The daily Madisonian. [volume] (Washington City [i.e. Washington, D.C.]) 1841-1845, 1842-01-12

4 luton, which he had never seen before The Sena-
tor objected to the term "persons" because there
were free persons as well as slaves on board OF the
Creole, and murder had there been committed.
| Now, they only knew, from the newspapers, that
murder had been committed but might il not have
been committed by persons other than slayesi
Mr.. PRES TON remarked that they commended for
| the reclamation OF the slaves. M $780,.
Mr. RIvES gave due credit TO the Senator from
Michigan as he had disclamed any sinister design in
proposing his amendment. He thought however, tha,
the Senator had INDUCED in needless degree Of ias-
diousness as 10 the term applicable 10 the subject 10
| controversy. The Senator would admit that slavery
was recognized by the Constitution and by law; but
| did he not the bearing of his remaksl The
| British Government was exceedingly fasiidious on
the issue calling slaves persons and IN all It's
public documents, and in English newspapers, these
slaves were called passengers by the public officers a.
| Nassau he did not understand The gentleman TO-
take sides with the authorities Of New Providence;
Tor with him. the question mere matter 81 form
but while il was form with him, il was matter
of substance with the British Government, with
which this Government had controversy upon the
subject and would the Senator throw his influence
IN this body on the side Of that power, by perssing
IN his amendment In the discussions which had
taken place between the two Governments this de-
scription OF property had on both sides, been called
slaves. The American Government had claimed
and indicated certain rights in that name and the
British Government had not hestated to speak the
same language. Even in looking the census re-
turns, although there were persons designated as
slaves, he did not find the precise word. Then why
should the Senator indulge in defence offastdi-
business as to hay ng the exact wcrl Of tho G THU
ton He hoped that the Senator would reconcile
4 II with his sense OF duty to withdraw his amend
ment, which was susceptible Of being misunderstood
and capable OF doing mischief. Heretofore, In all
the resolutions proposed from time TO time, upon this
subject he did not believe that there had been any
fastdiousncss as to the terms employed.
Mr., PHELPS did not Iegardl as a matter OF any
moment whether one word used or another; but,
while he was prepared to yield to the Senator from
South Carolina the privilege of attaining his object in
his own way he did not consider himself commit
ting himself to any question which might hcreatier
arise " it'll rci,renc toIt.
4 Mi CLAY said that il was extremely desirable, 10
all controversies with foreign powers, whether
tually existing or not to present unbroken pha-
anx, and that all party divisions should when
question Of the present character should arise. He
trusted that on no side would this be made party
question: nor any thing connected with it. But he
, rose 10 make suggestion to his friend from Mi
chigan. He had what the Senator had not
seen--the protest made by the passengers and
J officers of the Creole on their arrival at New Or
leans, and he had read the whole narrative with the
most thrilling and appalling sensations. With regard
to the occurrences board Of the vessel there could
be no earthly doubt that the murder was committed by
slaves. He would here mention a circumstance
which was highly credi.able and it was, that, of the
thirty-eight slaves, only nineteen took part in the
murder the rest if for no other reason, looked on
with dread, or took heart with their masters and this
was especially the with the female slaves There
could be earthly doubt that the murder was
, mted by slaves board of the vessel He had
learned the subsequent proceedings al Nassau with
infinite regret, because added greatly diff
culties with the British Government, which claimed
that slaves thrown the Bahama islands by the ac
OF God were entitled to their liberty and the vessel
thrown into its port by act of mutny and murder
II remained to be seen whether this to be
persisted in if so, they would be virtually denied
the IF fha de
country and vessel could not proceed from one
9 port to another with safety TO the property which
might be on board. iehoped that the Senator would
pause before he gave his sanction to enormty like
that committed on the Creole But his friend from
j Michigan proposed to substitute the word persons
for that Of slaves,n because the Constitution did
not express the latter term However that might be
it was word that had been frequently used
: in our relations with Great Britain. In the first
article of the treaty of Ghent there not only
express recognition of the term but a provision
providing for an Indemnity account Of slaves taker
away by the British from the ports of the United
States In this matter il became necessary to invoke
the aid Of he late Emperor of Russia and he decided
favoraby to the claim and compensation was accord
? lngly made. He hoped that the Senator would no
II press his amendment.
! Mr.. PORTER said, that he certainly had no nten
ton to prejudice this the merits of the transac
ton, and that his motive had not been fairly apprccat
ed lie was aware that the term slaves" had beer
used IN common parlance but his objection to its us
here was, that II was unnecessary word in the Ian
: guage OF legislation, and, in suggesting the amend
: nent he had had no other object in view but con
fOrmity with the Constitution. He had ex
pressed no opinion, but had merely vindcated biz
course. His motive 10 recognise that sort of de
corum which belonged to their deliberations and which
was sanctioned by the Constitution. The term slave,
e was not known to the Federal Government, and hi
thought that 1t was very proper to avoid the express
sion
Mr.. GRAHAM remarked that since the discus.
sion had been going on, he had looked nine or ten
laws on the subject and almost every one Of them re-
cognised the term slaves
Mr. WOODBRIDGE took the opportunity to add
his own request that his colleague would withdraw the
amendment, especially the term in the resolution
confirmed nothing and concluded nothing.
Mr.. POR TER said that he had no wish TO stand
single and alone this subject He could not how.
ever withdraw his amendment except by the unani.
nous consent oftfe Senate. Ii this should be given
he would have no hesitation in doing
The question was then taken and decided in the af-
frmatiyc MIR. PORTER withdrew his amendment,
and the resolution was then unanimously adopted
THE BOARD OF THE ExcHEauER.
The motion to refer the plan of the Secretary of
the Treasury to select committee was announced
by the Chair rs the order of the day.
Mr.. WALKER addressed the Senate for nearly
two hours, and, in the course of his remarks said
that although he could not vote for the plan as it now
stood, he must dissent from the opinion of some Sc
majors who had objected to il as plan for the aug
mentation of Executive power, far beyond any other
scheme which had ever been proposed by the Exec,-
tive Department He believed that the plan did aug
ment this power, and that far, it could receive
his support but, at the same time, he would contend
that eherofthe Bank bills passed at the extra session.
and which would have become law had it not been
for the Presidents Veto, augmented Executive power
in much more dangerous and oppressive manner
than the project now under consideration He would
vote for that part of it which provided for the keeping
of the public money, for that feature in the In
dependent Treasury, although it was not SO cconomi-
cal There were also portions Of tho BILL as to
| exchanges which he would vote for but he would
not vote for paper circulation by the Government
unless the hills TO be issued should be based on dollar