M'arthur Democrat. (McArthur, Vinton County, Ohio) 1853-1865, 1862-04-24

il consider that THAT would remove on
Oi the obstacles V the exercise OF lh
power, it were deemed expedieni t
exercise il; but il is only removing
ono OF them. There are two Otbe
conditions which are inserted in thi
Tesq bition: the first iS the consent @
the people Of the District.
Mr.. President, the condition Of ih,
people Of this District is anomalous
4 condition in violation oil the grea
! principle which lies At The bottom %
oar own fr,e institutions. and o: al
free institutions. because it is the cas'
Of a people who sre acted upon by leg
islutive authority, and taxed by lcgs
flatiye authority, without having an,
vol in the administration AFFAIRS
The COVE, nInenr OF the United Sta:eS
in respect to the people OF his District
Il adyranny, VII absolute goyernnen
not exercised hitherto admit, apl
| hups it viii never be so exercised =
tyranni cally or arbitrarily. But it il
in the nature, OF aIl arbitrary power
for il ! were TO give Q definition VI ar
fbtrary authority, Sonld say it 10 that
power whicb,is exercised by an au
I.tbority over a people who haye no
voice nor influence ip the ey 6ctlAent
Of laws, or the Imposition OF taxes ;
and that 10 tue precise condition pf the
eaople to whom | lave referred. r
y Well, that being their condition,
ard this question OF the abolition OI
slavery affecting them in all the lsla.
tions Of life which ne can,uIagine--
OF property. society conliorr, peace
itbibkwc should require, as another OF
the conditions upon which alone this
power should be.cxerciscd, the consent
Of the people Of the District Of Co
lumbia. Aud | nave not stopped
there. This resolutionr requires still Il
third c"ndiliun; and that Is, that sla
very shall not be abolished within til,
District eff Colnmhia. although Mary
hand consents, ard although the Ienpl'
O! the Disir!ct itself consent, without
tho third coudItion--that of making
compensation TO the owners Of slaves
within the District. And, sir, il is
immaterial to NE npon what basis t'iis
obligation TO snmpcnsaie the slave
holders in the District for such slaves
as may be, liberated vnier the au.
,thority of Congress, iG placed. There
is a. clause --an amendment oi the
Constitution OF the United Stat
which provides that no propcrty-nC
private property shall be taken lol
public use, without just compensation
10 the owners Of such property. Wei!
| think that in just and liberal inter
petation Of that clause, we ars res
Itrsmel from taking the property o
the people Of the District Of Columbia
in slaves, in consideration of any pub
lie policy without iulI and complete
compn>atiun. But il thers be M
constitutional restriction such as is
contained in the amendment have
referred to, Upon principle OF eternal
justice it s wrong to deprive those
who have, property in slaves in this
District OF that property without cOul'
pensaton. s.....
| No one Of the European powers
Great Britain, Frame nor any uthel
of the powers which have undertaken
10 abolish slavery in their colonies
have ever yen.ured to doit without
making compensation to the owncrs
They were under no .snch coustitu
tional obligation as have referred To-
bni t ey were upd,rtIai obligation tt
which all men ought to bow = thai
obligation of eternal jnstice, which
declares that no man ought to be de.
priyed Of his property without ipIla
ju,t compensation for its, valne.- -
Whslher under the constitutional pro.
vision or not, the case Is the same.
know, sir, that it has been argued thar
this clause of the Constitution winch
requires cumpt nsation to be made for
property, wllep faken by the Govern
ment ,ior .he public use, Would not ap
ply to the cass VI tue abolition of sla
very, because the property is not taken
hy the Government for the plblic use
Perhaps liierallyit would nst be taken
for the use OF the public, bat it would
he taken in consideration OF a policy
aud purpose adopted by the Govern.
ment for the good OF the public, or on,
which it was dsemyd expeIient 20 car
ry inlo full effect and operation, BY
a liberal Interpretation OF the clause
It seems to nls, hpwever, that slay,
property would ba 81 far regarded
that it ought to be ST. far regarded al
taken trl the use OF the public, or al
the instance Of the public, Ne to entitl.
the OWNERS oil the slavee 30 taken to ,
compensation. under and by virtue o
| the vlausc itself, to the full extent o
the value Of the slaves liberated. !
appears to me that this is an ef,ctua
and constitutional restriction upon th'