Richmond enquirer. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1815-1867, 1832-03-27

compact by which he agrees to surrender the right TO
himself 1t will be long time trust, before this axiom
Of liberty can be safely denied in Virginia But TO whom
does Il apply! None claim its protection, under
strict construction OF Its terms except the pos'enty OF
those who "entered into society," In order to ascertain
who these are Is look back TO the original
elements OF which each society composed. II would
imagine, puzzle the ingenious gentlemen OF the Legis-
ature to find the beginning point OF this enquiry far
as Virginia Is concerned. Let il begin where it will,
however, may safely affirm that the African formed no
part OF those original elements; ne party
social compact, in any form whatever. How then
can he claim the protection of Bill of Rights the
ground that he is the poserty Of those who deprived
into state Of society,"" 1t is manifest that his claim to
freedom can derive support from the strict letter of that
instrument.
The lawyers Of the House may perhaps reply to this,
qui h9rein Mera herei in cortice The principle of the
Bill oil Rights whatever be its letter. is founded in
eternal justice and announced by the trainers of the
Constitution perpetual and controlling rule of right
to be applied through all time, to all who should live
under that Constitution. This ground has been, in point
offac taken by the aboitionists and promptly taken from
them again, in the OF this debate Indeed, the
reply is obvious Slavery existed when the Constitution
Of which the Bill of Rights is part formed and the
very who formed il, and who of best
quanted with their own meaning and intentions, did not
consider 1t as applying to slaves. Contemporaneous
position is the best rueof construction, either for Cons,
tuons or Laws auhappy to be able to agree with at
least of the abotionists in least Of his OPT
Mons He gives the true rule upon this point That in
strumen only be understood purporing TO declare
the rights Of those who formed the body polite at the
time OF its adoption had supposed that this rule of
construction generally received, that il would
not be brought into question: by any we'll Informed man.
There IL yet another view of this subject which may
possibly place the argument upon favorable ground
for the aboitionists Let us suppose them to that
tho right being inherent in the indvdua in his native
country, and in his condition of nature he could not with
out his own CONSENT and his posterty could not,
scih his CONSENT be deprived OF it, any time in any
places and OF COURSE that followed him and his descend
ants through all time, and in every place, the pre-
sent time and in Virginia This proposition is actually
affirmed by of the speakers and the conclusion
l.; The I,rivn itlpc ia in
general, better than the title from which it is
derived, and as the slave Cor his ancestors) was
originally deprived of his freedom by injustice and vio-
ence therefore he is in point of fact free here he
ought to DC, in Africa. will pause enquire into
the proprety OF using the words "rght and 'itle, Ell
ther as SYNONYMOUS convertible The speaker
has but followed the example by his -adjuors i'm
stating his proposition without due precision
language Let us how far his conclusion is warranted
ny his premises What was this right il existed i'm
Africa! Certainly it right under Bill of Rights
nor under anyoher of our nventiona guarantees He
mas them nothing more than that 'natura right which
nave already examined and which has been shewn be
little better than no right at ALL But admit have been
never so perfect when and how was taken away? Not
certainly by the present by any other Vr-
ginians, since had civ compact" of our own The
slave trade has been permitted by our laws since
the revolution, and it was very unwiingly submitted
uhuer the Colonial Government. Indeed it was, has
been remarked in the of the debate prominen nj
cause OF complaint against the British Crown and one
which justified us, as ioreathers thought in shaking
OH our allegiance to II, that ii made inhuman oil
s negative, in refusing permission exclude negroes
oy law The original wrong then, done by us II
so, new proposition in political ethics must be
IN favour oil the aboonss, before they any aid
from this view of the subject How far is one community
under moral obligation TO redress the wrongs done by
another community Is there any dictate of Natural JUS
uce wncn comPeis us to repair the injuries done by Eng
ianh, Holland, France and SPAIN or even by Rhode
.; T are we under any such high obligation to
counter consideration all the injuries done by any and
every individual of those countries! The question admits
oil but one answer. But than this is demanded
by the aboilionists. Their proposition If il be worth any
thing argument goes the whole length of asserting
that epery social State is bound bu an OBLIGATION SUI
perior to all The conventional loos and obligations OF
that social State to guarantee By pO,cer of the State
right belonging to state Of nature and that, too, in
Jauour ~ every man, tc0nGn and child in the tcorid
achefher member Of that social state not! Every
one must perceive that nothing short of this can give any
right to the slave, or impose any obligation the State
virginia In reference to that right this aspect of the
case. And yet this most extravagant dea-this very
quixotism OF political philanthropy, is gravely said TO EN-
ter as controlling principle, into Bill Of Rights
10 supcrsede and annul rights of property which have
been recognised aud secured, by hundred acts of As
semoiy Such an exhibition of argumenative intrepid.
would oe indeed surprising in any other debate but this
bu let US allow the abo0nsts still further shift tn
position We told by of the speakers that although
we were not the original doors OF the wrong permit
and thus pcrpetuae among us; or in his own classical
language, he receiver is bad the thief" Leaving
the complimentary application of this adage to speak its
own language in Gears politc let least claim the
negative merit of being toiLng receivers; the wrong
IN this respect was forced upon by a compulsion
which we could not resist. This consideration GER
tany weakens very much, the force of the obligation
whch the mere liberation of slavery is said TO i'm
pose on u.s. Let however, take no benefit from this
exception, but conccde TO the argument all the power
1t can claim Let be admitted that if the wrong exis,
among us by whomsoever committed, il is duty TO
rect it, Sill the enquiry remains what is the nature and
orient oil that duty? Ii appears me TO be the precise
coreaye OF the right If the right in the slave be aso-
ute the duty on the master is Imperative and not other
tctse IL, therefore, the aboonss have failed in es,b
fishing right the slave, absolute and paramount they
must abandon the hope of fixing the duty ON the master
asimperative and Indispensable In truth however this
proposition clearly correct ;oa certain extent and il will
readily be admitted with its proper qualifications The
principles OF eternal justice do certainly impose duty on
The maser but that duty like all Others must he estima-
ted and weighed with reference all other duties and ob
cations, spnnging from the social state and eura
necessary TO its existence and prosperity This the true
view oil the question, and this is, undoubtedly quite as
nuch as HT Jefferson eUer meant To AFFIRM IL is great
y to be regretted that the abolitonss have not
themselves with this agound. We should i'm that casr
nave escaped much crude and considered doctrine and
been shocked with less of insurrccionary matter II has
pleased them however TO take bolder ground unable
tend in fair field, they have attempted to carry their
sares by STORM, in which all order of battle Is lost and
ana conduct can avail nothing in the uproar and confusion
attack Hence this attempt to bear down the slave
ny theories engendeed in dreams by exploded consruc-
tons OF the Bill of Rights; and by unmeaninc camor oans,
at gross injustice which charged upon us as an act
personal and national dishonor Its i'm this view onlv
mat have hitherto denied the rghtof the slave and re-
ss'e9 ,ne imposition OF any duty the master rejoice
st nave al length approached the true ground of en-
qulry the ground Of power in the Legislature and rich,
IN the shareholder, prescribed and guaranteed i'm otr
constitution rms enquiry being disposed Of we shall be
aoe 70 say WIN some degree OF precision, what are the
real rights OF the slave, and what the duties of te master
81 may pot be altogether Improbable TO suggest TO tbc
eboHhonss consequence Of their doctrine which NAV
perhaps, satisfy them ti1 would not be quite so vala
Ole IN practice II is charming in theory If the slaves
are free entitled 10 be free undCr our Bill of RIGHTS
IN In nlo hon I,N.E