Richmond enquirer. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1815-1867, 1836-01-14

will now sir as brio iy az possible recur 10
the SUBJECT OF slavery within the District of Columbia
shall pass the Presbyterian Synod of Kentucky
merely remarkng that judging from this resolution they
seem to be TT companions for the abolition priests OF the
North who have led bi0us females so unwarily in.
to their schemes As the article quoted from the Rich
mond Enquirer have only to say, that the benevolence
oil ITS editor betrayed 'n into an error of which do
doubt he has long since repened As 10 the quotation
from the Richmond Wing, have only the same thing
TO say in either case, however, will remark that they
We're urging the State Government which had the
tituonal right to nterpose As the article signed
Sou,h Saroiinian, do moi Ieeve il was written by
Souih Carolinian, but by individual who assumed
'na name tor the purpose of giving force his
remarks, South Carolina being extensive sayeh hold
viii now, Mr. Speaker, approach the constitutional
question: aud would soenny ask it il to be seriously
argued that the sages of the Revolution understanding
huerty az tey understood II, would have manifested
much caution in the framing at the constitution by sau
ary restrictions upon this subject and yet have been
incanous 20 leave Congress i'm possession of this
power any where: Where is ittound5 IL il neither ex
pressed directly indirectly in any one of the prov
sions OF The constitutions Again, sir be believed
or one moment, that the States of Virginia and MARYLAND
VIC 'oi'os, IN thc ranks OF those who restricted the
power of the Federal Government would have qiven
up parton OF their citizens, in order that there might
oe ihii!cted upon them an unlimited, unmitigatrd and
Unrestricted desposn, rcserving even the right Of
representation: for the argument of the gentleman
from Vermont be true this Government within those
ter miles square despote as that of Russia or the
Grand Turk. Would the people OF Virginia and Mary
hu nave consented TO pass of portion of their citizens
Ton and restraint upon The power of Tie Federal Co
vernment over them Would they I'VE been willing
- nave erected despotism in the mds; of the Union;
S' cannot believe It, The very idea is preposerous
fortunately for us, however, there is proof positive on
.s SUBJECT. The language of the act of the Virginia
ccssion is clear, unequvooa and decisive unon the
point, and it viii be found answer every arpumcnt
urged by The gentleman from Vermont
me provso TO the of cesson by The Stale of Vir-
gnia IS In these words: Provided that nothing herein
con,alhed shall be construed 10 VEST in the United
S.a , any NIGHT of property in the SAID, az
ieet he rights OF individuals therein otherwise than as
., same snail or may be transferred by such individuals
TO The United States by this clause no roht of soil
pusSes congress cannot affect the right of individuals
~ e soil ohiy SO TAR as individuals may convey 10 the
United States, the reyersion the soil is in the State
OF Virginia is it net therefore most manifest that with
tnese reservations and restrictions Virginia regarded The
rights of the citizens of the District as eecuay secured
ana grarnnueo as they under her own Constitu
oi anu laws previous TO the ccssinn? Congress cannot
declare any ling designated and held as property moi
10 DC property, without express grant In relation 10
slaves the Constitution regards them as property and
guarantees us security If the power 10 abolish slavery
in The District of Columbia exists then tLe nenp. ~
inc District, although American citizens stand on a
o"uhg OF gross inequality for Congress is restrict.
ca as TO all other citizens then eInphatically ask il
Virginia and Maryland did dsfranchise this portion
OF teIr former elti2ens The language of the act of
essslon 10y Niaryand Is rather more equivoca but We,
'Ie spirit and design the same-when is seen The
Objects OF the cessun expressed in the preamble 10 ,e
act The reference to the Constitutions and the resnceJ
character OF the cesson property i'm the said lie
this question 'P'"
or "'ie Is another renson why the States of Virgiuia
aryah would not have been guilty of the excess
oil Jolly o making the cession unrestricted; and Which
proves the character of The provso referred to- and Is
ms; Maryland large slave hoding State ana
virginia lhe largest in the Union; and they both pro-
yided at their citizens should return to their
governments whenever the cedcd Territory should cease
10 DC used as The seat of the Federal Government
Now, SIR, cxngush slavery here and what do yo,, do
gu make railYng point Cor free negroes in The ar
Itne OF slavery itself Here might be gathered all tie
.saheeied and insubodinate spirits among the slave
population OF the surrounding States who might resort
here In such hordcs, thatthe citizens of the District would
DC unable to control or check them / saw sir tL, L.
gisatures of those States would not and conId nv,
nave been guilty Of the folly making such an unre
branch oil the subject not dceng necessary to repeat
ihe able and perspcuous views of my coeggue lar
W lse,) so torcbly expressed
But, MIR. Speaker, the question nov seems ia ,,. ho,
is this matter TO be decided Ii has come IN before us
ana, IN The language of gentlemen, il must be met
we all ADMIT TINS property guaranteed 10 us by The
constitutions and that Congress has no power to cg;sl
IN relation 10 it in any of The States The constiinon
al power TO DO is denied by every member mon lis
noor' why then was the constitutional power of the
Congress OF the United States restricted in relation n
ms SUBJECT Because it is property over which we in
uFiuuaiy have control, interviewer into orr system
ana the constitution has determined that ursdciio vor
IL sa not be Transferred from the domestic control of
me State governments TO that Of the Federal How
'neH IS inns question To be decided? do moi
Wish 10 AVOID vote upon il in the most direct man
ner; am prepared, sir, to meet it, come when i, |
VIII, whence IT will, and in whatever shane !, ma,
an willing TO make every Concession that gentlemen can
sK reasonably IN the form in which the decision of the
iouse sslal be- expressed that be decisive and eE
tcluai but cannot go far to record INV vote TO
affirm that slavery is evil. This is u subice, MIN
winch we have nothing do and my ind, dual oin;on
hteu not Dc cXpressed s0yy-sir, am Willing TO make
inc most loca concession that the nature of the case
WIN "'"t Now let rs investigate the true character of
The question under consideration. Our brethren of tl
DIh nave no direct interest in this question but our in
erTst Is directly at stake our lives liberty propertv nil
Is ~ danger III has not originated in the South nothin0
was heard Of IT until this Abolition society awakened our
eafs, and alarmed us for safety The question then *
will you quiet the people OF the South VIII Won decide
ie All brethren of the great Americas family and have
been associated together Tor upwards Of y years LET rs
then continue III the bonds of rateina love Jbe
southern people tell you, wish continue in iraer.
fd and their prospects bhghted by these harrassn in
references with their rights We ask then our bTeih
rem OF the North to quiet in the most decisive form
.hey can, consistent with their duties If they cannot
sustain all The propositions that have been presented
hey can either submit for some one tst shall he
considered decisive have disposed OF tle question Of
yihg thfso petitions the table; that course, il not de-
cS'e anu mol adequate TO the emergencies Of the occa
SON many gentlemen are unwilling 10 reject any uct
.os on 'he ground That is te constitutional riq of
inc ciiizen to petition. myself MIR Speaker have no
obJecion TO That course but prepared to vote not
oHy inat such petitions lie not rcceved bat If coud
10 so would vote that they should be all thrown iooe
her INTO the midst oil the Potomac.
Mr Speaker, let examine the proposition 70 re;c,
Wheh VIII hkcly follow reconsideration the reerncc
exeinpie Of the Senate during tic first session Of The G
Congress, 10 show that tie rejection Of this mo.
moral woulI be dsrcspcctiul Sir the cases nre moi
analogous II my recollection be right tic vote of The
othoc' III at case was not upon proposition reject
but upon proposition not 10 receive The paper 1bai
was more disrcspectful than ia rai.ct - =, -