Daily Nashville patriot. [volume] (Nashville, Tenn.) 1860-1862, 1861-04-09
Spefial Mntifes.

matter would work II we attempted another
form. Suppose this section had been so
framed as to provide that ''the importation
OF slaves. coolies or persons held to service
or labor, into the United States and the Ter
ritories, from places beyond the present linn
its thereof" shall be prohibited. Suppose it
had assumed that shape-'.from beyond the
present limits thereof" In that case, in the
event of the recognition of the independence
of these Southern seeded States, they would
no longer form part aud parcel of the United
States, but yet were within the limits of the
United States at the time of the adoption
of the amendment. They are within our
"present limits" Suppose, Mir. President,
that this Confederate Government, thus re-
cognized, and Independent, should itself
hereafter establish the African slave trade,
might not slaves, imported from Africa into
the Southern Confederacy, be exported
thence into the border slave States, without
violating the amendment thus framed? In
such case, the slaves would not be imported
into Virginia from beyond the 'spresent limits
of the United States" but from points within
those present limits. The importation would
not, therefore, be prohibited. Thus, the peo-
pie of the border slave States might be sub
Jected, IN inuituna against their will, to the
African slave trade. While the provision,
had 1t been thus framed, would have prohib-
tied the slave States, which remained in
the Union, and under the Constitution, from
importing slaves from Africa, it would not
have prevented the importation of slaves by
the Southern Confederacy. after its indepen-
dency, and their expectation into the other
States,
In any aspect of the question, it seems to
| me that this section, while it was not necessa-
ry-while the prohibition might have been
well left to Congressional legislation-is not
obnoxious to the objections which have been
| raised against it. There would seem to be,
as Judge Brockenbrough intimates, general
concurrence of opinion adverse to the re-
opening of the African slave trade; and such
would seem TO be the hereditary, traditional
position of Virginia.
Mr.. Morton-Will the gentleman permit
me to ask him a question: 1 am perfectly
| satisfied that the gentleman is not inclined to
| wilfully do any Injustice to the people of the
South.-But, if l understood him correct
| ly, think he expressed the opinion, that an
act against re-opening the African slave
| trade bad been vetoed by the President of
| the Confederate States, without stating the
| grounds upon which that veto had been rem
| dered. / merely wish to ask the gentleman
if he has the slightest impression that that was
a law interdicting the African slave trade,
| and that the veto was placed upon that ground
/ at the time that the President signed it? If
| so, have to inform him that the Constitution
| OF the Confederate States expressly interdicts
| that trade; and if there was a veto in relation
| to it, presume it arose from the character
| OF the penalties for its violation. Some in
| the South think that the crime of piracy is
| unconstitutional; and the Congress of the
Confederate States may have passed law
changing the character of the crime, remov-
ing the penalty of piracy and substituting
that for felony, and that the President at
Montgomery may have vetoed.
MIR. Summers certainly design no re-
mark OF mine that have submitted, or that
Il s tn or
the motives or conduct of our sister States
none whatever. However much it NAV
be a matter OF regret that they have seeded
from the Union, and the circumstances under
which that secession occured-the early ac-
ton taken by them-I have not a word of
reproach for the distinguished men of those
States, or the action of the States in the ag-
9regate- L am sure my language has not
warranted any inference of that kind
was about to remark further. in reply to
the gentleman from Orange, (Mr. Morton,)
that the Information which / have received
in regard to the action of the Congress of
the Confederate States, at Montgomery, is
through the medium of the public press
learned through that channel that en- act in
regard to the foreign slave trade has been
vetoed by the President of the new Southern
Republic. l understand further from the
public press, that the effect of that action
would be to leave, for the present at least,
the condition of that traffic as it is now reg
ulated by act of Congress.
L understood from the account of the trans
actions at Montgomery, that it was a bill to
lessen the penalty imposed for violation of
the law carrying on that trade Instead of
leaving it as felony, it was made to be
mlsdemeanor. / have not seen the veto
message, and know nothing of the grounds
upon which the President predicated his veto.
Mr.. Morton. L hope the gentleman will
understand that 1 did not mean to impute to
him the slightest intention to misrepresent
anything at all, but thought that the fact
might net have been cognizant to him that
the African slave trade is" as positively in
terdicted by the Constitution of the Southern
Confederaey as it is by the article to which
he Is now referring.
Mr.. Summers. Mr.. President when you are
making a constitution for your own country,
it will not do to predicate it upon what may
or may not be the course of another govern |
ment. The point of my remark, in this re-
gard, was simply this: That had this pro- |
vision prohibiting the Importation of slaves
beyond the present limits of the United States |
been inserted, if in the future, the African |
slave trade should be introduced by the Con- |
federate States of the South, and should be |
made lawful, then by such phraseology, the
difficulty to which 1 have referred might |
arise. 1t would, in that event, not be an i'm |
portation from beyond the present limits of |
the United States, and although you might
prohibit the direct African slave trade, we
might be led into the traffic through the me-
dunn OF an Independent government CONT
guOus to us, and which was in our own limits
at the time of adopting the provision.
think, Mr.. President, that there is really
no reasonable objection to the provision as
inserted here. If the South concur in the
expedienoy of the prohibition of the African
slave trade, there is, at last, no insuperabIe |
objection 10 having it made part of the |
Constitution any more than to having it in
the statutes of Congress. That such is the
opinion of the people of Virginia, have no |
reason to doubt.
The next section is that in which certain |
sections of this adjustment and certain pro-
visions Of the Constitution of the United |
States are rendered irrepealable. It is as |
follows:
1.-The first, third and fifth sections, together
with this section of these amendments, and
the third paragraph of the second section of
the first article Of the Constitution, and the |
third paragraph of the second section of the
fourth article thereof, shall not be amended |
or abolished without the consent of all the
States"
This renders irrevocable the provisions
found in the first, third and fifth sections of
these amendments, and further embraces the
clause in our present Constitution which
bases taxation and representation on three
fifths Of the slave population, and also the
provision for the rendition of fugitive
slaves. By the amendment, all these safe
guards are perpetuated, being. irrepealable
except with the consent of every State in
the Union l.
Mr.. President, among other causes of ap-
prehenson which have, at various periods,
affected the public mind, not the least has
been one growing out of intimations within |
the last year or two, from representative men
of the Republican party in the North, that
the time would come when slavery was to |
cease entirely upon this continent, that, per-
haps the child was now in life who would
witness the entire extinction of this institu-
ton. 1t Sas natural to enquire, how is this