The national era. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1847-1860, 1850-07-11

had in view in quoting from the founder Of
Hsthoaisrq while controverting the arguments Of
, professed Methodist minister, is sufficiently OBJ
7ious; it was to sbop vkot genuine Meihodism r.
luires ~ relation 10 saUsTy,o and there was pas
age in the manuscript 70 this effect when taken
o the editor Of the Washingtonian but it was
stricken out by his request in order to spare the
feelings Of certain individuals
Having now shown that | did not maintain, as
alleged in the presentment, that masters have no
right Of property in their slaves deem it prop
er to say, in the language of George Washington,
that il is among my first wishes to see some plan
adopted by which slavery in this country may be |
abolished by laws
Second The statute under which this present !
ment was made when taken "a connection nth The
Constitution Of VugHq, does not apply TO this case.
The Constitution says, art 3, sec III "The Le-
gjslature shall not pass any law abridgng freedom
of speech OF Of the press" and again it says,
" Nor shall any man be enforced restrained mo-
erwise suffer on account Of his religious opinions
OF beliefs that "all men shall be free to pro-
fess, and by argument to maintain their opinions
in matters Of religion
We must not suppose that the Legislature in
tended TO violate this fundamental principle Of
the Constitution, and therefore it is reasonable to
construe the statute, not to infringe the free
dom of speech or Of the press, or to impair that
religious liberty 80 solemnly GUARANTEED to every
citizen of Virginia.
10 may be shown by reference TO the Discipline
Of the Society of Friends page oll that as re-
hgious Society We have found it to be our indis-
pensable duty to declare TO the world our belief
that slavery is wholly inconsistent with the be-
nefcent precepts of the Chistian religion Ii there
fore remains TO be our continued concern TO pro-
hibit our members from holding in bondage our
And at he me- we
bend it TO be incumbent on every individual
deeply TO consider his own particular share in
this testimony The slow progress in the eman-
cipation of this part of the human family we
lament. but. nevertheless do not despair Of their
ultimate enlargement And we desire that
Friends may not suffer the deplorable condition
of these. our enslaved fellow beings, to lose its
force upon their minds through the delay which
the opposition Of the int"vrsasd may occasion
in this work Of justice and mercy, but rather be
aBjHstessS,C ~ -.hc,Lt". va ~ '!Fa5 I
ton remains the greater is the necessity, on the
side Of Righteousness and benevolence, for our
steady perseverance in pleading their causeo
This extract from our Discipline shows coDclu-
sively that we place opposition to slavery on
the ground Of q religions concern We consider il
a duty. on proper occasions and in the spirit Of
meekness aud love, 10 open our mouths for the
dumb and TO plead the cause Of the poor and
occasion has a Friend been known to incite
slaves TO make instruction or rebellion" for to
resist oppression by physical force is contrary to
our well known peaceable principles. We be-
lieve that the triumphs Of philanthropy and
christianity cannot be achieved by coercye means,
but by the gentle, persuasive spirit Of the Gospel
which, proceeding from the love Of God expands
the heart into love for the whole human family
Nor 10 we feel at liberty to encourage insubordi-
He -. o.ko.
leave their masters for this would be an improper
interference with the relations established by law
Oar concern is not to meddle with the slave,
but 10 appeal 10 the master-our course is open
aud abovehOard - our aim is to accomplish a
christian object by christian means.
Now we must not suppose that the Legislature
intended, by the statute referred to- 10 deprive US
of a religious privilege, sOlemny guaranteed to
us by the Constitution OF our native State, aud
which has been constantly exercised by ne msm-
EerS Of orr SOCIETY from the foundation Of The Coz
t7HMsW dorm 10 ths present day.
ThUdlv If the court shall deem that the
statute under which this presentment was made
does apply to this case, aud it was intended for
such cases then | would respectfully maintain
that the statgte. bspg palRable yi9atiSp Of the
and il is the duty Of the Judiciary to disregard
it, The court will find precedent for this
course in the case of Peter Kemper rs. Mary
Hawkins, recorded in A collection Of cases de-
cided in the General Court of Virginia Phiia
Edition, page 20.
In this case, which was decided in the year I79s,
a statute Of the Legislature was unanimously set
aside, on the ground that it was contrary to the
D. Constitution Of Virginia -
Judge Roaue, in giving his opinion, said
4" now think that the Judiciary may aud ought
not only TO refuse to execute a law expressly re-
pugnant to the Constitution but also one which is,
by a plain and natural construction in opposition
TO the Fundamental principles thereof Ii the Le-
gislature may infringe the Constitution, il is no
longer fixed it is not this year what it was the
last, and the interests of the people are wholly at
the mercy Of the Legislature Page ~.
Judge Henry said
q concur most heartily with my brothers who
have gone before me, in the last two points, that
the law is unconstitutional, and ought not to be
executed the injunction, therefore must be over
ruled aud this opinion form, not from view of
the memorials nor from writer's who knew not the
blessings Of free government but as they were seen
and felt through the prospect Of future times but
from honest reason, common SsHse, and the great let
ter of free Constitution Page 90.
Judge Tucker said, in concluding his remarks !
"From all these instances, it appears to me that |
this deduction clearly follows, viz: The judiciary
ays bound to take notice Of the Constitution, as the
frSt Ian Of th laad and that whatsoever is eoArarv
thereto is n3t he lqu of M. tamil p-Pogs ST.
would moreover suggest, that the statute now
under consideration his been recently changed
in some Gifts features since which believe there
has been no judicial decision under it,
FonHh'y would respectfully call the attention
Of the court TO the circumstances under which my
review Of W. a Smiths address was written. A
person from another county, protesting TO lecture
on education, had recently traversed the county of
Loudoun, and at several places publicly maintained
that slavery is right in ITSELF and is sanctioned by
the Bible he had even ventured to call 10 question
and TO ridicule the leading doctrine Of the Decla-
ration Of independence, as may be seen by an edi-
torai article in the LOUfOm Wig published the |
same week that the lecture was delivered in Lees
burg And can't be possible that freedom Of speech |
and of the press are so completely Frustrated in |
Virginia, that native citizen Of the county NAV
not be permitted TO answer address thus public
ly delivered in which were maintained doctrines
at variance with the sentiments Of Washington,
Jefferson, Madison, Patrick Henry, and all the |
great statesmen Of Virginia. The court will
hnd ON examination Of the essay for which | have
been presented, that il is moderate and temperate
in its tone; expressive Of warm attachment TO the
Federal Union, and Of respect for the feelings Of
my fellOw-ctizens whose education and circum-
stances have caused them TO view this subject in |
different light from thRt in which have seen IT,
So careful was not to give offence that era
sed from il quotation from Jefferson, which |
thought was too strong for the nerves Of some
sensitive people in Loudoun; and on handing the
10 the editor, c. c. Mcintyre who is
also a member OF the court, requested him to eI.
anime it aud strike out any passage that was cal
culated TO do harm He did examine il with that
object, and clause was stricken out showing the
purpose for which the quotation from Wesley was
made, but il ought to have been retained as subse
quent events have shown
In conclusion, beg leave 10 reiterate, that so
far from denying that slaves in Virginia are le-
Rally the property of their owners, asserted that