Daily Richmond Whig. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1840-1842, 1841-08-05

| nrcss, ard II would bo proper TO receive and reCe
nc Pe't'on Tor the purpose OF investigation and &c
uon, But Old MaTpot should present a petition
saying, that 10y assembling people he had bee
cuftai'ed OF half his fair proportion as ptesidcr,
aud asking that Mr. Tyler might be put out, and III
petitioner put IN for four years; say that the pst
uoh should at once DC rejected, because, II ever,
word IN II he true, there Is no grievance and ~
power to grant relief. But according to the ersu
ment, which alone is sufficient confer a "nntiona
'eputa'ion,' the petition o, Old slcrplc, must d,
received aud reie red; for, the case OF the Aro
tsis Is not better than MaTplo's When the Abo
nuoaSt ol Boston presents pc ition stljirg, tina
the people of the District Of COumbu or Virgin,
own slaves, and asking that the tite Of the owner
may tie abolished and The slave emanCipated h,
presents a case as naked as Old Marp,o's, and no
quite 80 grevous, and his petition should he reject
ed. To escape this conclusion, two or three an.
swers have been essayed. One is that il my posi-.
ton be true, then Congress admits, whenever il
receives and refers petition, tina; It presents case
OF grievance to be redressed In strctness vt RICH;
and law that is true but is known not TO be so IN
practice, because there many prc'endcrs 70
high moral courage who think 1t oonslituIionally
wise 10 receive anu refer petitions which
they have no power TO act, except TO reject them
| IN some form or otheE-Another answer is by al
! illustration from the Bank Of the u. :. The two
! subjects OF the Bank and Abolition arc so dssimar
mat II rs difcult 10 imagine how one, in whose mind
there was any c.oarneSs precision should canddly
/ lken lhem-the one being at the worst a doubtful
cise-the other case expressly embraced toy tie
very terms OF the Constitution, and petition de.
stroy ~ being therefore petition destroy the Con-
sttuiiOn. But, IN truth, Congress has authority to
consider Of the propriety of Bank by universal con-
cesslon, because 1t has exclusive control of the f.
n'neeS, and has therefore the right and power 10
stueT oi, and examine every scheme and Proposition
by which that cnnlrol may be exercised in order to
OBTAIN the best, rejecting IN the end of course, such
as should be thought unconstitutional. The case Of
a proceeding IN court has been supposed also. Let
that analogy be tIIcd, and will abide II. Ii sui
a gaI Ia
word in II TO he true, presents no case for relief
demurrer is offered by the defendant, which. admit
ting all the plaintiff leses, denies his right to
into Court md the Court sustaining the demurrer
dismisSes the plaintiff W .tholi proof OF inquiry It,
on the other hand, the plaintiff states in his bill or
declaration, case, which, II u entities him re-
lief, he Is entertained and trial had. Apply the
same rule 10 the AUui'iOnists, and | SIN content
The demurrer s the mo ion to rt;e,t-and what is
tho mischief which would result from the adoption
o.! this prin:iplel | answer ompha,ically, more.
Bui on the contrary, good would result .scm it, by
throwing out of Congress, without DELAY, app.ica-
tons which It had no power ~ grant, instead of re-
ceIvIng and referring them, to come up again and
consume, as many Of them do, much OF the time OF
Congress, and money OF the people. ard be At last
rejected; and IN other respects, the results would be
the same, because the contents OF the petition are
always FIRST stated by him who offers il: the petition
could lie rejected only 10y majority vf Congress,
and majority who, knowing Us contents, believed
they had no constitutional power TO act upon II. To
majority had received and referred the petition and
then rejected it? Il is at fret and at last rejection
OF the prayer Of the petition by Congress- differing
IN this only, that Il IS rejection IN a form TO
time and money, and prevent discussions woundng
TO tIe just SensIJcs Of large portion OF the Uul-
on, and OF themselves welkenin: the bonds of the
Union. Suppose Congress 10 receive and refer a
petition asking, that the President be dcposeu be-
cause he will not IN Bank Bill and a DICTATOR
appointed; aud ,hen by schema resolution after arsu-
men TO determine that had no constitutional power
10 dcpoSc the President or appoint DICTATOR and
therefore Tect the prayer the petition and the next
day Old Mlrp.ot should present another pe,ICa for
the same sub. CT, would any man say that Congress
was bound TO receive that petition and again consider
the question recently decded7 Yet tins is precise
y what has been dons in the case Of the Abolition
IsIs-ior, Congress has received and referred their
petitions, had a report and debate upon them, aud
solgmnly, 10y an oyeTwhe Inning majority decided
that % had no power 10 abolish siayery-and again
come the petitions, from the same Old Marpoi, and
we are tod they must be received or the righ, of
petition is violated But it is urged, that ii the
South denies the right TO receive Abolition PETITIONS
the North may deny, may make It prereNt to de-
n.y. the right of the South to petition for a redress
OF the grievance under which u aUOrs in the Tefl.
sal OF the North 10 surrender iuTyes fiOm Justice
or labor. This Illustration comes from Southern
member, and IS striking. IL Is evidence OF the utter
inclPaci'y Of the who offers it, TO discuss the
quesliOn-or, 1t IS evidence that he has reason to
aDprchcnd that such result may take place. II the
AhotonIsIs are rejected. pass over It as specI-
men OF logic, by which II is attempted n induce one
party 10 do What il thinks wrong Uy the assume-
ton tha # il does not, the opposing party may or
will DO what II kHojrS to be wrong: for here IS not
a man in Congress who Is not an out and out Abo.
lIiionS', who viii not admit that under the Cunsti-
tuition Congress bound TO pass the necessary avs
to ensure the surrender Of fglycs. But how IS Il
possible, that the rights of Ice South in this re
Spcct can bc denied, It the Abolition petitions are
rejected; for, The maOrIty which is strong enough
and sound enough, 10 reject the petitions, Wi, DC
also strong enough 10 do iu Justice 20 the South,
unless indeed II can DC supposed tina, with maio-
rI'y strong enough and sound enough TO reject the
petitions there could be found cO-exsting nm or.
", VINO would yioa;e the Cons tuition by refusing
TO pass laws to apprehCud tugl.ives or unless the
miIorlly, which strong enough 10 receive Abo-
lluOn petitions. was also hardy and reckless enough
10 violate the Constitution and deny the lust rights
Of the South, although the petitions were received
and that fac, would prove nothing in this discussion
10 aid the advocate Of the ABOlIliOniss. But is
there any ground for the suggestion, that majority
now he found IN Congress, (or II II will be there
next winter, IL Is there Hpw,) which will deny the
right OF the South % surrender of its fu.ve,? If
there lie such majority IN Congress, while at the
same time the judica! functions OF sister State
are successfully appealed 10, 70 Justify the plumber
Of one % our citizens and icgI.Izs fdpine, u may
well be doubted whether II Is patriotic or wise
longer u oppose the intercourse bill Of the last
winter; nay, whether duty does net command us
even TO add strength 20 its enactmens, and appeal
at once to the law Of sell defence.
Il is sud, however, that the right Of petition must
| be separated from Abolition 70 save our putty. Tie
right Of Petition and Abolition ought never to have
| been connected. To co1nsc, them is mere trick.
The meaning, practically Ol this csy is, "You mus,
not offend the Ab1Ii i0uis's" | DO not believe,
that the fte Of the Wing party dspend upon the
favor Of the AbolitioGists; but If IL does and 10 is
disposed TO court them, deer!y as am devoted TO
Il, say, lot II sink, ard will Detnkr mysorto tina.
party, which will protect the fame, the Institutions
the pace Of tie South and scofa 10 prostitute her
honor az the service Of power. But how is the
Wing party 10 be injured ny rejecting the petition,
| Of the AJ1JiOni5lsl IL Is Stronger now az Lle
North than ii was when the Dist rule was adDp'ei
and II u s m bg injured by r,uning the 2Ist rule
item the Wings who have come in 10 the late Clgc-
/ tons must have turned DutV. Buren, men who we're
opposed 10 AbJun petitions and who had the finn.
IS and firth 10 maintain heir opinions though hey
lot their ,lsc ons. II THIS be true then tho Whi-
parry Of tie North is the Abolition party, and the
South has lost rs fris1as l the conf e. Of parties
and the triumph It the Wings hos been the defeat Of
tho Sott'. do not believe It-and do not be IIeyc
that trc people Oi the North who rise such an out.
cry against "5pstr1ciIous," 1rd ike some in Virgi
| MIS-, ubh0r specially Vir-nl nbg'r. c.ons, can bs
the dupgs Of 50 silly abstraction, and would cleo
men 70 whom they were politically opp. ed rn OF
der ~ sustain This abstract right Of petition m the
| AbJIuOnls's, wishing OF the same time that these
same petitioners may IN the end have lheir petitions
defeated and rejected. Of UI thc aUslrictfoui..s
ever heard Of, this abstraction Of he -a1strnc.
| tfyHists Is the most abstract and ubsurd. Yankee
| Wit IS more practical, as the case Of Mr. LudIau
] shows-ll takes the cppcrolg-ond Lol the abstract