Juliet signal. [volume] (Juliet [i.e. Joliet], Ill.) 1844-1???, 1862-05-27
SPEECH OF HENRY CLAY,
Abolition of Slavery In the Dis
trfct of Columbia.
In the Senate of the United States, Febru
airy III. 1889.

And now, Mr.. President allow me to
CONSIDER the several cases in which the au
snority OF Congress is invoked by these
ABOLITION petitioners upon the subject of
DOMESTIC slavery. The first relates to it a.
i exists in the District of Columbia. The
following is the provision os the Constitu-
ton OF the United States ia reference 10
that matter:
ITO exercise exclusive legislation in all
cases whatsoever over such District (not
exceeding ten miles square) as may By ces.
sion OF particular States, and the accept
ance of Congress. become the seat of gov
ernment of the United States"
This provision preceded. in point of time,
the actual cessions which were made hy
the States Of Maryland and Virginia
| The object of the cessiou was to establish
asseat ct governments Of the United States,
and the grant in the Constitution of exclu
sive legislation must be understood, and
should always be interpreted, as having
relation to the object of the cession. Ii
was with a full knowledge Of this clause
in the Constitution that these two States
ceded to the general government the ten
miles square. constitution the District Of
Columbia. In making the cession, they
supposed that it was to be applied, and
applied solely, 20 the purposes of seat Of
government, for which it was asked
When it was made, slavery existed in both
those Commonwealths, and in the ceded
territory, as it now continues to exist in
all of them. Neither Maryland nor Vir.
ginia could have anticipated that whilst
the institution remained within their re-
spective limits, its abolition would be at
tempted by Congress without their con-
sent. Neither of them would probably
have made an unconditional cession. If
they could have anticipated such result.
From the nature of the provision in the
Constitution, and the avowed object of the
acquisition of the territory, two duties
! arise on the part of Congress. The fret
is, to render the District available, com.
Portable and convenient, as a seat Of gov
eminent of the whole Union The other is,
to govern the people within the Dirtrict so
as best to promote their happiness and
prosperity. The objects are totally dis,
| tirct in their nature, and in INTERPRETING
and exercising the grant of the power Of
exclusive legislation, that distinction sho'd
be constantly borne in mind. 1t is neces-
| sary, in order to render this place com
Portable seat of the general government, TO
abolish slavery within its limits No one
can or will advance such proposition-
The government has remained here near
| forty years without the slightest inconve-
| nience from the presence of domestic sla-
very. Is it necessary to the well being of
the people of the District that slavery
should be abolished from amongst them
They not only neither ask nor desire, but
are almost unanimously opposed to it. 1t
| exists here in the Eildest and most miti-
gated form. In population of SO, S44
there were, at tho last enumeration of the
population of the United States, but G, Il9
slaves. The number has not probably
much increased since. They are dispersed
over the ten miles square, engaged in the
quiet pursuits of husbaIdry, or in menial
offices in domestic life. If it were neccs-
sary to the efficiency of this place as a seat
of the general government to abolish sla>
very, which is utterly denied, the abolition
should be confined to the necessity which
prompts it, that is, to the limits of the city
of Washington itself. Beyond those limits
persons concerned in the government of
the United States has no more to do with
the inhabitants of the District than they
have with the inhabitants of the adjacent
counties of Maryland and Virginia, which
lie beyond the District.
To abolish slavery within the District of
Columbia, whilst it remains in Virginia
and Maryland situated as the District is,
within the very heart of those States.
would expose them to great practical in
convenience and annoyance. The District
would become place Of refuge ord es-
cape for fugitive slaves from the two States,
and place from which q spirit of dis
content, INSTRUMENTATION and instruction
| ,rhk ho II -.
two States. Suppose, was at one time
under consideration, Pennsylvania had
granted ten miles square within its limits
for the purpose of seat of the General
Government; could Congress, without q
violation of good faith, have introduced
and establi he'd slavery within the bosom
of that Commonwealth, in the ceded TERRI
tory, after she bad abolished it so long ago
as the year 1880? Yet the Inconvenience
to Pennsylvania in the cases supposed
would have been much less that that to
Virginia and Maryland in the case we are
arguing.
1t was upon this view Of the subject that
the Senate, at its last session, sOlomnly de-
clared that it would be a violation of inns
piled faith, resulting from the trunsactiun
of the cession to abolish slavery within the
District of Columbia. And would it not
be? By implied faith is meant that when
a grant is made for one ayowed and decar
ed purpose known to the parties the grant
should not be perverted to another purpose
unavowed and undeclared, and injurious
to the grantor. The grant. in the case we
are considering, of the territory Of Colum
bia, was for q seat of government What,
ever power is necessary to accomplish tina,
object is carried along by the grant But
the abolition Of slavery is not necessary tc
the enjoyment of this site as a seat of the
general government. The grant in tine
Constitution, of exclusive power of legis.
lation over the District, was made to ensure
the exercise of and exclusive authority oil
the general government to render :his
place safe and secure seat of government
and to promote the well being Of the in
habitants Of the District. The power
granted ought to be interpreted and exer-
cised solely to the end for which it Eat
granted. The language of the grant wa:
necessarily broad, comprehensive, and ex.
elusive; because all the exigencies which
might arise to render this secure seat Of
the general government could not have
been foreseen and provided for.
The language may possibly be sufficient
ly comprehensive to include a power d
abolition. but it would not at all thence
follow that the power could be righifu lJ
exercised. The case may be resembIed t.
that of plenipotentiary invested with /;
plenary power, but who at the same time
has positive instructions from his govern
ment as to the kind Of treaty which be i
to negotiate and conclude. If he violate
those instructions, and concludes a differ
J ent treaty his government is not bound b,
it. And if the foreign government j
, aware of the violation, it acts in bad faith
Or, it may be illustrated by an exampl
: drawn from private life. ! am an endor
ser for my friend on q note discounted il
} bank. lie applies to me to endorse anoth
err to renew it, which do in blank. Now
! this gives him power to make any othe
use of my note which he pleases. But il
| :-...sa q -. :. =. u : 1919 =.