Vermont watchman and State journal. [volume] (Montpelier, Vt.) 1836-1883, 1845-04-25
For tho Waterman and Journal.
THOUGHTS ON SLAVERY.
nv n. DfNsMoRr.
-sIANERY In TIE limited STATEs

y. DrNsMoRr. Il
No 5-sLAvERY IN THE UNITED STATES. y
The District of Columbia was coded to the gen Il
eral government in 1890, by Virginia and Maryland t
within whose territory it was situated. The Con- n
sttution provides that Congress shall have power
" to exercise exclusive Legislation, in all cases what
ever over such district mot exceeding ten miles
square as may by cesson of particular States, and
the acceptance Of Congress, become the seat OF
government Of the United States" Previous to
the cesson of Virginia and Maryland, slavery ex
listed within the territorial limits Of the District
and has since continued to exist under the authori-
ty of Congress. Whatever power those states pos
sessed previous to the cesson, over the subject OF
slavery, must, by the very terms of the grant, be
exclusively vested in Congress.
Such has been the unanimous opinion Of all the
distinguished statesmen Of both the North and the
South. The doctrine that Congress possesses no
constitutional power to abolish slavery within the
territorial limits of the District, is of very recent
origin, and its discovery may be traced to the same
fruitful source which hos recently imposed multi
plcity of strange and unbeard Of constitutional
doctrines upon the people. That source is the rcck |
less and unprncipled spirit of party zeal. If Con
gress has no power to abolish slavery within the
District, then the power Is certainly lost and exists
no where viii it be pretended that the leglsla- |
lures of Virginia and Maryland, sovereign and in
dependent States, have no power to devise any
means for the abolition of slavery within their bor-
|
elusive legislation" over the District, less power
than had Virginia and Maryland previous to the
cesson of 1880? Is slavery so necessary, so es'
sental to the well-being Of our government, that
the power to abolish it is no where 10 be found'
President Van Buren,, in his Inaugural Address,
March 4, 1887, uses the following language -"
must 20 into the Presidential chair, the inhcXble
and Incorporating opponent of any attempt, on
the part Of Congress, to abolish slavery in the Dis
trict of Columbia, against the wishes of the slave
holding States and also with determination equal
ly decided to resist the slightest interference with
it, in the States where it exists. 1t only remains
to add that bill, conflicting with these views, can
ever receive my constitutional sanction"
We shall say nothing respecting the propriety or
prudence of a republican Executive, seeking TO ill
tmidate overawe the Independent legislation Of
Congress. Our sole business now is with the doc
trines and principles advanced. The first question,
naturally presenting itself is, did Mr. Van Buren,
concede to Congress the constitutional power to a.
bolish slavery within the District? Nothing APP
pears to the contrary; and in a previous production
from his pen,* he is understood directly to assert or
admit the power. Why, then, we ask are the wish
os of the slavehodlng States to be consulted IN
preference to the remaining States in the Union
We know indeed that much has been said, by Hen
ry Clay and others, about implied jaih--that when
Virginia and Maryland coded the District to the
, General Government there was a tdcit understand
ing that Congress should not interfere with the sub
iect of slavery. Had Mr.. Van Buren, declared that
Congress ought not to abolish slavery within the
District contrary to the wishes of Virginia ant
Maryland, and assigning as reason that the Dis
trict portion of their respective terrific
ries, the appearance would have been much more
plausible, and much less sycophuntic but even thi
would have been appearance merely, for when those
States coded the District, they parted with all thei
right of exercising Legislation over it. Let us sup
pose that Congress should enact law, providing
in constitutional manner, for the final abolition o
slavery within the District and that the Represen
tatives and Senators from the non-slavehodin!
States should unanimously vote for it, together witt
; a respectable minority from the slaveholdng State
$ what must have been the language of Mr. Va
= Buren,, as President of the United States, on re
turning the bill to the House from whence it orig
l mated? "Why, gentlemen, the bill you have pas
Il sed, believe to be entirely constitutional, and
5 have no doubt that a majority OF the repubca
1t freemen Of this Union demand its passage; but
u perceive that the generous South" the land
u chivary and good feeling, pretty toerably ma
d about this business and it will not do in this Ian
e of republican equality to liberate the miserable dc
= graded African from bondage, till we have first OF
= tanned the consent of dear friends in Georgi
L South Carolina, Louisiana, and other portions
our beloved Union, south of the Potomac and Il
n. Ohio" Can this be the language of republic;
IN chief magistrate? Can men, claiming to be repu
IN cans, justify such sentiments and principles:
e We freely and readily admit that Congress h
to no constitutional right to Interfere with slavery
u the several States. But whilst we do this, we
D. the same time fearlessly assert that neither /
~ President, Congress, nor any department OF I
d federal government, have any authority to interfi
II, for the purpose Of sustaining slavery, either in
as District of Columbia elsewhere. They ha
ar certainly more power to sustain than they Ina
ISL to abolish slavery III the several States. In the
he trct Of Columbia er neceSSitdte rel, Congress
g: act; for refusal to abolish slavery there is viru
nd ly action in its favor. The duty Of Congress in
o. alton to this subject, depends upon circumstanc
y which we have, as yet, not investigated. We sh
en- do so hereafter. Our only object now has been
OF glance at the existence of slavery within the ID
ne trct and at the po,cer which Congress possesses
rd abolish it.
", Slavery exists in the several territories by
TO PERMISSION of Congress. The United States {
us bound TO guarantee to every State in the Union
republican form of government The citizens
Wy each State are emitted to all the privileges and
en- munities of citizens in the several States. Sav
IRE however, regarded, not citizens but as pr
ny erty. Men of common sense, who have one pal
nd Gle of republican blood coursing through til
ms yains unable TO perceive why 1t is not the d
re; of Congress to prohibit the extension of slaY
SO, beyond the limits where it existed in 1857, wi
ma the Federal Constitution was adopted. 1t is n
sense too SILLY to be noticed to talk about the pr
ut ileges and mmunties" OF citizens in holding sla
ed in republican government. Satan himsefwo
M blush IN stating such an argument Men, who h'
Lhe the souls of men, would never consent to the
ma shaving OF their species, except when the same
Hat demanded by inevitable necessity.
adj Vide letter o Sherod Williams
we
ion For the Waterman and Journal.