The Rutland daily globe. [volume] (Rutland, Vt.) 1873-1877, 1874-01-15

OF one OF her cOlOnlcS or OF any other
country has been denied this right by that
government
Let US turn to our country. When our
fathers declared that the United Colonies
are, and of right ought to be, free and ihde-
Pendsat St1tcN,' was one of thch' grievances
that the right of petition had been denied
them; Not at all. The King and parla-
mcnt recognized the right of their ''rebel-
lious colonists,' as they called them, to
petition The complaint was that although
they had pctilioned, and their petitions
received yet that their repeated petitions
have been answered only by repeated in
jury. Thus the right of petition 10 the
government was always recognized here,
prior TO our independence. The constitu-
ton Of Vermont, adopted in III, pro-
vided expressly for the light of the people
to assemble together to consult for their
common good land to apply to the legis-
lature for redress of grievances. by address,
pet6ioH, or remonstrance," which pro-
vision has remained in force ever since.
We doubt not that the constitution of every
state in the Mon contains Il similar clause
The constitution of the United States pro-
vides that Congress shall not abridge the
fright of the people peaceably TO assemble,
and to pet'ti0n the government for redress
of grievances" The right of petition re-
NAMED unquestioned and unquestionable
until about 1886 or 1887, when John
Quincy Adams commenced to Introduce. and
and did almost day alter day introduce, pc
titions for the abolition of slavery. Congress
was in the absolute control of the slave
power, but they, even. dared not to I'M
Qualiiicdly deny the right of petition The
utmost limit TO which they dared go was
to pass the infamous rule that such petit
tions should be received, should not be
"pnnted or REFEREED but should be laid
upon the table and no further action taken
thereon. Subsequently, the House went a
step further and resolved ''that slaves do
not possess the right of petition secured to
the citizens of the United States by the
further but they rather backed down a
step, rs they acknowledged the right of
petition TO exist under the constitution
Their denial Of it to slaves was, probably,
based upon the ground that ''slave" was
not a person, but an animal, thing, prop
erty. Such, at that time, was the com.
monty received idea at the south and was,
also, entertained, or pretended to be enter
tanned, by large class of persons at the
north.
Without continuing this discussion, suf-
flee it to say that John Quincy Adams
fought the good fight" until no one could
be found bold enough to deny this right, or
who attempted to abrdgc it. 1t may be
asked why we call attention to this subject
in this day and age and in free America?
Ii may be asked why we do not confne our
discussions and comments to current topics
and matters of present interest Our
answer will be made in Yankee fashion
that is, by asking other questions. Is it
not a current topic? Is not the preserva-
ton of the right of petition matter of
current interest? Is there 10 danger of
any attempt at its curtailment. abridgc-
ment or denial Has no such attempt
been made in the month Of January of the
year of our Lord one thousand eight hun
dred and seyenty-four, in the United States
of America We are living in strange
times, and we have often had occasion to
see that as the tall oak grows from the
little acorn. so great events have their
origin from seemingly trifling causes. In
the quotations made from the constitution
it will be noticed that the word 'people' is
used. Nothing is said in reference to
''citizcn," ''freeholdcr," "voter" or tax
payer" The right of the people to petition
was fought through by John Quincy Adams
on this very ground. Henry A. Wise, to
whom the Shareholders looked as their
champion, was compelled to say that
"slayes' could petition, although he re-
garded them as property. 1t will be re-
membered by our readers that large col
0ny of ''Memmonites" came to this coun-
try, few months ago, in order to escape
religious persecution in Russia, intending
To settle in this country. Monday last,
Senator Cameron cndeavored to present to
the Senate Of the United States a respect
fal petition from these Russian Memmon-
ties, setting forth that ''thcy desired TO be-
come citizens of the United States, and
asking TO be allowed to occupy public
lands.' Was this respectful petition re-
ceiyed No On the 18th day of Jan
uary, y. d., 1874, in the Senate of the
United States, Orris $. Ferry, a Senator
from the state of Connecticut, objected to
its reception because they were not "ct-
liens of the United States, but were "for-
elgn citizens and the petition was not re-
ceived So much for petitoning in 1874
Is it not time to talk again about the Fright
OF petition?' Suppose they had not act
ually settled in this country, had they not
the right to petition? This right is above
and beyond all constitutions. 1t is an in
herent right. These Memmonites should
be received with open arms, but instead of
this, their respectful petition is ignomin-
iously rejected because, forsooth, they are
"foreign citizens
---------------------
lMpopTs AND EYpoprs Tho monthly