Martinsburg gazette and public advertiser. [volume] (Martinsburg, Va. [W. Va.]) 1826-1833, 1832-03-15


p:eted; they wspld then be reduced to tn,
level Of the beasts Of the field. and we shoulc
oe safe: and am net certain. that we wou't
not dn It, # we could find out the necessar.
process; and that under the plea Of necessity
put, SIR, this is impossible; and can man hs
IN The midst Of freemen. and not know what
freedom Is? can he feel that he has the pew
er TO assert hls liberty, and viii be net do III
fes' sur, with The certainty OF the current oil
Time, will he do it whenever he has the pow
er Oar, to prove that the time will come
need offer no other argument than that oil
arithmetic, the conclusions from which are
clear demonstrations on this subject. The
Data are before US all, and every man can
WORK out the process for himself Sir a
death struggle must csme between the two
classes. IN which one or the other must be
extinguished forever Who can contcm
plate such catastrophe a. even posi- ie,
and De indifferent, inactive? SIR, the rikn,
oil property IN the colored class general,
mas been brought into this debate, and an
sorry Tor u; II rs not TO be treated in the ao-
stract. But think our Eastern brethren are
TO blame FOR il; they rather ariogsn,ly All
vanced their right Of property, as an insupe
rsoie barrier TO our doing any thing for the
removal Of the evil Of slavery, and rather
challenged an investigation Of their tile, and
u has been rather rudely handled in this d,
bate Yet, sir, am for maintaining the
bonds oy which we hold this propert, nosr,
with ilrmness and with sigilsace: because il
Is necessary 10 the putlic safety that We
should DO so. AMI because there are vested
rights 10 their property. under the aw a. IL
NOW is. Sir, | should be clad that ,h,s
House should declare unanimously, thai tn,
rflatfDus - "A 4
not now be disturbed. that none of the pre-
sent generation should bc renewed. cxceot
those who may be given up voluntarily But
SIR, the plea OF necessity will not answer in
Bar t. scheme Tor the future, gradual.
emancipation and remuyal of this class that
10 within our power. The evil was gradual
~ eotailed upon us, and can only be gradual
~ removed | admit, that we are not to be
blamed for the origin Of this evil among Us.
we are not to be blamed for its existence
now, but we shall deserve the severest cen
sure, u we do mol take measure. as soon As
possible to remove 1t. Sir, every obligation
OF justice and humanity demands, the satet,
oil the Repubhc demands the adoption OF 4
system which shall produce The cennin, gra
duai emancipation and removal of this
whole class. To ilberate tho after be.n i.
obviously practicable, il has been recon
mended by the immortal Jefferson, whose
copnseis we have followed in so MANY
things, with such signsl benefits, bat have
totally dlsreearded in this; it has lcea done
by our sister States; aad th. only objection
OF anJ isrce, that have heard urged, i. tle
constitutional one, founded upon the aitenu
ated; contemplate right % property in these
aiteF-born children. which placed in com
petItlen with the lives of our sous and
daughters, to the remotest generations, IN
competition with the very existence Of this
Republic Sir, am sick with the ella n our
IN this debate, about this property, this
wealth | consider it all, as mere trash,
when weighed against the pubic safety
liz right o! property in slaves is entirely
The creature oil the positive Law, all our
rules ofpropcrty are under the control of The
Legislatures; oar law Of descents, distribution,
&c can De altered by the Legislature waen
ever u shall seem expedient, and soTtsori
car tbs Legislature alter tire rule with re-
gara to property ia slaves, because The right
is purely the creature Of the Legislature
The law now is, that the children OF slaves,
sball be slayes to the owner ofibe mother,
but will il be commended tsat this Las. can
never be altered? IS II 10 be perpetual, will
no necessity justify change? The idea is
ridiculous SIR, there is an important dit
ference between rested rights, and rights not
Uesfes, between pfespectsUe, and retrospec
tiee legislation Ii a child be bora OF slave,
under the law as it now is, the right becomes
vested in the owner Of the moiaer. and we
could not consistently with the Constitution,
perhaps, take the Guild from the master;
without compensation, Why not, Because
tits vested right under the statue Hut
can we not leglsiate prospecticety, on thus
subject? can we not declare that the chill
dren Of slaves born ten, twenty or fifty
years hence. snail not be slaves, but shall
he free? If we cannot do this, then indeed
eur statue is perpetual, and the present
owner of female slave has an indefeaslbie
estate IN her descendants for one huadred
generations to come; in fact forever, THIS
is absurd. The right to slaves no,o IN being
is vested; the right TO those 10 be born is a
mere possibility; il the law remain as II now
is, the right may vest; if il is altered, the
right will not vest How could you compen
safe slave owner for the possibility OF in
crease ten years hence? what would be the
measure or valnep Sir, IN abolishing the law
OF primogeniture, we could not have taken
from the eldest son, an estate which had
vested in him, and have divided il equally
among his brothers and sisters and himself
Why not? Because the right bad vested
But we could pass a law altering the rule o.
property prospeciively. directing that in
stead OF all the land going to the eldest son
il should pass to all the children equally
4 Ii Al IL =.