Richmond semi-weekly times. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 184?-1853, 1852-06-11
REMARKS OF MIR. SCOTT,
OF FAUQUIER,
OF FAUQUIER,
IN THE HOUSE OF. DELEGATES,

formerly before the House, he had. in no way,
partaken ofthe excitement to which it had given
rise. Upon his return, he found the matter re-
ferred to the committee for Courts of Justice, of
which he member, and he was constrained
by his position to give it his attention
By the terms ofthe reference. the committee
was instructed to consider the and report to
the House such resolutions as would be proper
for its adoption. Divided councils had, unfortu-
natey. caused disagreement among the mem
bers of the committee, and two reports had been
the consequence. To one OF these his name
appended and with a slight modification, in a
matter of mere FORM 1t Identical with what
offered as the substitute of the gentleman
from the city of Richmond.
He certainly preferred the substitute to the re-
port of the committee, but he not satisfied
with either. He Should nevertheless, have content
himself with silent vote the OCCASION and for
borne all participation in the debate, but for the
consideration that, under the circumstances sta
ted, his true opinions were liable to be misunder-
stood
The paper to which his name was appended
had been originally prepared by the gentleman
from the city of Richmond, who, as the acting
chairman had presented it to the committee.
When first read, he had objected to it, because
he did not think the doctrine of the Executive
was reprobated in terms sufficiently decided and
strong. But it represented to have been
prepared with view to satisfy the friends of the
Governor, both on the committee and in the
House, and to secure, what was desirable, united
action on the part of all. 1t certainly seemed to
contain as little could well be said on the &C.
casion; but rather than be the instrument to cast
dscord among his associates he had yielded his
acquiescence After its rejection by divided
vote of the committee, he had united, too, in pre-
senting it to the House. But now, be was con-
strained to say that the resolutions with which it
concluded fell very far short of the condemnation
tl,1 &C +l,<
Executive ought to be met, and he dissented, al
together, from that part of the report which
pressed a satisfaction with the second or sxpana-
tory message.
After stating that the act of the Executive,
with the reasons assigned for it in the first
sage, had a tendency to produce spirit of insub-
ordination dangerous to the community the re-
port proceeds an this aspect we should deem
it proper subject for further comment, were it
not for the sounder views presented in the latter
message Certainly. the act of the Executive,
with the reasons assigned for il in the first mes
sage, eminently calculated to beget spirit
of INSTRUMENTATION dangerous to peace, and
well merited comment A MASTER in the at
tempt to infiict moderate chastisement on his
slave, had been resisted by the offender vio-
lently cast off in the struggle, and slain with
blow from an iron poker, which fractured his
skull. The first message raises doubt whether
in the opinion of the Executive, any degree of
delinquency attached to the act; whether it was
not case of justifabe homicide, or involuntary
mauslaughter. tthe most he concludes, to use
his expression, SIT but manslaughter
aoidhout intent tokiU"
If this doctrines prevail there must be an end
of all control and authority this species of
property the very foundation of our society will
be rudely torn asunder, and evils become in
flicted on US intolerabe than the Machine
lions fthe most wicked abolitionists. The owner
md the llat hahtua ly co. armed and
in their intercourse with their slaves, the ght
est disturbance of peaceful relations be in
danger of leading to the most fatal results. 1t
would be especially so in this community where
large numbers of this population are collected
together in the manufactures, governed and d.
rected by single hand. Now in what respect the
second message repairs the fault of the first,
renders further comment unnecessary, he
unable to perceive. 1t is confined strictly to
single object. The Governor had learned that
great dissatisfaction had been excited by his mes
sage; by some he was understood to deny the right
of the master to chastise his slave, and he sent
10 the explanatory message to set himself right
on that point.
HHe saws: Il never entertained the opinion, nor
do intend to intimate that the slave would, under
any circumstances, be excused justified in
resisting the legal authority of his master. The
right of the master, his agent to punish his
slave, whenever in his opinion he deserves it, is a
IT..
en- tertained, it is almost unnecessary say, that
in nv late message did not intend to convey the
idea that the relative positions of the white citizen
and the slave to the laws of the country We're the
same or that the exercise by the master or his
assent of the ample power of chastisement given
BY the law, furnishes ercusable or justifdble
reason for resistance or an exhibition OF resent
ment upon the part of the slave"
In the first message the offence was stated to
amount to manslanghter at the most, and amongst
the circumstances relied upon to render the homi-
eide to that grade, the excitement of passion
arising from the collision and the suffering pro-
ceeding from the lash. Now it is known that accor
ding to the well settled principles of the criminal
law passion aud suffering are proyocatons which,
under circumstances, are permitted to mitigate
the offence of voluntary homicide, and sometimes
to extenuate it to manslaughter. But to have this
effect, the passion must be allowable, the lnflic-
ton must be wrongful, and the person giving the
provocaton be himself trespasser. 1t was upon
this view of the law, that when the passion and
suffering OF the slave were relied for the mti-
CATION of the offence, the Governor was under
stood to regard the master trespasser But
this impression has been corrected; 1t Is now con
ceded that the master was not trespasser agalns
the rights of the slave, aud the case stands that
notwithstanding the master was in the exercise
. of an unauestoned right, secured to him by law,
inficting chastisement to which it was the du-
ty of the slave to submit, the Governor thinks the
provocation arising from it proper to be consider
ed for the purpose of extenuating the killing to
the minor offence Of manslaughter; an offence
punishable. in she case of slave, with stripes
merely. This is the clear result OF both nessa-
ges taken together.
The pardon Communication put express
~ on the ground that the facts, at the utmost
made case of manslaughter. That is not
tracted. To execute the sentence of the court