Liberty advocate. [volume] (Liberty, Miss.) 1835-1866, 1840-05-28

system OF government, commands the Will OF
the majority TO be executed in all our legisla-
ton, (within the rules prescribed by the organ
ic law is main substitute for the right OF Pc
tition in arbitrary Governments, and, | will
add, Of much higher and prouder pretensions.
In our system, the right Of petition is the most
limited of popular and political rights.
The specification orsuch right, in our pow
Ter Of Government, implies in one view an APP
prehension of wrong to the citizen, superlndu-
cling necessity to sue for as favor, that which
the People in this Government may demand as
a right. Inthe other aspect, it implies the still
humber privilege Of soliciting that which it
may be generous TO bestow, and yet not unjust
to withhold.
If our Government was that OF the tew which
oppressed the many, and when the people as
sembed 10 petition for redress OF grievances,
the mnons of power, backed by the military,
read me riot act, or the tyrant's proclamation,
and then dispersed the multitude, under such
circumstances, it might be highly priced as
great and gracious privilege to approach the
throne of master through the obsequious me-
dunn of petition. But trust it shall prove
vain effort of the abolitionists to magnify the
right of petition here into such consecrated i'm
portance as to profit them much in aid of their
seditious cause. They cannot dignity this
right by claiming for it such profound consd-
Grafton, but at the correspondent expense OF de-
basing the American People to more servlle
condition than every principle other Govern
ment entities them to occupy. To hold 1t up
here as test ofthe Peoples freedom, the con-
serva,ve principle Of their Liberties, the deep
foundation on which their Government rests,
and that all is at stake in The rejection Of
their petitions, is truly working up an ocean tenn
pest
The condition Of the American People is hap
pily more elevated, their means political pre-
serva,ion more enlarged, than this portentous
clamor wonld report them. 1t lisa false alarm,
and will not take, that the liberties of the Peo-
Pile are held by so fra tenure as the right OF
petition
But am not tenacious that such petitions as
are now presented should be refused admission,
rather than nailed to your table, as soon as re-
ceived upon it. As question OF right, would
certainly prefer that such petitions should not
be received into this chamber at all. would
prefer it, also from a sense OF due and becom.
ng respect to those States whose sovereignties
md reserved rights these petitions most wrong
July and rudeIy assail.
With respect to the propriety and policy Of
these petitioners, and reporting on
their merits, with the view Of concilating the
The petitioners, shall say but little more than
10 declare my uncompromlsing aversion to such
a course. Not that should apprehend, from
L. a. IF. IL,
port tending, in any material degree, to excite
apprehensons, or endanger our rights in the
South. am well assured no such report would
1t this time be made. But it is sufficient for me
o repeat that, as verify believe Congress has
10 righ;ful jurisdiction of the subject, should
egard any report that could be made as a tri-
lmph yielded to the ;officious opportunities Of
he petitioners, and hence criminal usurpa.
ion OF power against the sovereignty of tho
states interested. Nor do | believe that any
esort which wonld be made here would allay
hat obtrusive spirit ofthe petitioners. 1t is the
doloch spirit Of religious and political fanat-
ism; and when have sober reason and simple
ustice ever met such adversaries with sue.
ess?
To the honest and misguided of our Northern
i petition at hazard in This contest, we will say
0 them, in hope and confidence, that their full
nd impartial investigation Of this question
must result in our justification. The question
# jurisdiction, in every tribunal on earth, is
revious question, rghtfully made at the thresh-
old; and no court that maintains decent re-
pect for its character and the rights of sutors
will betray itself by Judgment ON the merits
i the controversy, when not possessed OF COM
etent jurisdiction over the subject and the par
les. Now, the right Of legal redress Tor IN
lrles TO person and property, and the pledge
t power that the courts shall be kept open tor
he administration of such redress to all, Is
nmllar and emphatic pledge in most OF the
ofthe State Governments. sup
ose the citizen mistakes his forum, and seeks
edress IN one court, that can only be awarded
n another; the court object to adjudge the mer-
IS oil his case, because impotent to grant re.
ress. Butthe sutton persists that his right OF
ut is guaranteed to him by the Constitution,
md that this right is arbitrarily nullitled ana
endered valVeless, unless he can obtain
rearing and judgment on the merits othis cause
| he answer which the court must necessarily
give to such importantly is; "Your right OF
'utt, all abstract from our duties to adludge, we
10 not contest; but such right on your part
Toes not confer on us a jurisdiction 10 decloe
your case. We take no cognizance Of the mat
er, not from disrespect to the suitor, but Tor
want OF proper authority to retain and adludge
me suit Go hence to that tribunal ,ohlch mas
We Po'oer to grant what you petition Tor"