The Madisonian. [volume] (Washington City [i.e. Washington, D.C.]) 1837-1845, 1844-01-08
THE RIGHT OF PETITION.

THE RIGHT OF PETITION.
A violation Of the Constitution is always a
serious matter however trAing the immediate
consequences may seem to be, for the obvious
reason, that one infraction leads to another. Ii
is above all importantio the South, under pres
ent circumstances, that she should NOT be justly
chargeable even with disposition to commit
X such infraciions. The weak should be particu-
J. lariy careful not TO be in the wrong. The slave
hpldiRg States have but eighty eight representa-,
y tlves in Congress: the free States one hundred
and thirty 1--WE; and it is only By considering
Delaware as a saye-holding State that the rep
reservations in the Senate can be said to be bal
anced. The slave-holding States have on,
hundrrd and fourteen Presidential electors: thu
free States, one hundred and sixty -one, or .
majority of .torty-serem.@ These are important
facts 10 bear in mind, however trite for public
opinion, the will of the majority, is the final lri
bunal on questions of the respective constitu
tional rights Of the General and State Govern
ments, from which there is no resort except e
notification or disunion.
The South, therefore, must endeavor TO keey
that tribunal in good humor, or al least give il
no just cause of irritation, if she wishes to con
1inue in the Union She has been told, within
few days, on the floor Of Congress- that her
best security consists in the good feelings OF
the people of the North. Her best policy, at all
events is rigid adherence TO the Constitution,
so as to furnish Others with no pretext for VIC
lating it,
Yet, she is accused Of violating the Consti-
tuition in most important particular, and of
contemporary dsregarding one Of The dearest
rights of the People of the North; and not merely
accused, but convicted, upon the testimony of
those who pretend 10 be emnenlly her friends.
The rule OF the House Of Representatives ex-
GLIDING abolition petitions is defended upon the
ground that Congress has right TO refuse to re-
ceivepetitions which pray in effect for violation
of the Constitution. But the rule in question ex.
cludes petitions for the abolition of slavery in
the District Of Columbia. Now, Mr. Van Blu
rem and many others-perhaps majority of
Congress and of the People believe Enormously,
we think that Congress has constilutonaIly the
power to abolish slavery in the District. There
fore, if the rule cannot be defended on other
OF The right of petition. Besides this, ii is sug-
gested, that petitions for the amendment of the
Constitution are always constitutional, and
nothing Is more easy than for abolitonsts TO
present the most Objectionable and ii fammatory
addresses IN that shape, and persevere in their
opportunities until Congress shall be compelled
10 adopt some summary and erciting mode of
uetf rid of ,bo l.,
the defence 10 which we allude, is not only
placed In the wrong as it respects the past but
efieclually deprived of security as 10 the future,
and compelled to rely on the good feelings of
abolitionlsts, from whom she certainly has not
hitherto experienced much charity
1t us important, we think, that The South should
be extricaed from this position, which is humil-
laling al least, if not dangerous. 1t is danger
Gus, we think, because it is hum iating. We
believe that the aboitionists would be stimulated
rather than appeased and quoted, by triumph,
which would teac b them not TO despair in future
struggles.
We will resur again, therefore, TO the provi-
sion Of the Constitution which is said 10 have
been violated. 1t is, that Congress shall make
no law respecting an establishment of religion,
or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or
dbridging the freedom Of speech, or Of the
press; or the right Of The people peaceabiy 10
assemble, and TO petition the Government for
redress Of grievances"
1t is very clear TO Us, that this provision of the
Constitution is copied from one of similar ma
ture introduced into the Constitution of Eng
land at a time when the People of that country
were struggling to acquire portion of the sove-
reigniy due to them. 1t had been the practice
of their Government to disperse peaceable as
ssmbages Of the people by armed force, and
imprlson or otherwise punish those engaged in
such meetings, upon the pretence that their
plans or objects were seditious or reasonable
The right of the People peaceably 10 assemble
for the purpose Of deIiberating on national af-
fairs or grievances, is, under any form of gov
eminent, an all important right In this coun-
try, Congress can pass no lap abridging the
right: and neither House of Congress could. if
1t would, abridge the right by the adoption of
rule which would operate only within the pre-
cincts Of the House adopting it. That the
trainers OF the Constitution had this riobt
OF peaceably assembling in view, is evident.
we think, from the phraseology of the arli-
Gle. The distinctive participIe or is used
throughout except with respect to the right
of petition alone, which is coupled with the
right "peaceabIy to assemble" and not as
serted distinctly and separately, as the Others
are. Ii is obvious, too, that the right TO petition
considered separately, is valuable only in pro-
portion as the Government is stronger than the
People. Under a despolic government ii is all
important as The only channel through which
the People can make known their grievances