The western Democrat. [volume] (Charlotte, N.C.) 1852-1870, 1856-02-19
For the Western Democrat
SOUTHERN & SOUTHWESTERN
CONVENTION


The Commercial Convention, lately as
sembled at Richmond, contained some 225
Delegates from Maryland the District of
Columbia, Virginia, North Carolina, Mis-
souri,, Louisiana, Texas, and ON the last day,
one from Tennessee.
From the tenacity with which opposition
was at once made to action, some belle =
ed apprehensions were entertained that
certain private interests, claims, or inten-
tons, would be influenced by acts of the
Convention.
The City of Richmond had been twice
appointed as the place of meeting; once
delayed on account of fever at Norfolk.
An immediate proposition to assemble again
in the same place, during May or June, was
regarded ecessary-scarcely courteous,
but onerOus-as upon such occasions there
are always extraordinary and expensive
preparations, which some were indisposed
to call for again.
OF course, no gentleman of Richmond
could object to the proposition. Distant
delegates, therefore, were obliged to resist
delay, and attempt to carry out some of the
whole year, since the adjournment at New
Orleans, in order to avoid the ridicule of
precipitately abandoning every effort. On
this account, all the Delegates from North
Carolina uniformly opposed adjournment,
through one of their number. Two days
were vainly spent arguing this subject :;
and the members of Committee to whom
all resolutions were ordered to be referred,
were obliged, by a majority of the States,
to report through their chairman, Mr.. Floyd,
the series of original resolutions, in order
to be again debated in the whole body. In
deciding the final vote, in Convention, by
States, Texas, Louisiana, and Missouri. not
largely represented, antagonised numerous
delegates from Maryland, Virginia, and
North Carolina. Those from the District
decided against the resolutions to adjourn
The Delegate from Tennessee had not then
arrived, being delayed by the state of the
roads.
The Convention sat four days, Two were
spent discussing adjournment. A public
dinner was given on one of the last days.
No reports were called for, or offered; nor
did there appear much preparation for the
practical issues upon which the welfare of
the South depends. No doubt some propo-
sitions wer- withheld, for want of time and
A spirit, conservative of the Constitution
and the Union characterised the expressions
of the assemblage.
Our Eastern neighbors, it was thought,
did not pull fairly in the traces of Govern
ment, according to original agreement; and
on that account, it was proposed to sacitch
them up little, when they hung back.
The meaning of the moral law, pressed
by active abolitionists, that runaway SER
want was, in no instance, to be returned to
his master, was resisted in debate, and ex-
planned not to have reference to a servant
running from our Hebrew Tribe, or State, to
another, but to servants, prisoners of war,
fleeing from the wild wandering tribes. in
the neighborhood of the Hebrews, who were
alone allowed to be bought as slaves, by
them. The moral law of the Hebrews was
The same in this respect as our own, plainly
copied from it by the Fathers of our revo-
luton. AS the Hebrew law distinctly for
bids men "to covet the servant of his neigh
Dor" it cannot be fairly shown, to author
re the theft, entic ement, or concealment