Keowee courier. [volume] (Pickens Court House, S.C.) 1849-current, 1859-06-04
@OS0ga.l NV,
Remarks of Mr. Farrnw

On the Resolutions in favor of Rc-opcning
the African Slave Trade in the Convcn.
ton, at Nicksburg. May 18th, 1859
Mr.. President do not rise to enter into
the discussion of the question before the Con
rcntion upon its merits: but. inasmuch as
the hour for taking the vote has nearly ar
rived and since the Convention has ordered
that tho vote hc taken by States, and us it is
uncertain what may be the vote of tire dele.
CATION from South Carolina. and "a there are
some of us who intend voting against the res
olutons, whose opposition may not be known
under the plan of voting by States, rise. ut
the request of five on my colleagues, who
agree with me in objccting to the adoption of
these resolutions, to explain the position we
occAry, and the state of tic question as We
understand it to exist in South Carolina.
In December 1866 Coy. Adams, in his
Annual Message, recommended to the Leg
islnturc tho re-opcning of the -.frican slave
trade. This was the first time the subject
was ever brought before the State i'm any 9TH
or form than through the newspapers and
prcsentmcnts OF one or two grand iuries. =
Upon the reference Of the message, that nor
tion which related to the African slave trade
was referred to special committee In that
committee. there WAS difference of opinion.
The committee asked and obained leave to
make their repOrtto the succeeding session.
made elaborate reports, both by the majority
and minority of the committee Both those
reports were printed and laid on the desks
OF members; and when the question was ta-
Ken up: both reports were ordered to " lie on
the tnble"
The ensuing summer brought on the can
NSSs fOIthc general elections. But if there
was q single election district i'm which the
question of tho African slave trade was made
an issue, or even entered into the canvass
enough to approximate an issue except, pos
sibly, the election district including the city
of Charleston, | was never npprized OF it
And | doubt very much whether | need
make this exception, for although my distin-
guished colleague (Mr. Spratt,) who intro
dnced tho resolution before us, was then as
now recognized rs u champion of the aggres-
sivc idea ON this subject, and was returned
by Rattoring vote as one of the mcmbers of
the Legislature from the city of CHARLESTON
Yet other gentlemen were returned membcrs
from the same election district by equally Hat
tcrinS votes, who were well known to have
been warmly opposed to any agitation of the
subject.
But further, sir, in the session ensuing
this election. my colleague (Mr. Spratt) itrt
troduced in the Legislature of South Carroll
IN certain resolutions embodving his vicws
on tho African slave trade. These rcson-
tons were made the special order--thoir dis
tinguishcd mover was heardin their behalf
in very elaborate argument: he was replied
to by one of his colleagues, from the city of
Charleston, and thereupon tho whole subject
was again ordered to . lie upon the table"
Called upon. sir under these circumstan-
ccs. to cast sStutc vote on this subject, five
ofmy colleagues here with myself entertain
the belief, with duo Difference to those ofour
colleagues who NAV favor The ndontion of
these resolutions, that the question of re.
opening tho African slave trade hns. nm to
this time. been entirely ignored by the Slate
of South Carolina. And this statement is
made in Justice to those Of us of the South
Carolina delegation whose opposition might
otherwise be buried under the plan of voting
by Stntes. IF have erred in,this statement,
i will thank any one Of my colleagues to cor
rect me.
A word as to the yerdict of the Charleston
Jury in tho recent trial of the Echo crew.--
II has been assumed by gentlemen in discus
sions on this floor, and | have, heard it assn
med oil the streets and in tho halls of tho
hotels in this city, TINT the Jury in Charles.
ton undertook to decide upon the law as
woll rs tho evidence. / have good reasons
for believing that this assumption is 0ratuit-
ous. The lry never considered the consti-
tutionality or uhcunstitutionaiity oftho law.
In their Judgment the evidence was not suf.
ficicnt to show that the defendants werc trn.
Jy charged. have been credibly informed
thnt this declaration had been mnde by eve.
ry juror who was charged with the ease. If
4 am not greatly mistaken have been so in
formed by my colleague (Mr. Spratt) himself,
whose authority will not be questioned.
HEALTH constitutes tho happiness of the
A.4E1 Al