible mode, be exerted to measures tending
to the abolition of slavery. This sugges-
ton would of course attract much attention
in the Southern Conventions. In that of
Virginia, Gov. Randolph said:-
81 hope there is none here who consider
ing the subject in the calm light of philoso-
ply. will make an objection dishonourable
to Virginia-that, at the moment they are
securing the rights of their citizens, an OBJ
lection is started, that there is a spark of
hope that those unfortunate men now held
in bondage may, by the operation of the
General Government, be made free"
At the very first Congress petitions on
the subject were presented, IL mistake not,
from different States. The Pennsylvania
Society for promoting the abolition of Slav-
cry took lead, and laid before Congress a
memorial praying Congress to promote the
abolition by such powers as it possessed.
This memorial was referred, in the House of
Representatives, to select committee, con-
sisting of Mr.. Foster, of New Hampshire /;
Mr.. Gerry, of Massachusetts,; Mr.. Hunting
ton, of Connecticut; Mr.. Lawrence, Of
New York, Mr.. Snnickson, of New-Jersey (;
Mr., Hartley, of Pennsylyania, and Mr.. Par
ker, of Virginia all of them, sir, as you
will observe, northern men, but the last.
This Committee made report, which was
committed to b Committee of the Whole
House, and there considered and discussed
on several days; and being amended, al
though in no material respect 1t was made
to express three distinct propositions on the
subjects of Slavery and the Slave Trade.
First, in the words of the Constitution, that
Congress could not, prior to the year 1908,
prohibit the migration or Importation of such
persons as any Of the States, then existing,
should think proper to admit Second, that
Congress had authority to restrain the citi-
zens Of the United States from carrying on
the African Slave Trade, for the purpose of
supplying foreign countries. On this propo-
sition, our early laws against those who en-
gage in that trafick are founded. The
third proposition, and that which bears on
the present question, was expressed in the
following terms:-
" ResoIved, That Congress have no author
ity to intefere in the emancipation of slaves,
or in the treatment of them in any of the
States; it remaining with the several States
alone to provide rules and regulations there
in, which humanity and true policy may re-
quire."
This resolution received the sanction Of
the House of Representatives so early as
March, 1890. And now, sir, the honoura-
BILE member will allow me to remind him,
fhof mi oulv wara the .salact cnnnnsitfoo