Vermont watchman and State journal. [volume] (Montpelier, Vt.) 1836-1883, 1844-02-09
ABOLITION AND THE RIGHT OF
PETITION.

one oil the most sensible, and coming from a N.
Carolina member, one Of the most Important re-
Gently delivered in Congress. 1t was made upon
the resolution to rescind the obnoxious Twenty
llrst rule. We copy from the National lntelli-
gencer. MIR. Clingman Of N. e. said
81 have for long lime been of the opinion that
we Of the South have been on this subject, pursu.
ing wrong course and the more | see of its
consequences the more 1 am confirmed in that
opinion. The 2lst rule is, as all concede, n re-
sricon OF the right Of petition. Butt is attempts
ed TO be supported OIL she ground that Congress-
acting in this matter the local legislature of the
District Of Columbia, should not receive petitions
OF this character, coming from the States Of this
Union. Were this position true, which for
sons that shall presently advert 10 lido not.ad-
nit, it would not support the justice or proprieiy
of this rule I; BECAUSE Ms prohibition prevents ME
people Of the District from petiiiolSng on this
subject as much as it does all others. None surely.
will deny that the people of this Dissct have a
direct interest in the matter, and Of course ought
to possess The right TO have their petitions pressn-
ted, should they ever think proper to offer them.
{" am told that in this country there exists no
right OF petition, though it exists under all other
Governments, and in all other countries in the
world. Yet it does not exist ia this country, be-.
cause the people are sovereign and have rIghtto
command. The doctrine has been advanced by
men of high standing at the Souih but, sir,it
seems scarcely to merit areply. What can he so
absurd TO insist that the major proposition does
not include the minor? That because the citi-'
zens of this republic have greater privileges they
are deprived Of smaller ones? But, supposing
this true, how does it affect the present guess.
lion? would like to know what sovereign right
it is which the people Of this District possess p
They cannot vote for the election of President,
nor for member of Congress; their only poli.i-.
cal right is the right of petition. Yet Of this you
TOO deprive them, and lrample on the only politi-
cal right they possess. And still l am told by
corn that tha af ri
not desire to present any petilious of this kind,
SO practical wrong is done by refusing them.
This is a bad, avery bad argument for the South
ern men, who, as we all know, are charged as be-
ing very fond of distractions. What becomes of
the abstract right of petition although they may
not choose'io exercise it? II they come here with
their petilions. they must he rejected And the
argument that applies TO the District will apply
with equal force 10 the Territories; they are in a
like condition.
But do not assent al all to the position taken
by the gentleman from New York (Alr. Beardsley)
that when the people pray for objects in them.
selves unconstitutional they have no right to be
heard. How can you ascertain that their prayer
is unconstitutional until you receiyeit They
come and present their requests at your door;
you may reject their prayer il you please; bur
surely you ought to receive their petition, so es
10 ascertain for what object it is presented The
right 10 petition the government exists in all coun-
tries. 1t exists PROFESSIONALLY in England
where all the subjects have a right TO petition
parliament and to petition The Crown, and where
their right 10 do the one is as much admitted as to
do the other.
The liberal party have ever stood ON this
ground in that country. Remember that one Of
the most eloquent speeches ever delivered by thar
great deJater and statesman, MIR. Fox, was on this
subject. Not on the proposition to receive petl-
tons Oh, no, nobody disputed that ; but against
u law which prevented large assemblies for The
purpose OF pelitioning Parliament, because it
might interfere with the universal right OF peii.
ton. In the bill Of rights of North Carolina, the
rgh of petition for redress of grievances is de-
clared 10 be the inalienable right Of the people
But what are their grievances? Are not thew 10
Judge? /. ID said that the continuance OF slavery
is no grievance, and so they have right to petit
lion against it. But if the government is TO be
the Judge OF what is, aud what is not grievance,
it may, on that ground, refuse 10 receive any De.
lilon whatever All it has TO do is 10 decide thar
the thing complained of is no grievance. and
refuse hereupon TO receive The petition. As,o
what ID grievance. the petitioner ought to be al
lowed to Judge for himself; it 10 enough for us,
ii we possess the right to REJECT the prayer OF his
petition ii we esteein The matter he complains of
no grievances it is an easy thing to refuse his peli-
ton.
ls it not reproach that the right of petition, n
right so sacred and so important, should no where
be restricted but in this fair republic The right
OIL petlliou sUOulu every where De as Tree, in nv
view, the right of all created beings to petition
The Supreme Ruler of the Universe If the peti.
TONER thinks he is agrievsd, that is enough to en-
lille him to q hearing"
regret the course pursued on another ac-
count. We of the South are in position pecu
liary delicate. Slavery exists with US; it does
not exist at The North, and England has abolished
in it her West India possessions. have, indeed,
not much belief in the sincerity Of the British
Government So long as she retains more than
one hundred millions OF slaves in the East Indies
without even an effort to berale ,hem she de-
serves no great credit for her humanity.
MIR. Holmes here nIerposed 10 state, in justice
TO England that she had recently taken steps
toward the liberation of her East India subjects
MIR. Clingman resumed. | thank the gentleman
for the information. But ] was about 10 observe
that we staud in peculiar delicate position at the
South, though we stand OH firm ground while we
stand upon The Constitution but we should be
careful not 10 ask Tor more than is clearly right
While we fix ourselves ON the Constitution, we
stand on solid ground, and we should not irriia,e
others by claiming too much. The North is irri-
lated by the abolltionsts, who toll them we are
not satisfied with slavery at the South, but want
10 make Them slaves TOO by taking from them the
right OF petition. Now, our ground is firm enough
without our seeking to stand upon doubtful
ground, and thus giving irritation. Some per-
sons, indeed, are anxious 10 keep up the excite
men Il do not here refer 10 members Of Con-
gress IN either House) While there are some at
the South who take tie highest ground, as they
say, this subject, in order 10 induce the people
of the South 10 esteem them the most jealous
lovers of their rights, and thus obtain favor at
home, there are men at The North who take the
opposite ground from the same principle. They
seem 10 make capital of it, and we are short
sighted enough 10 enable them 10 do il. Hence, g.
III feeling grows out of it both at the South and
The North, The feeling s now very different
rom what It was some years ago, and all arising
~! Of this foolish struggle about petition.
My constituents, most of them, know OF the feel
ng which pervades the North only by what they
zee In this House, and when they see half the
House voting TO establish this rule they consider
hem as all siding with The abolitionsts. This
ought not 10 be So and will not if we can come
o a right understanding. | regret exceedingly
o see The subject of slavery introduced on ali oc-
,asions, even in debates on the navy and subjects