The voice of freedom. [volume] (Montpelier, Vt.) 1839-1848, 1839-06-15
N UNE EsEEs FL.

sons against it is the same which has deferred mo
from ever giving any aid or countenance TO the
Colonization Socety-its impracticabiIitv.
The immediate abolition of slavery in the Dis,
trict of Columbia is utterly impracticable.
First, because the public opinion throughout
the Union is against it. This public opinion
throughout all the slave States is unanimous or
so nearly so that no one dares to avow an opinion
q favorable to the measure. No member of Con-
gress from any one of the States where slavery is
established, would dare to vote for it, nor could he
return with safety to his person among his con-
stituents if he should.
Nor is the public opinion, in any one of the
non-savehodng States, with the possible excep.
ton of Vermont, favorable 10 it. The party of
the present Administration are universally against
it, if not in opinion, at least in action. All the
strength of Mr.. VAN buren, in the South rests
exclusively upon the pledges that he has given
against this particular measure, All his friends
IN the North must and do sustain him in it. The
Aboitionists are yet small, and, lament to say,
a most unjustly prosecuted party in all the free
States. 1t is their martyr age, and as they are in
a great measure actuated by religious principle,
they suffer with the spirit of martyrdom-an in
vincible but necessarily an unsuccessful principle,
inasmuch as success leaves itno scope for action
The immediate abolition of slavery, therefore,
in the District of Coum bia, is no more in the
power of any member of Congress to effect than
the immediate abolition of polygamy at Constan-
tinople, or the immediate abolition of widow burn
ing in Hindostan and if it were possible even to
introduce into the House of Representatives bill
to that effect, should vote against it so long as
should know it to be not only unwecome but obi
Gus, to at least four-ffths of the People through.
out the Union.
In special manner should | be opposed to the
enactment of law to operate exclusively upon
the people of the District of Colu abba, against
the will of that people, and in compliance with
petitions from persons not to be affected themselves
by the law. This is contrary to the first prnci-
Piles of our institutions. The Declaration of In.
dependence derives all the just powers of governs
ment from the consent of the governed When
the People are represented in the Legislative As
sembly, the consent Of the whole must be inferred
from the voice of the representative majority but
when the People are to be bound by laws emana-
ting from Legislative assembly wherein they
have no representatives their will must be ascer-
tanned by manifestations from themselves. Now
it is certain that great majority of the inhabitants
of the District utterly averse to the abolition
of slavery among them by law, and would consid-
er it as unconstitutional violation of their rights
of property. | hold the opinion that one human
being cannot be made the property of another
That persons and things nre by the laws of Ma
ure and of Natures God, so distinct that no hui
man laws can transform either into the other~-
But this is not the opinion of the people of the
District of Columbia and in the enactment of
laws to bear exclusively upon them, and not upon
myself or my immediate constituents, | must be-
governed by their will and not by my own.
These two reasons-the impracticabilitv of ac-
by law measure of transcendant i'm
portance against the public opinion of four-fGhs
of the nation, and the injustice Of enacng law
against the will of those upon whom it is TO bear,
and against the will of oilers upon whom it is
not to operate at all-have been, and will contin-
ue to be, decisive with me against any proposal
in congress for the immediate abolition of slavery
in the District of Columbia. Either of them
would, if alone, bring me to The same conclusion.
And indeed these have been among tic reasons
OF my anxious desire that your Petitions particu-
larly for this measure should not only be received
by the House. but deliberately considered refer
red to the Committee for the district of Columbia,
or 10 q select committee reported upon, and free
ly discussed by the House. have believed, and
still believe, that after such full and free dis
cussion any bill for the immediate abolition of
slavery in the district of Columbia, should COM
mittee even report such bill, would be rejected
in the House by majority of at least four to
one and have hoped that, if not all, great null
titudes of YOU would, in the result of such dis
cussion, become convinced that the time has not
vet come when Justice herself would be satisfied
with the immediate abolition of slavery in the Dis,
trict of Columbia. Your rights at least would be
involatc. l trust that full consider
alton by yourselves Of the injustice, under all pos
sible circumstances, of legislation over people
against their will, at the demand Of another people
not subject to the law themselves, would deter you
from perseverance in pursuit, your only motives
t, which are the dspensation of justice toall. But
should it prove otherwise, should you persist in
petionng from session 10 session for the same
boon, as in many of your petitions is declared to
be your intention, the same respect the same con-
sideration, and the same answer should, in my
judgment, be given to your petitions, so long as
the same reasons should be applicable 10 them.
| had long INDUCED the hope that the abolition
of slavery in this Contederacy would be effected
by the People of the several States in which it
exists; as has actually been done in the States of
New York and Pennsylvania. Proposals for this
most desirable consummaon have, at different
times, been actually made and discussed in the
Legislatures of Maryland Virginia and Kentucky,
and the time had been when in all those States