Richmond enquirer. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1815-1867, 1832-03-27
,n FOR THE ENQUIRER.
THE DEBATE-No III

o.. IL.
Philosopher Square is longer an ideal character An
ene sect has arisen among who protesting TO follow III
hehs oil The age, pay blind Difference as he is sup
posed to have paid, TO the unalterabe rule of right and
the eternal Illness OF things. NY last number was do
voted 10 an examination OF their leading doctrine homo
have succeeded in showing that the natural riot If &
do claimed Tor the slaves OF Virginia. not quite so clear
as has been supposed least that right go Who'll
~ without guarantee that he who is said 10 possess il
against socety,Is yet dependent society," for the onv
SAFE means oil enforcing it, Ii would seem TO follow
without any great violence logic that society has g
10 withhold those means if its interest and safety Re-
quirc IT, Society may indeed if it see proper TO do so
deny Itself, by its conventional ACRE mens all CON
iro over this or other right subject How far orr
society," that is the State of Virginia has done 40 bv The
principles she has prescribed for her government MT i'm the
Bi oil Rights, Is the next topic Of inquiry in the natural
order of subject.
The abouoniss almost without exception have cbaro
ca upon the STAKEHOLDER violation in practice of pri4-
cipe which he has soemnly recognized in fundamental
article OF his government The great name of Mr. Jefer
son mas been invoked to give weight to this rcproach
yield to none in for the great character of Mr.
jefferson; but must be permitted to think that the au
hony OF his name is somewhat too freely used. prefer
TO be my own judge Of my rights as citizen of this
commonwealth. Inviting all who may read these
essays TO the same Independent exercise of Judgment
20 not despair OF convincing them either that Mr. Jeer-
son has not shown his usual precision of thought and Ian
guage IN this instance, else that he is improperly vouch
ed rs authority upon this point.
fhe rst article OF the Bill of Rights declares that "A
men are, Try Nature, equally free and independents and
have certain inherent rights, OF which, when they enter
mo society," they cannot by any compact deprive or dives
INC enjoyment oil lie and hbcrz
~ with the means of acquiring and possessing property
ana pursuing and obtaining happiness and safety"
Al analysis of the article, presents with the three
following propositions:
first-Ihat all men are, By Nature equally free apd
independent. "'
Second-That they possess IN a state Of Nature cer
tain Inherent rights, of which, when they enter into
state OF society they cannot by any compact deprive or
divcst their poSterity. "
Third-Tha these inherent rights are the endowment NJ
lille and liberty, with the of acquiring and possess
ing property, and pursuing and obtaining Happiness and
safety. ~
So far as the first proposition is concerned il is unneces
safy to 90 more than cali the readers attention toits terms
IT airns ha all men are by nature, equally free and in
dependeh'j not that they in state Of society The
popoon therefore, standing alone does not warrant the
conclusion drawn iromit by the abolionss and NAV be
either admitted denied with perfect safety 10 the present
argument, f'9'
The second md third propositions may be considered to-
getheF So far they relate to the present inquiry they
affirm that the right TO liberty, which every has in
state OF nature, is such that he cannot deprive his postey
" OF II by any compact which he may make when he
'ners into state OF society There is nothing here TO
support She idea that the right is inslienable' man
may ALLEVIATE II from himself although he cannot de-
prive his Postfrify Of it. The proposition supposes