Richmond enquirer. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1815-1867, 1832-02-09

Imperative, demand that rcsort shol
De mad 10 the supreme law of necessity; and it. ON ves
gaton tho first question shall be found TO oppose no bar
1er, and the second 10 demand decisive actions ny
sen VIII not hesitate in the course which my duty pre-
scrbes TO r.
The gentlemen the other side all admit that slavery
cannot be JUSTIFIED on principle. They say that no mai
VIII defend the principle Of slavery Blu; what do they
mean when they say that the Constitutions both State and
ederal protect them in their right TO this popery Neihe
ne State or Federal Constitution Sir projects them in such
ght 10 tins property they assume They have noitbe,
oil them thrown any such defence around those ricbt
which are claimed here, gentlemen would ondly magnc
nc poet!cdl gentleman from Brunswick CIr Gholson)
whose brilliant Imagination and glowing fancy saw wealth
ana happiness III our worn out fields whose suies In
cod that the ploughshare of desoation had passed
haan, VINO , saw IN our revolutionary population, who
nearu IN the melancholy winds which sighed through the
tops oil our old field pine trees the soil the wealth. and
GEAR n,icalions oil great and ourishing populations
told us that the Federal Constitution ga ntesd The
oil property in slaves He refers the 9th article of
the amendments of the United States Constitution nv
whch II Is provided that private property shall not be
taken Tor public uses without just compensation adj
NIT, Mr. Speaker, that ii is true, that private
cannot be taken, without adequate compensation If taken
rom am individual here FOR In. of that Government
nut IL IS provision solely applicable those cases i'm
which the Federal Government, i'm the exercise of her
powers and within the sphere of her constitutional rights
compelled TO take the property of the citizens of the
states Tor her uses 1t rule prescribed TO her by
which the States and the people of the States are TO be-
protected against that Govenmentcer certainly not one by
Whch inc nghtso property OF individuals are guaran-
eeu 10 men, against the laws or municipal regulations
that particular State OF which they may be members IL
Is re Of action for that Government, charter of
rights TO citizens OF the States in the mode and manner
and tenure by which they hold their property in the STATE
The gentleman farther supposcs, that the admission
OF representation upon the Federal ratio goes 10 sustain
inc guarantee OF property under that Constitution The
precise contrary is the result TO which my mind is led bv
this act 1t seems to me, Mr.. Speaker, so far from re-
Gogzng them as property and guaranteeing the right in
them as such, clearly and conclusivey proves that
they arc recognized persOns-persons entitled TO
representation for three-iilhs of their numbers-It
does not Mr. Speaker require that ave should recornize
III IN hcl n hon
VIII recognize them persons: beyond which we shall
go out up to which we are not required advance
That compact Mr.. Speaker, not one in which This
principle was neither directly indirectly settled and
established; was in the language OF gentleman once
On lis oor' nothing more nor less than well driven
bargain "a bargain in which OF the South demanded
ana obtained from our Northern friends privilege for or
saves which we In our representation (until the
era OF our new Constuon0 had conferred either
on them their owners. 1t does Mr. Speaker seen 10
me, that the aid which the gentleman from Brunswick in
vokcs from the Federal Constitution to and protect
MS right TO this species OF property entirely fails him. He
must therefore ookt other point for that constitutional
sanctty which he hopes and believes suans him in tb
rghto oil property The gentleman beakes himself TO his
STATE Constitution lie asserts that under its phrascoopv
which is in the very words OF the Federal Constitution there
Is objects and designs on this
cle OF that Constitutions, YGsItee Lib CLAUSE Of the 3rd
passing 'any law whereby private property shaft en
for public uses without just compensation deny, Mr.
Speaker that under this paragraphs slaves protected
property-they are not made property by this Con-
s'itution. l admit that they property but they
are property under the Statutes of Virginia. The gem
teman from Brunswick, Mr.. Speaker, says that the
trainers of tho Constitution were shareholders and
and that they considered them property un
der the Constitutions and entitled to its projections that
different construction proved that hoy either knaves
or FOOLS j. Mr. Speaker beg leave to differ with the gen.
teman, if he should arrive at either of these conclusions
The gentleman from Rockbrdge referred this House TO
una, clause In The Bill oil Rights in which is asserted that
call men, by nature, equally free and independent"
What Mr. Speaker is meant by this declaration IN
questionably as human beings Mr.. Speaker-they are
embraced within the bounds of this broad, extensive and
eternal truhone that is laid down as the cornerstone
of all free Governments But, says the gentleman they
were shareholders, and therefore could have meant
TO declare them Ths was true of ma
tura right and not declaration of tho powers of Govern
ment, of the social obligations rights of property"
The Bill of Rights, Mr. Speaker, announced the right
the Statute enforced tho necessity under which our fore
fathers acted
Sir, Mr. Jefferson, whose hand drew the preamble to
Bill of Rights, has eloqueny remarked that VIC had
invoked for ourselves the benefit of principle which we
denied TO others He and felt that slaves as men,
were embraced within this principle And of the
heaviest grievances of which complained in our sepa-
ration from Great Britain, in The Declaration of ndepen-
dcnce he declared, that they had violated rights by
prompting negroes TO rise in against us-those
very negroes whom, by inhuman of his negative
he has refused permission 10 exclude b. law In the
original draft of that instrument in his hand writing
he alleges that Great Britain had waged cruel war against
human nature itself, violating its most sacred rights of life
and h6eryn the persons OF distant people who
offended him, captivating and carrying them into slavery
in another Hemisphere or to incur miserable death in
their transportation thhcrthis praca warfare the OPP
probrum of nlldel powers is the warfare of the Chris
tidn King of Great Britain, determined TO keep open
market where MEN should be bought and sold" They
were then, Mr.. Speaker considered under the
principle invoked but they property under Statutes
made by ordinary Legislatures. The objects of dominion
property things contradisnguished from per-
sons; and conceive that that provision in the Consu
ton which guarantees property TO The citizen, refers
exclusively to this common law definition of property
Sir there Statute by which your horse or Your OK
declared to be property They under this definition
They property per see, and the declaration which
guarantees property to the citizen embraces them, the
| natural legitimate objects of property.
IL was, therefore, that slaves which not property
by the common law, were made 80 by statutory enact
ments-a statutory enactment which, by the operation
mere law, has erected they suppose, nsurmounta
BILE barrier TO those natural and unalenabe rights, which
cannot dvest ourselves of, of which Others
dvest The slave has natural right TO regain
his liberty-and who has high right TO reduce them
TO slavery again. In two Of the States Of this Union
Massachusetts and Now Hampshire, the declaration in
the Bill of Rights, has, OF itself abolished slavery. No
that would abolish here, under the authority Of thai
declaration.They made property here by the sta
tutethey property under the statute, and they mus
remain property until that statute is repealed that statute
the result OF necessity, imposed upon by the
British Throne; but il is such statute can be repealed
/ by this Assembly. The power which this Legislature
possessed Of declaring what shall be property also enables
it to declare what shall not be property. All that claim
on this question: is that when the public necessity de-
mandng their emancipation is greater than the public
cessy for their retention slaves that then it is in the
power of this any subsequent Legislature 10 repeal this
statute NJ friend from Berkeley Mr Faulkner) nigh
have gone farther in tc principle which he advanced thar
that the post natl not such property as the
of their parents could not be Invested Of II TO
TO result from the power inherent in this body Of decar
ing what should be considered property, and rcpcaiin
any laws which have heretofore declared what prOper
us the other day, that not the value OF the propcr
involved in this question that made him tenacious Of it.
that it the principle for which nc commended. IT
adopts the language, "mions for defence not 10
. firth hat he ia