Vermont watchman and State journal. [volume] (Montpelier, Vt.) 1836-1883, 1850-05-02

! Sir, the people of Vermont are a law abid
ing people. They are not conscious o
: having made or threatened to make any az
gressions upon other States. She has n,
wish TO interfere with the rights of others
but while she respects the rights of othe
States, all who are acquainted with her his
tory will admit that she has been able t,
take iolerable good care Of her own. While
she accords to others the free exercise o
those constitutional rights, the freedom o
| speech and of the press, she has no idea o
relInqulshIng the exercise of those right.
herself 1t will be recollected that early il
the session my colleague (Mr. Peck )
presented to this House, certain resolution:
of the Legislature of Vermont upon the sub
ject of slavery. These resolutions have
been made the subject of severe criticism il
the other wing of the Capitol, as well as il
this House. The gentleman from Arkan.
sas, some time ago, in--an a,sirvvs-to his
constituents, a copy Of which he was Sc
kind as TO lay upon my desk, in relation to
those resolutions, INDUCES in the following
remark
" Already has Vermont asserted in sol
emn legislative action, that Congress has
p0,oer ouer slarery IN eoery State, except thu
original parties to the compact. Five of the
slave States were parties; the other nine
were not; and of course, by this doctrine,
Congress has power TO abolish slavery in
them. The doctrine seems INDUSTRIOUS now,
but so did the same doctrine when first ap-
piled to the District of Columbia and the
Territories. 1t excites unmitigated disgust
and bitter denunciation now, but SO did all
the early efforts of abolition. Time will
sanction this, as it has done all the past
and, in fifteen years from this, every Nor
thern State will have adopted the Vermont
ers platform. Would you then submit, or
would you dissolve the bonds ofthe Union ?''
So, then, because the legislature of Yer
mont, in the judgment of the gentleman
from Arkansas, entertaIrs an erroneous O.
pia'oa of the powers of Congress, he would
~ dissolve the bonds of the Union. The
gentleman from North Carolina, Mr.. Vena-
bic, has INDUCED in the same strain of re-
mark upon those resolutions, and says
" Those If the State of Vermont, in advance
of all heretofore passed, actually claim the
right to abolish slavery in the States admit
ted Since the adoption of the Constitution
and yet the current sets stronger, and pi es-
ses with mightler force" The resolution
winch has received SO severe commentary
from the two gentlemen is as follows:
" Resolved That the so called COM
promises of the Constitution restrained the
Federal Government from interference with
slavery only in the States in which it then
existed, and from interference with the slave
trade only for limited time, which has
long since expired; and that the powers
conferred upon Congress by the Consiitu-
ton to suppress the slave trade, to regulate
commerce between the States, to govern the
Territories, and TO admit new States, &c,
may all rightiuily be used SO as to prevent
tie extension Of slavery into territory now
free, and to abolish slavery and the slave
trade wherever either exists under the iu-
risdictlon of Congress-"
might here submit to the world, which
deserves TO receive the most unmitIgated
disgust and bitter denunciaton," the sim
pie statement OF a historical fact, or the I'M
Justliiable distortion and perversion of that
statement. Mr.. Chairman, | insist that
there is no fact or inference contained in
that resolution that will even palllate the re-
mark, that " Vermont has asserted in SOL
emn legislative action that Congress has
power over slavery" In single State III this
Union.
Mr.. vENABLe Will the gentleman al
low me to interrupt him!
Mr.. HEBARD. With pleasure.
Mr.. VENABLE, (Mr. IIebard yielding The
floor.) The construction placed on the
Vermont resolutions by me, in the remarks
made some days since, is the true one, or |
do not understand the English language =
They affirm the fact that the compromis-
es OF the Constitution restrained the FEEDER
al Government from interference with slave
~ only in the States i'll which it then ex-
-:ed, and from interference with the slave
trade only for limited time, which has
long since expired" Why IS the term on
ly' used, unless it is intended to limit the
obligation of the Federal Government to
refrain from interfering with slavery in such
States Us it then had an existence. Now
this use Of the word only" by all rules of
construction, makes the exception in favor
of the States where slavery existed at the
time of the adoption of the Constitution;
and, of course, assumes that the right to in
tCiiC'C "ith III ototCS ditCi 10 du-
mltted, was recognised, and allowed by the
Consultation.
Mr. HEBARD. The resolution asserts
that the compromises of the Constitution re-
strained not restrains) the Federal Govern
ment from interference with slavery only in
in the States in which it then existed. This,
it will be noticed, in point Of time, refers to
the time when the Constitution was adopt
ed-a statement true and plain, and easy Of
comprehension. No such sentiments as are
attributed to those resolutions are contain
ed in them No such sentiments, SO far as
| know or believe, are entertained by any
portion of the people of Vermont. 1t is not
my purpose to disguise the fact that the
people Of Vermont are opposed to slavery,
and, in all constitutional ways, intend to OPP
pose its extension into territory now free
They believe it to be a great moral and po-
litical evil-an evil not merely to the slave,
but an evil to the nation. But, while they
hold and cherish these sentiments, it is no
purpose of theirs to attempt, and they claim
no power on the part of Congress, to abol-
ish 1t in any Stale which, by its own laws,