Weekly standard. [volume] (Raleigh, N.C.) 1858-1865, 1859-03-16

yield annual profit in cash, and tax all prone ,os
in proportion to its annual profits the result womb
be that industry, energy and enterprise would hara
to support government affording equal protectou
and benefits to Incidence, ignorance and soth. P"t
no Senator will defend principle palpably erro
only legitimate subject Of taxation upon which hs
State can safely rely for the support of the govern
ment and the payment of the public debt. AuN'
property in the State therefore, of whatever lns s
should be made to contribute to the payment Of tha
expenses of the government according to its yalnO
whether it yields to its owner an annual profit IN
cash or not Improbable property requires and
enjoys as much protection as that which Yields a
profit And if it is necessary to protect that kind
of property by law, it should be made to nav f.
the protection which it needs and receives
If Mr.. Speaker, your neighbor Injuries your un-
profitable little negro the law gives you as sure and
speedy remedy as if he Injuries the most vauahIa
hand upon your farm, and you claim the same
protection of law over the improbable young NEGRO
that you do over the adult profitable man. If then
they are equally protected by the government why
should they not be equally subject to taxation to
support the government! But annual profit in
cash is not the proper test in deciding what propcr
ty shall, and what shall not be taxed
In this country, the object of almost every man
is to accumulate an estate, and his object is as ul
attained if he grows rich by the annual increaled
value of his property, as if he receives his annual
profits in cash. Therefore if invests $4,000 in
young negroes from one to ten years of age and
they increase in vane ten per cent per annum over
and aboge their expenses which is very low est.
mate; and B invests $4,000 in bank stock, which
yields him an annual dividend of ten Der cent in
cash, 1T is perfectly plain that is accumulatnp an
estate as rapidly B. And if A is growing rich as
rapidly as B, and his property requires as much
protection and it costs the State to protect it
why should he not pay as much tax as b? But
although young negroes do not pay to their owners
an annual profit in cash, it is we'll known that they
pay larger profit in their annual enhanced value
than land, money at interest stocks, or any other
species OF property in the State If then, young me-
groes enhance in value more rapidly than any other
species of property, and if man grows rich more
rapidly by investing his money in them, than if he
invests it in any other kind of property, and if it
costs the government more to protect them, why
should not young negroes be taxed as other proper
ty to support the government?
The sixth objection to altering the constitution
is, that 1t 0iN injure tile institution of sA,cerl
In what way, Mr. Speaker, will it iniure the in
stltutIon OF slavery in North Carolina to tax slaves
as property and not as persons? Will the instltu-
ton OF slavery suffer by putting slaves as property
on an equal footing with all the other property in
| the State in reference to taxation? What is the
Abolition and Black Republican idea of the right of
PiOPS'Cy siaNcS! IL Is tI1dC slaves are not
erty. What is the Democratic idea of the right of
property in slaves? 1t is, if Senator Douglas IS to
be regarded as good authority upon that subject,
that slaves are property and hence on an equality
with all other kinds of property"
The ISSUE then, between the Democratic party,
both North and South and the black Republican
and Abolition parties is whether slaves to be re-
garded as persons or property. That was the issue
in the late campaign in Illinois, between Douglas
and nd hon
the world that 1.-The Democracy of Illinois, in the
first place. accepts the decision of the Supreme Court
of the United States in the case of bred Scott as an
authoritative Interpretation of the constitutions"
and, "in accordance with that decision, holds that
slaves property and hence equality with all
other kinds of property" we find Lincoln at Alton
declaring, amid shouts of applause from the black
Republicans and Aboitionists his opposition to the
idea Of property in slaves, and exultingly asking
land when this principle-this new PROPOSE
ton that no human being ever thought of three
years ago, is brought forward combat it as having
evil tendency, if not evil design; combat it
having tendency to dishumanize the man, to take
away from him all right to be supposed or consd-
cred as human. | combat it. therefore, as being one
for the purpose of preparing the public mind for ma
king property, and nothing but property, of the ne
gro in all the States of this Union"
Now, Mr. Speaker, if the right of property in
slaves is recognized by the abest statesmen and u-
rists in the Union, by the Democratic party North
and South, by the laws of Congress- by the Supreme
Court of the United States, by the constitution of
the United States and by the constitutions of all the
Southern States, and confirmed by the opposition of
black Republicans how, I ask, can any sane man
suppose for moment that the institution of slavery
can be injured by taxing slaves property in North
Carolina? But if the institution of slavery should
suffer in North Carolina, who, ask will be respon-
sible for it, those who propose to place it on an
equal footing and identify it with the other property
of the State, or those who "attempt to exempt
slaves from the rules that apply to every other
kind of property and thereby "abandon the strong
est ground of defence against the assaults of the
black Republicans and Abolitonists! 2"
If slave property were taxed adj ralorem and
paid its just and equitable share of the expenses of
the government, would not the owners of every
other species of property be interested in its protec-
tion whether they owned slave property or not ?
If so, would it not give strength to the institution
to make the alteration proposed? And if 1t would
give strength instead Of inuring the institution is
it not the true interest of advocate the
change? In Georgia. Florida, Tennessee and other
southern States, slaves are taxed as property adj
calorem and no ever heard that the institution
of slavery had been injured weakened in those
States by being taxed as property, and, l appre-
hend they are as good southern States and as free
from abolitionsm and black republicanism as North
Carolina If the institution of slavery has not suf
fered in Georgia, Tennessee and Florida by being
taxed ad valorem, how can it suffer in NorthC Caro-
lima by being taxed IN the same way? If the inst-
tuition suffers in this State those alone will he
responsible for the injury it sustains, who insist
upon making distinction between slaves and other
property-the inevitable result Of which will be,
the alienation of non-saveholders from it, and the
engendering Of prejudice in their minds against it.
But, Mr. Speaker, if slave-owners would consult
their real interest yield to the impulses of gen.
erous patriotism rather than the suggestions Of a
blind avarce and step forward and voluntarily sur
render discrimination, the benefits of which they
have enjoyed at the expense of their less favored
neighbors since 1885, the institution of slavery
would be stronger in North-Carolna than it has
ever been since the organization of the government
Slaye-owners therefore, should be the most jealous
advocates of the passage of this BILL for as soon as
the restriction is removed from the constitution, and