Anti-slavery bugle. [volume] (New-Lisbon, Ohio) 1845-1861, 1848-05-05
SALEM, OHIO, FRIDAY, MAY 5, 1913

rights, should defend those rights to the ut.
most. Coming in this way down to the cues.
ton Of the gentleman from Tennessee. he
said that when these slaves of the District of
Columbia felt the chains of their bondaue
bearing heavily upon them (he stated it be-
fore God and the world that they possessed
the RIGHT to free themselves.
Mr.. Haskell. | am satisfied. Inasmuch
as the gentleman j%ustifes the slaves, | desire
now also to know whether lie jusiihes the
thievest
Mr.. Giddings did not know there had been
any thieves in the case.
Mr.. Haskell. The men thenl
Mr.. Giddings. The gentleman may be as.
sured that | do not come here with any dis
position 10 suppress or disguise a single SEN
tinent. Where laws are enforced, | woul1
say that men should obey them. We are not
permitted to interfere with the rights of citi-
2ens here, because Of our allegiance 10 the
government.
Mr.. Nenable resumed, sending to the
Clerks table the following amendment,
which he had before indicted, but embracing
now as a modification the amendment sug.
gested by the gentleman from Tennessee,
Mr.. Haskell which was read as follows:
Strike sut the word five" in the r~esolu-
ton and insert "%nine;" and after the word
appointed" the words ''by ballot;' also,
insert after the words "referred to-" the fol-
lowing, VIZ: "and that said committee be in
s%tructed 10 inquire into and report to this
House, whether any member or members Of
this House were instrumental in procuring
the slaves who were recently decoyed from
their owners in this District, to leave their
owners; and whether the said members of this
House have not been guilty of felony in at
tempting or aiding in an attempt to kidnap
slaves"
Mr.. Toombs objected TO dignifying the
resolutions by admitting that the matter in.
volved a question Of privilege. He denied
the ground assumed by the gentleman from
Pennsylvania, tMr. J. r. lngersoll.l He
held that our rights were better defined undel
the Constitution than were the rights of Bri
fish subjects and members of Parliament un
der their most extravaEant and oppressive
claims Ct privilege. He stood here (if re
ports were Irue) the defender of the rights 0
the mob alluded to. Until Congress shoulC
pass laws bearing upon the case, the threat
Ct the mob could not be interfered with. II
showed that the Speaker in his decision claim
ed the benefit of a most oppressive preceder
which did not apply 10 the case. The Cor
s~titution was our chart, and not the prece
dents OF the British Parliament. He wa
ready to meet this question at any time
He was ready to stand by the people of I'll
District with physical force, if necessary.
He teah. from JetFeison's Manual what ha
been referred to by the gentleman from Pea
sylvania, MIR. Ingersolll and which he ch
racterized as the authority under which Il
federalists Of 1900 sought to incarcerate a ce
tain man for writing against the governmer
Those only who claim unlimited power {
the government, could plead these preceden
f for their Justification. Last night he pass,
the street and heard the attorney for this Di
trict pleading with the mob, that the law
the land was sufficient for the redress Of :
their grievances but the law Of the land d
not seem to be sufficient for the gentlemi
from Massachusetts Mr.. Palfrey. He d
sired that this question should be put up,
firm ground. He told the people Of this Di
trict, that if they could not be allowed to
pose in their quiet homes and be secure fro
those incendiary attempts which lately seeI
ed to have been supported by the lnfluen
of members Of Congress-if they permit
the continuance of the sessions OF this boz
in their midst, they were worthy of the ma
acles with which the felons of their prise
were bound.