The national era. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1847-1860, 1850-02-21

beyond it's limits ought not 10 Be received, because
the existence or abolition OF Slavery here affects
nobody bat these hpizg here!
Members Of Congress are but agents Of the Pso-
pie. Their position does not release them from
the obligation Of giving reasons for their acts
Nothing is more common than differences of opin-
ion in relation to the powers conferred by the
Federal Constitution. These differences are le-
climate subjects of discussion. Because hold
one view Of the Constitution, have no right to
refuse hearing to an opposite view, respectfully
presented Senators and Representatives are not
above the People. When respectable citizens sub
NIT to them petition, the presumption is that
they believe their request reasonable and believe
that Congress has power to grant what they pray
for. Senators and Representatives may hold diff
ferent opinion-but thisis no reason forreusiag TO
entertain The petition If they may refuse to receive
it because they believe they have no power to
grant its prayer, they may do the same thing, be-
cause they regard the prayer unreasonable or in
! expedent Refusal to receive in the latter case
would be no greater abridgement of the right
! of petition, than it would be in the former The
right Of petition on one side presupposes the duty
of receiving on the other. A Senator believes
the thing asked for, improper-the petitioner be-
lieves it proper. Very well let the former first
hear, then consider, and then state to the petit
toner why he declines to grant his prayer. Sen
ators believe theg 10 ,0o no'F1r 10 do a certain
act; certain petitioners believing that they
have, ask them to do it. What is the plain duty
of the former TO hear, to consider, and then to
state to the petitioner their decision, with the
reasons therefor.
We know that such is the opinion of the great
majority Of the American People Such was the
view of John Quincy Adams, which, through
many years Of toll and persecution, he continually
urged upon the House of Representatives, until at
last he procured the abrogation of the twentyfrst
rule, and re6stablished, so far as that branch Of
the National Legislature was concerned, the right
of petition.
Against this view, the Senate of the United
States, three members alone excepted, has planted
itself 1t has assumed authority to abridge the
right of petition. Messrs DAVIS and WEBSTER,
Senators from q State, whose most intrepid son
won the warm sympathles OF the world Dy MS ne !
roic struggle for the restoration of this sacred |
right, now pour contempt upon his memory, by
virtually charging him with folly. For, if le-
gislative body may refuse to consider to hear, to
receive petitions from the People, because ii
Una ,ss i5s,',.s ss,ss mai IL
has no power to grant their prayer, should like
to know what John Quincy Adams contended
for7
We hope the People will observe the position
of these gentlemen, and of the other Senators
from the free States. They do not want DISCO
luton of the Union, but they know that the best |
way to strengthen the popular feeling against it,
is to observe scrupuously sacredly, all the guar
antics Of rights in the Constitution. They may
doubt whether Congress has the right to propose
any plan of Dissolution, and would regard with
adherence any attempt on its part to do 30, but
in all this they will find reasons, not for refusing
TO receiue Petitions on the mIjse but for sterny re-
jecting their prayer They will recognise no au-
thority in an American Senate to break down one
part of the Constitution on the pretext of pre-
serving integrity of the whole