Burlington free press. [volume] (Burlington, Vt.) 1827-1865, 1858-11-26
MIR. NICHoLsoN.s BILL,

We can not make out clearly from tho re-
port of Mr.. Nicholson's speech in Walton's
Journal of Monday morning what his points
were As VIC understand the report, they
were
First, that we ought by the passage of the
bill to indicate our sovereign contempt for the
fundamental hcresv, that the idea of proper
ty can be predicated of the person of any
human being.
Second, that it had been admitted from
the ablcst opposition to it that "if any law
upon this subject were at this time appropri-
ate, the present bill, as one of character
freer from objections than any other that
had at any time been offered for the action
Of our legislature, or the consideration of our
people"
Amendments proposed by others and
opposed by him had been voted down
by decisive maiorities The issue was
now on the bill as n whole He
did not think the objection of some Sena-
eOlS, tilul blic utl MOulu bc unconstitutional,
a sound one. Should it become a law. no
greater harm could come than to have it an
occasion for new argument before the [ S.
Supreme Court which might lead the Court
to abandon the ground lately taken by it, as
the Courts of Great Britain abandoned
ground formerly held by them.
He thought its enactment would encour-
age the friends of freedom, and be a check to
those who might be disposed to encroach
upon it.
Mr.. G!ecd believed the constitution of the
United States was the highest human law by
which he was governed-our State constitu-
ton next. but he believed there was still u
higher law, consisting of the inherent rights
OF man, or hnman rights. and by that law he
was governed. lie believed that the Consti-
tuition of the United States, correctly and le-
ultimately construed, did not conflict with
the equal rights ofman. it contained no pos
siblc guarantee for slavery the most that
could be said was that it permitted it to ex-
list at the time of its adoption. The decisions
OF the United States courts had been cited.
So far as they sustained his views Of the in
herent rights of his fellow men, so far he
would respect and be governed by them, and
no further. He denied it to be the doctrine
of property in man.
This bill admits constructively upon the
face of it the doctrine of"property in man, ;"
although the words of the constitution are
used, and provides a process by which this
pretended right of property in man" may
be enforced in Vermont courts. and the poor
slave taken under certificate of Vermont
Judge, and carried back into hopeless bond
age, and Vermonter attempting to prevent
his being carried out of the State under this
certificate, shall be punished for the act in a
Vermont court also. This bill constructively
admits the doctrine of the right of property in
man, and he could not vote for it; he never
| would vote for any law that contained this
! admission. Pass this bill and Louisiana,
Mississippi and other slave States would say
OF property in man." and had provided II
way (althongh hedged up with thorns,) for
enforcing this right 1t was said '.this bill did
not mean slaves" but all understand that it
is to be passed with reference to slaves, and
that IN fact it means nothing else ; but in en-
acting laws he cqnd snir NO er" ,r',., a.:
RES lie wished the law to read what it
means, and nothing more or less. This bill
is offered and to be passed Gf passed) in an
swer to the prayer of hundreds of petitioners,
for law relative to Fugitive slaves, and
he could not consent to vote for Il bill that
was understood by the Senate not to mean
fugitive slaves, but designed to answer the
prayer of these numerous petitions, and to
be understood by them TO mean fugitive slaves.
This would be piece of legislative fraud and
deception. For these reasons he could not
vote for the passage of the bill.