Richmond enquirer. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1815-1867, 1836-02-04

substitute must stand or fall OH It's merits-and what
principle there in it which justified this fierce at
tack The resolution of tie committee: What mpuI-
ant difference there between the resolution and the
substitute, that the gentleman willing 10 incIIc de-
bac and divide the House upon il: If The difference
not essential, there sufficient reason Tor
atlng Schsn IN attempt to override The cuu"aIt-
tee If, the other hand, there was in the estimation
vi gcntlcnrn sufficient for putting all 1t haz-
ard let them act upon their opinions but let them pre-
pare to make good their before the people -
Mr. T. thought there differences between Tie
resolution aud the substitute, hut they such de-
cidrdy TO recommend the resolution. The committee
SAID ta All interference with slaves by the 'cItizcs
ol other States, invasion Of ghts The gen.
teIEn from Neckenburg had objected 10 Ibis, and de-
nird that the acts OF the citizens Of any Stale was
such an invasion. But what said his substitute? Why,
that the interference Of The ''peopc Of other States
an invasion oi our ghts. Surely lie did not
10 say that the committee wrong i'll ascribinE
that effect 10 the acts Of "ctzcns, who n part
OF the "pcoplc, which he himself aScriJcd 10 the
"peoplc:' Upon his grounds, the Resolution
oil tic cou!LItru ought 10 be acceptable to him.
III lhs respect, than his own, because II went no: so
far. Cut there one important difference between
the resolution and the substitute and if there were any
inclined 10 support the substitute he wished 10 know
whether it owing TO that difference. The Rcsou
ton declared that Int TO slave property was
recognized and guaranteed by tho Constitution Of the
United Satcsthc substitute omitted this point. Was
there any present who denied this fact thought
1t unfit occasion 10 express IT. lie trusted not
why did the substitute strike 1t OUT Again, the reso-
luton said that interference with slave property was
"invesve oi the rights Of the States and violates the
Constitution" The substitute called it an "inyasun oi
lights, contradstnsuislrd from invasion of the
rights vi the States and the Constitution Was there
any thing those differences TO recommend The suLsli-
tulc 10 Nlrginans: lie confidently denied that there
any other differences than those he had mentioned
One OF them was important. aud lie warned gentlemen
against voting for substitute, which, in effect did no.
thing than strike out the declaration that VIC haze
constitutional guaranty for slave property and tia,
interference with It violation of the Consti:u-
ton The inference would be inevitable ha. .hry de-.
cd the existence Of such guaranty or were unwilling
now 10 assert it. And this the substitute for the
sake Of which, the gentleman from McckirnLurg was
willing to provoke debate, and destroy the unanity
of that body.
Mr.. GARLAND suid he called upon 10 explain the
difference between the resolution Of he majority and the
one which he had offered substitute. The difference
was this The resolution of the minority called upon the
North to put stop TO the publications Of the abolition.
ists and punish and restrain such individuals should
do any thing to njure interfere with The interests OF
the South in relation their slave property These de-
mands the North could, and he believed would comply
with. The resolution Of the majority, the contrary
demanded that which the Northern States could moi