Constitutional Whig. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1824-1832, 1832-01-28

stitutional restrictions or projections thrown
around this kind of property, which w,li protect
no, amply rcmunerate the owner for his property;
and therefore, prevents the Legislature from pass
ing any enactment on this subject.
The second, whether the necessity OF the case rs
sufficiently great and imperative, to demand that
resort should be had to the supreme law ofnecessi-
"; and if, on investigation, the first question
shall be found to oppose no barrier anu inc second
To demand u decisive action, nysch VIII not NO.
state in the which duty prcscribcs TO me-
The gentlemen on the other side all admit that
slavery cannot be justified principle. They
say that no vii! defend the principle OF slave
~. but what do they mean, when thcy say that
the Constitutions. both State and Federal, project
them in their right to this property Neither the
State or Federal Constitution, Mr. Speaker, pro-
tectS them in such right tc this property 4" they
assume. They have neither of them thrown any
such defence around those rights which arc clai;n-
ed here, as gcntlcmen would iondiy imagine
The pocticai gentleman from Brunswick, (Alr.
Gholson,) whose brilliant Imagination and glow
ing fancy wealth and happiness IN our worn
out fields, whose gullics Indicated that the 'plow-
share of dcsolaton had passed over ihem;" who
saw In our revolutionary population, who heard in
the melancholy winds which sighed through the
tops of old field pine trees the soil, the wealth,
ana clear indications Of great and tiourishing
population, told us that the Federal Constitution
guaranteed the right of property III slaves. lie
crs us to the 9Th article of the amendments of the
United States Constitution by which IT is provided
tnat private property snail not be taken tor pub
lie uses without lust compensation" admit, Mr..
Speaker that il is true that private property can
not be taken, without adequate compensation, IL
taken from individual here for the use of that
Government. But il is a provision solely applica-
bio to those which the Federal Govern
men, i'll the exercise of her powers, and within the
sphere of her constitutional rights is compelled 10
take the property of the citizens of the States for
her uses 1t is Il rule prescribed to her, by which
the STATES and tho people OF the States are o be
protected i,lv ot
one by which the rights of property of individuals
are guaranteed to them, against the laws or mum
cipal regulations of that particular State of which
they may be momhcrs. II is u rule of action for
that Government not charter Of rights TO citizens
OF the States III the mode and manner and tenure
by which they hold their property in the State
L he gentleman farther supposcs, that the admis.
sion representation upon the Federal ratio goes
TO sustain the guarantee of property under that
Constitution. The precise contrary il tho result,
to which my mind is led by this fact. II seems &c
me, MIR. Speaker, far from recognizing them as
property, and guaranteeing the right in them al
such, 1T clearly and conclusvcly proves that thcy
are recognized as Pe'Sons-persons entitled to a
representation for three -ihs of their NUMBERS
III does not, Mr. Speaker, require that IRE should re
cognizc them as persons. 1t only limits the cx.
tent 10 winch hey Will recognize them as persons
beyond which we shall not go, but up to which we
arc not required to advance. That compact Mr.
Speaker, was not one IN which this principle was
neither directly nor indirectly Sotllcd and
w, IL "'Si ih 'Hc language OF q gentleman
this ioor nothing more nor less than "wol! driven
bargan"-a bargain in which We of the South
demanded and obtained from our Northern friends
privilege for our slaves, which VIC in orr own
representation, (until the era Of Our new Con
stitution,) never htd conferred either on them O,
/ thoir owners 1t docs, Mr.. Speaker seem TO mo
that The aid which the gentleman from Brunswick
invokcs from tho Federal Consultation to sustain
and protect his right to this species of proportv
entirely fails him. Ho must therefore, look 10
some other point for that constitutional sauctitv
which he hopes and believes sustains him in this
right of property. The gentleman bctakes himself
TO his State Constitution. He asserts that under
its phraseoogy, which is in The very words of the
Federal Constitution, there is an nsurmountab bic
barrier TO our objects and designs this occasion
lie says, that under tho l1th clause of the 3rd
article OF that Constitution, the Legislature is
prohibited from passing "any law whereby private
property shall be taken for public uses without lust
| compensation" deny, Mr.. Speaker, that under
| tins paragraph, slaves protected as property
they are not made property by this Constitution
admit that they are prOpcrty-but they are pro.
/ Pery undcr ne Statutes OF VIRGINIA The &c flo
man from brunswick Mr. Speaker saws that fine
.''eis of The Constitution were slave holders and
H. Nv - 'h"' tho considered them FRO.
perry under the Constitution, and entitled to lis
protection: that different construction provcd
I.at tney were either knaves or fools. l. Mr.
MT. Speaker beg leave to differ with the gentle
man. ii ne should arrive at either of these conclu.
slons. lhe gentleman from Rockbridre referred
thus House TO that clause in the Bill of Rots in
"hich 1T is asserted that cal; men, by nature ar.
equally free and independent" What, Mr.. Sneak,
er, is meant by this declaration? UnGuestionably
as human beings, Mr.. Spcakcr-thcy are en,by,ocJ
within the bounds of this broad extensive and
eternal truth-one that is laid down as the CORNER
stone OF all free governments But saws the
gentleman, they were slave -holders and therefore
could not have meant to declare them mon -
"Ihis was true declaration of natural risht and
not declaration of the powers of Government
or oi inc social obligations rights of propcrtv
Inc Bill Of Rights, Mr. Speaker, announced Inc
right-the Statute enforced the nccosstv nndor
which oHr foref;ithors acted
Sir, Mr.. Jefferson, whose hand drew tho nro,r,,I
TO our Bi OF Rights, has eloquenly remark cd that
we had invoked for ourselves the benefit of min
ciP'e winch we denied to others. He saw and fell.
mat slaves, as mel, embraced withi;, this
principle. And as of the heaviest grievances Of
which we complained in our separation from,
Great Britain, in the Declaration of Indepcnd
once lie declared, that they had violated our r.bt
ny prompting our negroes to rise in arms against
us-those very negroes, whom, by an inhnman uso
OF his negative he has refused us permission 10
exclude 10y law" In the original draft of that
instrument, IN his own hand writing, he alledocs
that 1reat Britain had wagcd cruel war against
human nature itself, violating its most sacroJ
rights of life and liberty in the persons of a dis
tant people, who never offended him. captivatinc
and carrying them into slavery in another Uctn;s
Phere, or TO incur miserable death in their trans
perlation thiher-this piraiical warfare the onnro
brium of iniidel powers is the warfare Of ,o
Shr'St'd" hing oil Great Britain, determined 10
keep open market where MES should be bou,ht
and sold" They were then, Mr.. Speaker, consi.
dcrcd as mon under the principle invoked but thew
were property under Statutes made by ordinary
legislatures. "Ihc objects ofdominion or proper.
~ are things as cOnradstinguishcd from DC sons
ana conceive that that provision in fine Comet
tntion winch guarantees property TO the citizen.
refers exclusively TO this common law definition
OF property. Sir, there is no Statute bv which
your your horse or your OK is declared to be property
Ihoy are so under this definition 'i'Eev an