State journal. [volume] (Montpelier, Vt.) 1831-1836, 1836-03-29
$&}opstess,

REMARKS OF MR. PRENTISs, OF VT.
On the question of reception Of Petition from
the Society Of Friends, praying for the abo-
ilion Of slavery in the District of Column
bia.
TUESDAY, March, /.
Mr. President: am unwilling that the vote
which shall feel myself obliged TO give upon
this question should be liable, from sllen &C on
my part, 10 any misconception. In all my
public acts, and on this occasion IN PARTICULAR
/ am DESTROYS that the grounds upon which
proceed should be distinctly known, so that no
misapprehension may exist, with respectto my
motives, here or elsewhere. cannot yield my
assent to some of the doctrines which have
been advanced in this debate and | wish 10
say just enough TO prevent the possibility OF
any inference that | acqulcsCe IN them
Sir, the abolition of slavery in the District OF
Columbia is n question, in all its aspects and
relations, OF great interest and dclicacy. 1T
is a question which have had no disposition
to ugitate, especially at this time; and at no
time would interfere, in the slightest manner,
with slavery as it exists in some Of the States.
In my public character, look upon slavery in
the States only as the Constitution Of the Uni
ted States looks upon it as State institu-
ton, existing under State laws, and subject
MS t is known 10 The Constitution, and would
not treat it otherwise than the Constitution
treats it. would leave it where the Consti-
tuition has left it, disclalming all power in
Congress over it; and would neither do nor
say any thing, in my public capacity here to
disturb the right in the species Of property, or
in any manner to endangcr its security
While say this, sir, in reference to slavery in
the States, am bound in candor and frank
ness, to say, that regard slavery in this Dis
trct in very different light.
The petitions which have been presented
here do not ask any interference, or assert any
power in Congress TO interfere, with slavery in
the States. They are confined 10 slavery in
this District They complain Of its existence
here as public evil, and ask the interposltion
Of Congress to redress the grievance. The
Senator from South Carolina (Mr Calhoun
has moved that the petitions be not received.
The Senator from Pennsylvania (Mr Buchan-
any proposes that the prayer of the petitions
be at once rejected.
Sir, cannot agree with either Of these mo-
tons. They differ, to be sure, in point OF
form, but the effect Of both, it appears TO me,
is substantially the same. The first in order,
the one now before the Senate, denies, in
terms, the right 10 petition at all on the subject.
The other it is true, does not, in form, deny the
right, it proposes TO reject the prayer of the
petitions Immediately, without hearing, and
without consideration. They ale both essen
TALLY preliminary motions, precluding alike the
usual reference and examination into both
the merits Of the petitions and, in my judg-
ment, they both, in effect, abrldge the right Sc
cured by the Constitution /; or, more properly
speaking, the right recognized by the Consti-
tuition as pre-existng right right original
and inherent in the People. If we can make
no law abrdging the right TO petition, we sure
ly can neither rightfully refuse TO receive pc
titon, nor reject it instanter, on its reception,
without hearing, without any inquiry into the
subject-matter
The distinction between rejecting the peti-
ton, and rejecting the prayer Of the petition,
Immediately on its being received, which is the
motion proposed by the Senator from Penn
yvania, is too refined and abstract, in my APP
prehension for subject of such common and
universal interest to the People as the privilege
and right to petition. The distinction,
must repeat, is, to my mind, unimportant, and
exists rather in form than in substance. The
character of the motion is not altered, or, at
all varied, by the circumstance, that the mo-
ton admits Of discussion. Discussion may be
had on almost any and every preliminary mo-
ton. Discussion, free and liberal discussion,
has been had on the motion not to receive
That motion is still pending; and if discus
sion is all that is TO be looked to, every object
has been attained, and gentlemen may as well
vote for that at once. The disposition propo-
sed to be given TO the petition, aiterit shall be
received, is equally summary, denying, as il
does investigation and consideration in the
accustomed forms Of preceding; and though
il may be formal and technical compliance
with the Constitution, it is, after all, to every
practical and essential purpose, equivalent to
a rejection of the petition itself. If we are
bound to receive, we are bound to hear and
consider; and an abrupt and premature reiec-
ton of the prayer Of the petition, if not de.