State journal. [volume] (Montpelier, Vt.) 1831-1836, 1836-04-05

MR. WEBSTER ON ABOLITION.
UdShington, March Is

MR. WEBSTER ON ABOLITION.
Washington, March 18th.
In the Senate, to-day, Mr. Webster pre-
scented three or four abolition memorials
from different individuals in Boston, and
moved their reference TO the Committee
on the District Of Columbia He accom-
panied his motion with some brief remarks.
lie said he did not question the correctness
of the motives of those gentlemen, who vo-
ted in favor of the rejection of similar petit
lions. They believed that congress did not
possess the constitutional right to legislate
on the subject of slavery in this District :;
and if he had entertained the same opinion,
he should not have hesitated to vote as they
did. But he believed that Congress had
full power of Legislation over this subject in
the District of Columbia. No one conten-
ded that it could touch the subject in the
rcmotest manner in the slaveholding States.
But n vast potion Of the people of the
! North hold the opinion that Congress does
have jurisdiction over it here. The petit
TONERS pray for the abolition of slavery and
the slave-trade in the District. If Congress
have the power to grant their prayer, then
| is it bound to give it a hearing. This was
higher question than one of mere expe-
dencv. 1t involved a great constitutional
principle, which Mr. w. regarded MS of vital
interest TO the safety and the perpetuity of
the Union.
Mr. Webster bore testimony to the good
I character of many of the petitioners. He
did not consider them to be actuated by
party inducements, or to be mere specuIa-
tors for party purposes. A deep sense of
religious duty--a mistaken sense, in great
measure, he conceived it to be--was the
ruling principle of many in pressing this
subject upon the attention of Congress.
Mr. w. believed that the most iudicous
mode of quoting agitation and of restoring
| harmony would be to send forth a clear,
! dispassionate and convincing report--a re-
port covering the whole ground-which
should make plain the reasons, and they
arc many, why it is inexpedient, and almost
impractcable, to comply with the requests
Of the petitioners. This mode would be
better than any indignant and unexplained
rejection of their memorials or of the prayer
Of their Observation-Disclosures of the abolition
ISIS who meant well would be open to con-
viction, and on seeing the disastrous opera
ton of their measures, would desist from
their efforts; while those who meant ILL
whose sole object was agitalion-would be
distinguished from those who were really
honest and philanthropic in their inten-
tons.
Mr. Riyes, of Virginia, expressed his
qualification that the gentleman from Mas
sachusetts had distinctly conceded, that he
: would have voted against the reception OF
these petitions, had he believed that Con-
gress did not possess the constitutional au-
:horily to legislate on the subject. MIR Rives
entertained that belief, and he was not sure
as the Senate had hy great minority rejec-
ted the prayer of similar petitions, il could
not, with project propriety, refuse to receive
any more for the same object. He moved
that the petitions, with the motion for their
reference, should be laid upon the table
in order that he might consult with those
with whom he was bound to act on this &C.
casion.
Mr. King, of Alabama, made some pettl.
lent remarks, in the course of which he
expressed great dissatisfaction at the course
of Mr. Webster in Introducing these me-
MORALS, and "placing himself at the he al
of the petitioners"
Mr. Websler's rebulSc was calm and dir
,nifed. have not the means of doing ius
tlce TO it. He asked the member from Al
ALBANIA what he meant by putting him al
the head of the petitioners by placing him
in a station, to which he had never mani
tested his claim. He had expressed his
opinion upon the best mode of alaying
excitement upon question Of momentous
import. lie had pointed out what he con-
sidered the most effectual means for com
passing this object for maintaining the
constitutional rights of all sections OF the
Union, and restoring confidence and har-
! mony TO the various members of the con-
federacy. And for this was he to be stig-
malized rs heading the petitioners?
have given you but the shadow Of an
idea Of Mr. Webster's reply TO the con-
templihlc aspersion of the member from
Alabama. The reply was so manly and
dispasslonate, but at the same time cogenj
and effective, that Miss King appeared to
tGnS her head in very shame.
After some further discussion. in which
Messrs Mangum, Preston and Rives took
+ part, the petitions presented by Mr. Webster
and his motion 10 refer them were laid up
on the table. a motion 10 reject them
, shared the same fate.
The Albany Argus Of Tuesday says, eve
| Ia. a..