The daily union. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1845-1857, 1850-09-12


legslaed upon subject dangerous TO her safety as il
dangerous to the safety of all the slayehodng States
Why sir, we know that many OF the southern States
the abolition OF slavery within the District OF Columbia;
YET might say, with equal proety that none are mol
interested in the subject OF slavery in this District, but
the people of the District alone interested, because
none but the slaves of the people OF the District are to be
affected byt IL is because such Legislation goes further
by which this traffic in slaves prohibited il intended 10
prevent legitimate traffic in the adjoining States, and
presume in the other savehoding States i is because i
this bill should pass, will place upon your statute book
denuncaiion as wrong, OF this trahc, which the me-
cessy OF these States obges them tolerate and not to
prohibit do not detain the Senate sir but
really desire TO vote for much has been ngraited
upon the bill by the senator from Maryland, [Mr.
PEARcEl--to allow the bill to pass without making the
motion to amend it, as have proposed, by striking out
! Mr. CLAY. Mr. President. the motion OF the honor
able senator from Virginia Mr. MAsoNl is to strike out
the sections OF the bill reported by the Committee OF
Thirteen The first of these sections prohibits the intro
ducton of any slaves within the District Of Columbia for
the purpose OF being sold placed N depot TO be sub,
sequeny transported TO another market The second of
these sections provides for the abolition OF the depos
themselves, in which these slaves are confined in the
District OF Columbia Ii this motion, therefore, OF the
senator from Virginia prevails the whole bill in respect
70 The object OF stopping the slave trade in the District OF
Columbia will be stricken out and it will become Of
q totally different chsracer-iroyldng only for the pun
shmen OF persons tcng slaves away, and investing
power in the corporation to prohibit persons OF color from
coming into the District Ii is very important to the
Senate to understand the precise effect Of The motion Of
the Senator; because il PREVAILS there end to
condemnIng and abolishing the slave trade in the Dis
tric of Coumba. But, sir, do not mean TO go at any
length into the argument upon subject The object is
now to arrive at a decision.
The senator seemed to suppose that mistaken in
the law OF Virginia and the law of Maryland. think
not On thai subject sir the law OF Virginia. at the time
OF the cession TO the general government OF the District
of Columbia and the law Of Maryland also, both pro
slaves to be sold and both provided, il they intro
duced in contravenon Of the law, that the effect should
Virginia was changed subsequently but know mat
was the case with regard to the law OF Virginia long
time, and also the law Of Maryland which also has
been recently altered by the legislation OF that State
Both OF these States exercised the power at the time of
the cesson OF the District OF Columbia the general
government which is proposed to be exercised here,
with the difference only that here we propose also to
abolish the depots Of these foreign slaves brought within
the District That is the sole difference. The prohibit
slaves for sale existed accompanied with the penalty that
if they introduced they should become free That
the state OF the law in both States Now, sir all that
is asked upon the present occasion that we shall do
what each of these States did, with the further object OF
aboishng the depots themselves This has been done
by numerous slave States done by the State of Misss-
sippi done by her constitution done by other States;
done in my State That law was also recently al.
tered butl have doubt that It will be revived in the
course of few years. For sixteen seventeen
years-for have had occasion examine into the sub
ectif had wished to purchase house servant. or il
had wished to purchase saye and carry HIM INTO the
State OF Kentucky, prohibited by the law there
The question is whether we cannot exercise the
power under the general grant contained in the consttu
os and u conformity with the action o. the vaioas
on that do not mean to dwell upon IT, or 10 occupy the
time of the Senate,
ormty with resolution passed by the State OF Virginia
hope, sir, that the legislature OF Virginia will modify
its opinion upon that subject although at one time
merted, she modified that afterwards and does not insist
upon, as SINE qua non, any particular arrangement OF
se slavery subjects s that the na
The yeas and nays ordered
Mr. PEARCE Before the vote is taken upon the
amendment OF the senator from Virginia. which proposes
to strike ou, the first sections, desire TO submit an
amendment for the purpose oil improving the hrs section
There many senators who have objection to prohib
ting the importation OF slaves into the District, for the
purpose OF being sod who object to the provision by
which the violation OF the law is proposed to De punished
They object in other words TO the manumssion OF the
slaves who thus brought in. think it likely that
the bill will obtain votes il this provision should be
amended propose, therefore. pecuniary compensa-
ton instead OF the emancipation. move to amend me
first section by striking out from the end the words,
"such slave shall thereupon become liberated and ree
and inserting the words:
"uch owner the agen, Of such shall be subject
ton qui bsf the informer and the other halt
to the corporation within whose limits the offence may De
committed and in every such case bail shall be required
any law to the contrary Notwithstanding"
MIR CLAY. wish only to say that prefer the bill
il stands, although am indifferent as to the amend
ment proposed, and although think much larger sum
OF the slave lntroductons with mere lee OF hundred
dollars in might be made and yield poht IN
the introduction oil the slave prefer the bill as stands
for three (which will state in the hrs
place, this law Of Maryland existing at the me-the
law OF Virginia existing at the timefobid the intro
ducon OF slaves and declared that introduced con-
trary to law, he should be freed Besides that is the
proper penalty. Ii is in conformity with the laws which
generally prevail upon the subject OF contraband articles
Whenever contraband articles OF merchandise are intro
duced they foreted and SO ought 70 be IN cases
Of this kind But further il is much more likely that the
law will be efcacous il the person introduced s entitled
his freedom in consequence OF the Introduction being
contrary to law, than there be suit against the party
introducing him by prosecution pecunlay penalty to
be inflicted upon him. II the slave be introduced con-
trary to law there will be motive on the part OF the
slave and his friends TO enable him TO assert his freedom
and the law will be much efcacious than II you let
depend upon the infection of the pecuniay penalty,
which would be nobodys business, and which would
my great object is the abolition OF the trade As to the
mode Of efecting wheher by declaring persons ee or
by the nfction Of the pecunary Senate may
decide between the two modes according to Its judgment
The important provision OF the bill is the second one IN
my opinion 10 abolish the depots
| Mr. MASON asked for the reading Of the amendment
| which read.
i Mr. BADGER am best satisfied with the provisions
OF this section II stands in the original bill think
that there is great deal in the suggestion OF the senator
from Kentucky, tMr. CLAYl that II is the most ehectnai
and appropriate penalty that the person who in violation
OF law brings slave here shall incur forfeiture OF the
would be better il the forfeiture incurred by the pro-
prietor without changing the status OF the slave 10 nat
| OF a free man.
The case ~ con,raband N which The senator has refer