Green-Mountain freeman. [volume] (Montpelier, Vt.) 1844-1884, 1849-01-18


section reported was as follows:
No tax or duty shall be laid by the leglsla-
ture on articles exported from any State, nor on
the migration nor importation OF such persons as
the several States shall Sc proper to admit; nor
shall such migration nor importation be prohibit
ed
"Mr. Gerry thought We had nothing to do
with the conduct of the States as to slavery, but
ace ought to be careful not 10 gtre1t any sanction"
Our people think with Mr.. Gerry, that "iUe
haze nothing 10 DO tCih Slavery in the States"
We are determined that we will not be involved
in its guilt. With Mr.. Gerry, we intend to be
careful to give it no sanction" No. sir; we will
not sanction your slavery by paying our money
for the bodies Of slaves This is the doctrine
which we hold, and which we expect 10 main
tain; yet the members of this body are now en-
gagged in leglslating upon The price Of human
flesh. five pass this BILL we shall give our
most solemn sanction to that institution which
Gerry and his compatriots detested. Will the
members from Pennsylvania, the successors of
Franklin and Wilson, lend their sanction to
slavery, by voting the moneys of the people to
pay for slaves?
But Mr.. Madison tells us that Mr.. Sherman (of
Connectcut) was opposed to any tax on slaves,
as making the matter worse, because Il implied
they acre property"
Will gentlemen here admit that slaves are
property? | understand that some gentleman
fiom the North admit that slaves ate property
Mr.. Sherman and the trainers Of the Constitu-
ton would do no act by which it could be inpii-
ed that they were property.
MIR. Madison also participated in the discus
sion himself; and, as he informs us, declares he
thought 1t lcrong to admit that there could be prop
1ty in men," And the report of the committee
was 30 amended as to exclude that idea.
In that assemblage of lllustrous statesmen, no
man expressed his dissent from these doctrines
of Gerry, Of Sherman, and Of Madison. These
doctrines are distinctly expressed in the quota
ton Just made. /. That are 9h0ud hare moth
ing to do auth SiaverB but ought TO be careful not
TO giUe 1t any sanction" 2. That "We should
do no act By lchich Il can be implied that
there can be property IN men," 3. "That it
would be wrong to admit that there can be prop.
erty in men," Such were the views of those
who framed the Constitution They intended to
express their views in such language as to be
understood Will this House stand by these
doctrines
The gentlemen from South Carolina Mr. Burt
declared that he would leave us no room to cs-
cape this issue that we must say by our votes
either that there is property in men under the
Federal Constitution, or that there is nOt am
most happy to meet the gentlemen on this point
and am prepared to submit the question to those
who framed that instrument, to Mr.. Madison
His decision is left on record The only ques-
ton is have the Representatives Of the people
here the 6rmness and the independence to main
tain the Constitution? There stands the record
of their intentions. " He who runs may read"
No man can lail to understand the intentions of
those who framed our political compact. The
people of the free States understand them. They
know their rights under the Constitution; that
they hold the indisputable right to be free, and
entirely exempt from the oorodlng stain ofslav
cry. So perfectly were these principles under
stood in the early days Of the Republic, that af-
ter the war of the Revolution no man asked pay
Tor his slaves that were taken from him Or killed
IN The public service. In 1890 the Register of
the Treasury declared that no instance of the
payment for slaves during the Revolution was to
be found on record. No, SIT; Madison and JEFF
terSon, and their contemporaries, were then living
They well understood the principles on which
the Union had been formed. They respect the
rights of the free well Us the slHyc Suites, and
no man then attempted to involve the people Of
the North in the support Of slavery. | believe
the first attempt to make this Government pay
10. slaves was in 1916. This was u years al
ter the adoption OF the Constitution, and forty
two years after the declaration Of American in
dependence. 1t is an important historical fact,
that shows clearly the opinions then entertained
on this sub cCt.
After the close of the late war with England
bill was pending in the House, providing for
the payment Of property lost or destroyed during
that war. When the section providing for the
payment of horses, carts, &c, IMPRESSED into the
public service and destroyed, Mr.. Maryant, from
South Carolina, moved to amend the bill SO as to
embrace slaves. The motion was opposed by
Mr.. Yancy and Mr.. Robertson, and was mega
tived by large majority. (See National Intel
hgencer, December %, 1867 This was a mo-
ton so to amend the bill as to pay tor slaves
killed in the public service, when they had been
impressed have heard northern neubers eX-
press the opinion pending this BILL that we
ought to pay for slaves, if lost when they were
impressed into the service. Sir, such was MOI
the case thrty.ive years since. Our prcdeces-
sors then spurned the proposition. Where now
is the feeling, the spirit, which animated them
We have no record of the speeches, but every
member vii see that the case proposed was thu
strongest case that could be imagined. 1t was
where a slave was taken against the will of h
MASTER and pressed Tito service, and killed BY
the enemy. Yet they rejected the proposition
by large majority. The claim before us is 0
incompambly less force. Here the master hire,
the slave, at high price, to 90 with the troop
as guide, and Of course took upon himself al
risks.
The next case was that oil D'Autricve Ii
had claims against the United States for WOO
and other necessaries furnished the army, an
for the loss of time and the expense of nursin
slave who was wounded in the service of Coy
eminent at New Orleans. This case is nor
interesting from the fact, that there was at tn
time an attempt, as on the present occasion,
break down that we'll known principle in our col
sttutlon, that slaves are persons and not pro-
ery"
The Committee on Claus mt that time 1872
was composed of four northern and three soutl
ern men. AT its head was an honorable sou
ern man, who had served his country longer
this body than any other that ever sat IN ii
Hall For more than quarter of a century
was distinguished member of this House.
There are few, very few, now present, that h
the pleasure Of serving with him but his cotel
poraries can attest to his great abilities and d
served influence. That committee reported
favor of allowing compensation for the articl
furnished to the army, but said, expressly, Il
Slaves not beng property, they could not allc
the master any compensation for his loss" II
was the unanimous report; MIR. Williams Of
Carolina, Mr.. Mccoy of Virginia, and Mr.. Ow
OF Alabama, uniting i'll the report Mr.. W
hams had been contemporancous with Maids
and Jefferson, and he did not hesitate to av
the doctrines of the Constitution, and to ma
tain them. Here is the record of his opni
and the views of his associates When the
came up III the COMMITTEE of the Whole, C
tain southern gentlemen suddenly became
cited, worked themselves into passion, tire
ened dissolution of the Union, and all that S
ofthlng. They made strenuous efforts to reve
the decision of the Committee on claims; but
Tor soma twn wnel,s, discussion nrn II IN |