Glass /: ^y-^ Book :i^i-^i7^ a^aa^n question being that depending on the motion of !Mr. Pa"'ton, for reconsideration of the vote referring a pe- tition to abolish Slavery and the Slave trade within the District of Columbia, to the Committee on the District — Mr. SLADE said, he had been charged by a large and respectable portion of his constituents with the duty of presenting memorials of similar import to that under dis- cussion; and for that reason, if for no other, he felt bound to ask the indulgence of the House to a few remarks. He approached the subject, he said, with an oppressive sense of its magnitude, and, knowing its exciting charac- ter, of the great danger of being betrayed, in the progress of its discussion, into a state of feeling, unsuited to the place «.iid tlie occasion. It was a subject on which he, as well as his constituents, felt most deeply ; and he could neither represent their feelings, nor express nis own, nUKout » plainness and directness which might give offence. He begged gentlemen to believe, however, that he should say nothing intended to give the slightest personal offence to any; though he should, without fear of any, vindicate the petitioners, and assert the claims of those in whose behalf they plead. He regretted to hear the memorialists spoken of in debate as intruders, and their respectful petitions upon a subject of great national importance treated as a vexa- tious intermeddling with concerns in which they have no interest. Gentlemen must have patience. These petition- ers, as far as he was acquainted with them, were among the most intelligent and respectable of the community in which they reside; while the subject of their petitions was one of which it well became them to speak, and the Con- gress of the United States to hear. The great purpose, said Mr. S., of most ofthose who have hitherto spoken upon this subject seems to be to get rid of the petitions. The gentleman from New York (Mr. Beardsley) wishes to have them all laid on the table, as fast as presented, and " nailed" there; and yet he is exceed- ingly regardful of the " sacred right of petitioning," wliich must, on no account whatever, be impaired ! The gentle- men from South Carolina (Messrs. Hammond, Pickens, and Thomp.son) are more consistent. They profess to re- gard the petitions as disrespectful, and the petitioners as of- ficious meddlers with that which does not concern them. They, therefore, would have the petitions rejected. There is, in this, the merit, at least, of consistency, and the gen- tlemen have my thanks for evincing a disposition to meet the question fairly. Another gentleman, my honorable friend from Massachusetts, (Mr. Adams,) would have the petitions committed to the Committee on the District of Co- lumbia; in other words, to use his own significant, and, in this case, appropriate language — to have them consigned to the " family vault of all the Capulets;" and yet he, too, is jealous of the " sacred right" of petition! The sacred right of petition ! — that is to say, the " sacred right" of be- ing " nailed to the table," by the gentleman from New York, or the " sacred right" of being gathered by the gen- tleman from Massachusetts into the " family vault of all the Capulets !" Sir, the petitioners well understand the nature of both these rights. The last they have long enjoyed, and desire to enjoy it no longer. They want tlie (tcVmn of Congress on the subject, which, judging from the past, they are sure not to have, if it is to depend upon the decisive action of the Committee on the District of Columbia. I intend no disreBj)ect to that connnittce. To continue to do what has been done — that is, to do nothing, would follow of course a commitment to them, with an express understanding that the petitions were consigned to the tomb, without the hope of a resurrection. I, sir, said Mr. S., am in favor of the prayer of the peti- tioners. I believe that Congress has a right to legislate on the subject, and that the time has come when it ought to legislate. Something has been suggested with regard to political objects connected with the presenting of these pe- titions. Sir, I have no sv ' any such purpose exists ii Tlie^ are uiovcJ by a apiri the mingling of any considf •< may tend to divert attentioi Gentlemen, I regret to sa realobjectof the petitioners, ^ x»v.»...iciiiuu» of " abolitionists," to the end that the odium which has been attached to their measures for effecting the abolition of slavery in the States may be transferred to the exercise of an acknowledged right of asking Congress to abolish it in this District. But what do the petitioners ask at our hands'? Why, sir, simply that measures may be taken to put an end to slavery here, and especially that here, where the flag of freedom floats over the Capitol of this great Re- public, and where the authority of that Republic is supreme, the trade in human flesh may be aboli.shed. These are the questions which gentlemen are called on to meet, but which they do not meet, ehher by calling the petitioners "igno- rant fanatics," or denouncing them as " murderers and in- cendiaries." If, in the fervor of their philanthropy, any have adopted measures of more than doubtful expediency, for the purpose of acting on the public sentiment in the slave States, in favor of immediate emancipation, it surely furnishes no reason why we should obstinately shut our . eyes to the evils whi i are within our control, ai; ' -"hich call loudly for our i- lit:^''. I have said, sir, th.. .ni in favor at ■'. pray^ petitioners. Let me not oe -ii 'I'l-''''-' ""^he of slavery which I would advocaiv., I believe the immediate and unqualified a,, to be inconsistent with a just regard, both to tu^ :■ . ests of the community, and the highest welfare of the h];<.vc. The philfinthropy which aims at such an abolition, what- ever I may think of its purity, I cannot commend for its intelligence or discretion. But though I would have abo- lition advance by a gradual progress towards its final con- summation, I would have the work begin immediately. Sir, I cannot stand here as a freeman, and the Representative of freemen, without declaring, in the face of this House and of the world, that the right to hold men as goods and chattels, subject to sale and transfer, at the will of a master, should cease and be discontinued instantly and forever. But while I say this, I would not render worse the con- dition of the slave, by conferring upon him rights which he is not fitted to enjoy, and which would become to him a ruree vathcr tlian a blessing. I would not, at once, entire- ly emancipate him from the control of his master. But it should not be, as now, an arbitrary, unqualiticd control. For that control I would substitute the authority of law, which should be supreme. In saying this, sir, "I do but carry out a principle which has long been dear to me as an Anti-mitson. I have maintained, and still maintain, and shall continue to maintain, as a cardinal principle in my political creed, that, in opposition to all individual, and all associated, self-constituted authority, the l.^ws should be maintained in full and uncontrolled supremacy. There is no being, entitled to the appellation of wan, who should not find shelter under the a?gis of their broad and ample pro teetion. In applying this principle to the case of the slave, hovyever, I would not confer upon him the same rights which are possessed by hia master ; and, for the obvious reason, that he is not fitted to enjoy them. But I would place him under the supervision of laics made for his special benefit, and adapted to his new condition — laws which should essentially qualify the control of the master over him— laws which should protect him in all the rights which he is fitted to enjoy, and prepare him for the enjoy- ment of those to which it would be but a suicidal philan- thropy immediately to admit him. Sir, we owe it to this degraded race of men to prepare them for freedom ; to com- municate to them moral and religious and literary instruc- tion ; to restore and protect the domeslic relations amono- them ; to teach them the duties which they owe to God'^ and to us, and to one another; and to build upon the foun- dation of a conscious responsibility tc the government of Heaven and the authority of righteous human laws, a so- cial structure which it uhall be our glory to rear, and their highest earthly happiness to enjoy. But, Mr. Speaker, while I thus repudiate the doctrine of the immediate and unqualified abolition of slavery, I main- tain the duty oC immediately and absolutely abnliahing tho slave trade within the limits of this District. And here I come to a part of the subject which gentlemen do not choose to approach, but manifestly desire to avoid. In this I com- mend their prudence. The slave trade is an evil for which they well know there is no defence, and no palliation. I regret, sir, that I have not the means of ascertaining its ex- tent and character within this District. But the fact that I have no such means, furnishes a strong argument for referring the petitions to a select committee, raised for the purpose of going into a full investigation, and making a full report of the facts connected with this traffic. I can, at present, on- ly say, I am well assured that the trade is actively carried on in the cities both of Washington and Alexandria,* es- pecially in the latter, where is a large receptacle for the se- curing of slaves purchased in this District and the surround- ing country ; from which they are, from time to time, ship- ped to supply the markets in the Southern and Southwest- ern ports of the United States. I need not say that, what is usually connected with the slave trade elsewhere is con- nected with it here — the forced and final separation of pa- rents and children, of brothers and sisters, of husbands and *The following advertisements appear, daily, in the principal newspapers in this city : "CASH FOR 200 NEGROES, " Including both sexes, from twelve to twenty-five years of age. Persons having servants to dispose of will find it to their interest to give me a call, as I will give higher prices, in cash, than any other purchaser who is now in this market. 1 can at all times be found at the Mechanics' Hall, now kept by B. O. Sheckel, and formerly kept by Isaac Beers, on Seventh street, a few doors below Lloyd s Tavern, opposite the Centre Market. All communications promptly attended to. "JAMES BIRCH, "dec 4 — dtf Washington City." " CASH FOR 500 NEGROES, " Including both sexes, from twelve to twenty-five years of age. Persons having likely servants to dispose of, will find it to their interest to give us a call, as we will give higher prices in cash, than any other purchaser who is now, or may hereafter come into market. " FRANKLIN & ARMFIELD." " Alexandria, April G — d&sw." wives— the utter annihilation of all the endearing relations of human life, and the substitution of tlic single relation which property bears to its absolute proprietor . Sir, shall this trade in human flesh be permitted to con- tinue in the very heart of this Republic ? Shall the law re- main upon our statute book, which solemnly pronounces the citizen of the United States who is found engaged in the slave trade upon the high seas " a pirate," and dooms him to " suffer death," while here, in sight of this very Capitol, the same trade is carried on with impunity'? Shall our citi- zens, who make merchandise of men upon the ocean, be hunted as outlaws, while here, the same offenders against the human race are suffered to pursue the guilty traffic un- molested? Sir, this subject demands a searching investiga- tion. Will gentlemen deny such investigation! Shall the petitions which ask for it be " nailed to the table," or "buried in the tomb of all the Capulets!" I trust they will not be thus disposed of, and that no fear of" excitement" will deter us from probing the subject to the bottom, and administering a prompt and effectual remedy. I have, Mr. Speaker, spoken plainly and decidedly, be- cause it is due to the people whom I have the honor to rep- resent, that I should thus speak. It seems to me, sir, that the sentiments of the people of the North are not fairly un- derstood here on this subject. An honorable gentleman from New Hampshire (^r. Pierce) has said that not one in five hundred of his con- stituents were in favor of the object of these petitions; and other gentlemen have been understood to assert that the great mass of the northern people arc opposed to any action of Congress upon the subject. To sustain this view of the matter, the resolutions of public meetings at the North, dis- approving certain measures of the abolitionists, have been adverted to. I am well aware, sir,of the import of tho»c re solutions, and think I understand something of the nature <-,rtbnt puV^lio ocjitlniciit which they indicate. And I must be permitted to say, that I believe gentlemen are much mis- taken in supposing that they furnish evidence that the ge- neral sen ti-nent at the North is opposed to the favorable action of Congress upon the memorials which are now on your table. No, sir; the meetings which adopted the resolutions in question were got up with no reference to this subject. What are the facts 1 The Southern coun- try had been suddenly flooded from the North with anti- slavery publications ; and Northern meetings were, there- upon, convened to disavow a participation in the obnoxious measure, and to express their disapprobation of it. This they did, indeed, in strong, decided language. But let not gentlemen mistake the import of all this. It was the 7nfa- sure to which T have alluded which brought into existence these meetings, and it was this against which their pro- ceedings were mainly directed. The question of the abo- lition of slavery and the slave trade in this District was not agitated. It is not so much as alluded to in the resolutions of the Philadelphia, New York, or Boston meetings; but the doctrine of immediate abolition, and the " extravagant proceedings" (to use the language of the New York resolu- tions) of the abolitionists constitute the burden of them all. Sir, there are very many of those who are disposed to press upon Congress the duty of granting the prayer of these petitions, who did not and do not approve the views and measures to which I have adverted ; and it is due to frankness to say, sir, that I am among that number. I have never been able to perceive the expediency or propriety of attempting to inundate the South with even unexceptionable publications on this subject, much less those having a direct tendency to excite the passions of the slave, and tempt him to force the bondage which it is not for him to break, but for others to unloose. I admire, indeed, the purity of the philanthropy which seeks to abolish the institution of slave- ry, and elevate the degraded children of Africa from the con- dition of property to the privileges of men, but I deplore its often misdirected zeal, and deprecate the reaction which it is calculated to produce. The abolition of slavery in the States must be their own work. To convince them that tho whole system is ruinous and wrong, is not the labor of a day or a year. All the questions connected with this sub- ject are eminently practical questions, and nothing can be more obvious than the danger of faihng to accomplish any thing by a premature effort to accomplish at once ail that an ardent philanthropy may desire. I have said that the public sentiment at the North is not understood on this subject. I believe, sir, it is greatly misun- derstood. A large majority of the people are opposed to certain views and measures, connected with the proposed abolition of slaverj' in the States ; but they entertain, at the same time, an irreconcilable aversion to the institution of slavery, in all its forms. The most conclusive evidence of this is furnished in all the proceedings at the North, which have been adverted to, in this debate, as an index of public sentiment there. Thus, the preamble to the Bos- ton resolutions declares — " We hold this truth to be in- " disputable, that the condition of slavery finds no advo- " cates among our citizens. Our laws do not authorize it; " our principles revolt against it ; our citizens will not tole- " rate its existence among them." This, sir, expresses, I believe, the universal sentiment at the North on this subject. It is a sentiment which is not the production of a momentary excitement, but is deeply seated in the sober and settled convictions of the public mind. And, sir, let me assure gentlemen that no expres- sions of disapprobation in regard to the yneasures of "abo- litionists," or doubts as to the practicability of immediate emancipation, are to be taken as evidence that the "princi- ples" of the Northern people have ceased to "revolt against" slavery ; or that they will not avail themselves of every suitable occasion to discuss it, as well as of all reasonable and constitutional means of remed3'ing the evil. The sla- very of the States they know they cannot reach, but by moral influence ; and that influence they think can be made most effectual through kind and respectful, though earnest and urgent appeals to the Southern interest and the Southern conscience. But slavery here, they regard as within the competency of national legislation, and hold themselves, in common with the whole country, directly responsible for its continuance. And I need hardly say that there is a very general desire that measures may be immediately taken, looking to its final abolition : and espe- cially that what has, by almost the whole civilized worU, come to be accounted piracy upon the high seas, shall no longer be suffered to go unpunished and unmolested in the capital of this Republic. The venerable member from Massachusetts (Mr.AD.*M3) has said, and said truly, that opposition to slavery is, with the people of the North, a ■Miigious princifJe. An honor- able gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Jones) replies, by ask- ing, with emphasis, whether it is the rteHgionof the Savioui of men'? Sir, I did not expect to hear such a question seri- ously propounded here. I was not prepared for an intima- tion that that religion justified the holdingof human being.s as property. Why, sir, what is the great, leading, moral precept put forth by that Saviour, whose name is thus in- voked to sanction the practice of slavery? " All things whatsoever ye would th.^t men should do unto you, do ye even so to them." Sir, I will attempt no commentary on this precept. It needs none. I will only say that it contains the seminal principle of the pure and elevated morality of the Christian system — a morality so congenial with the spirit, and so constantly enforced by the example of its Divine Author, while upon earth. Now, sir, let gentlemen show me that Africans are not " men," and I will give up the argument. But, until this is done; until the declaration is blotted from the Book of Revelation, that " God hath made of one blood all nations of men, to dwell on all the face of the earth:" and until this great truth ceases to find a response in every human bosom, shall slavery stand rebuked by this all-comprehen- sive and sublime precept of the Saviour of men. But, sir, the religion which contains this precept, also enjoins submission to the "powers that be." The same mouth which uttered it said, "render unto Caesar tlie things which are Caesar's" — a ])recept coincident with that which exhorts — " servants be obedient to your own masters; not answering again ; not purloining, but showing all good fidelity." The Saviour made it no part of his business, while upon earth, to subvert the existing order of things. or to prescribe specific regulations for the administration of civil government. But he came to redeem men from sin — to write the law of love upon their hearia — lo est-abiish principles and proclaim precepts, betbre whose searching and all-pervading influence the time-honored systems of injustice and op[)ression shall melt away. Permit me now, Mr. Speaker, to examine, for a few mo- ments, some of the objections which are urged against the legislation of Congress on this subject. We are told, io the first place, that this is a question which concerns exclusively the people of this District; that the petitioners have no interest in it, and have nomore right to ask Congress to abolish slavery here than they have to petition the Legislature of Virginia to abolish it within her limits. Sir, the people who have signed these petitions regard themselves as citizens, not alone of the particular States in which they reside, but of the Republic. Every interest within the scope of the legislation of Congress is their in- terest. Every thing which concerns this Territory con- cerns them : its jwlice ; the value and security of the public property within its limits; and the safety of the Represen- tative bodies annually a.ssembled here. This is the growing capital of a great Republic. What may be the absolute 01 relative increase of its slave population, or how much it may affect the future condition of this District, cannot easi- ly be foreseen. That population amounted, in 1830, to more than G,000. The time may come when it will amount to ten times that number. And is it of no importance to our country whether its Capitol shall be surrounded by a mass of hardy, independent freevien, ready to peril their lives in defending it, as well as themselves, from the inva- sion of a foreign Power or whether it shall be guarded by 60,000 slaves, who, instead of rallying in its defence, may hail the invader as an angel of deliverance from their bond- age 1 And .is not this subject invested with additional in- terest, when it is considered that the Congress of the United States will be surrounded by such an amount of such a po- pulation 1 Have the petitioners, then, as a part of the American people, no interest in this question 1 And then, too, there is the character of the country as it may be affected by the institutions within the Territory, where the legislative power of that country is supreme. Is slavery tolerated in this Di.strict 1 The petitioners feel themselves, in some sense, responsible for it. Is merchan- dise made of men, within sight of the Capitolin which their Representatives are assembled, and on whose summit wave the stripes and the stars of freedom "? As Americans, they keenly feel the reproach, and instinctively reach forth their hands to wipe out the stain from the escutcheon of their country. But, in tlie second place, it is asserted that Congress has no right to legislate on this subject; that, however great may be the evil of slavery or the slave trade within this District, it is an evil which must be borne, since authority to remedy it is not to be found among the powers granted in the Con- stitution. And what are the powers of Congress touching this sub- ject 1 Is it true that Congress is authorized to extend its legislation to the high seas, even to the very coast of Afri- ca, and to prohibit the traffic in slaves, under the penalty of detjth, while it is powerless to reach the same evil in the very heart of the Republic'? If the grant of powers 7nust be so construed — if there is clearly no authority by which the Government can act in this matter, then must we sub- mit to the evil, and wait an amendment of the Constitution, which shall make it consistent with itself, and save the country from reproach. But, sir, fortunately for the country, the Constitution, through which we derive our powers, is not thus defective. The power to legislate upon this subject is granted ; and that, not by remote implication, but in terms of obvious and familiar import. Tlie 8th section of the first article gives to Congress authority "to exercise exclusive legisl&tion, in all cases whatsoerer,o\cr such district (not exceeding ten miles square) as may, by cession of particular States, and the ac- ceptance of Congress, become the seat of Government of the United States." In the first place, let i^ be observed, the power of Con- 6 gress to legislate in this District is exclusive. 7'hcre is no other jurisdiction, cither concurrent or conflicting. The jurisdiction of Virginia and Maryland, from which this territory was acquired by cession, is as perfectly excluded ?vS is the authority and jurisdiction of the Emperor of all the IiUssias. The crc/usire character of the jurisdiction being apparent, the next question is, what is its extent ? The answer is la the language of the grant, that it extends to " all cases whatsoever." The framers of the Constitution could have employed no language of more comprehensive import than this — " All CA3CS whatsoever." But are there no limitations to this? Certainly. The grant is subject to the limita- tions which are incident to all legislative power. There are many things which no Legislature can rightfully do. It cannot pass an ex pofit facto law. It cannot, by a mere act of legislation, transfer the property of one individual to ano- ther. It cannot authorize the commission of crime. These, and such like limitations, exist in the present case; not be- cause of any thing in the language of the grant, but be- cause they arc inherent in the very nature of all legislative power. Now, will it be seriously contended that the abolition of slavery and the slave trade is embraced within these implied limitations of legislative power? Is it not within the com- petency of ordinary legislation? Have not slavery and the slave trade been abolished by many States of this Union; and that, not upon the ground, as has been sug- gested in debate, of interest merely, but because, when thoroughly examined, the pretended right to hold and iransfer men as property has been found to rest on no substantial foundation? Indeed, the opposers of these pe- titions themselves, by laboring as they do to derive a prohi- bition to legislate on this subject from the Constitution, and from the reservations in the cessions of this territory, man- ifestly betray an unwillingness to trust the claim to ex- emption from congressional legislation to the natural limi- tation of legislative power. It is said, indeed, by the gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Wise) that the States which have abolisliod slavery ''have not violated the great principle of vested rights, by taking slave property against the consent of the owners and with- out compensation;" but that they have merely "adopted the ■post nati principle, and declared that rights which did not exist at the time .should never exist;" that is, that the issue of slaves, born after a certain future time, should Ijc free. Without stopping to inquire into the cor- rectness of this, in jxoint of fact, but, for the purposes of this argument, admitting it, let me ask what is the difference in principle between depriving an individual of his slave by act of legislation, and of the right to the issue of that slave by the same act? Upon common prin- ciples, an absolute right to the one as property necessarily carries with it a right to the other; and a iamier would re- sist as equal infringements of his rights, an attempt to take away his cattle, and a claim to deprive him of their future progeny. It would be appropriate here to go into an examination of the right which is claimed to hold men as property, and of the rightful extent of legislation on this subject. But it opens too broad a field for the present discussion, and I will not enter it. It thus appears that the right to legislate on the subjects of these petitions, which is manifestly included within the terms of the grant of power to Congress, is not excluded by operation of the principles which tbrm the basis of ordi- nary exceptions to the power of legislation. What is there, then, to exclude from the sweeping grant of power to legis- late "in all cases whatsoever," the power in question? An honorable gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Wi.se) finds various grounds of implied exclusion in the Constitu- tion. He says there are certain admitted exceptions to the leffislative power of Conirress in regard to this District, which he enumerates; and thereupon proceeds to infer, from the fact of these exceptions, that the power in ques- tion is also excepted. Thus,he says that Congress is prohibited by the Consti- tution from suspending the writ of habeas corpus, from passing a law respecting the establishment of religion, and I'rom abridging the freedom of speech and of the press, ox the right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, &c., and asks if these prohibitions do not extend to the power of Congress to legislate for this District. Most certainly they do; but it is for the obvious reason that they are unlimited in their terms, and of course necessarily extend to the whole legislation of Congress. Is there any such Umitation of the power in question? Why, when the Convention was in the act of providing limita- tions to the powers which had been granted to Congress, in the 8th section of the first article of the Constitution, did they omit to limit specifically the power of legislation "in all cases whatsoever," which had been granted to Con- gress in reference to this District? Ag?jn: The gentleman from Virginia says, ifl rightly understand his argument, that the provision of the Consti- tution, that " the citizens of each State shall be entitled to all privileges and immunities of citizens in the several States," necessarily extends to the District of Columbia, and that Congress must be understood to be prohibited from disfranchising here the citizens of the several Slates; that is, that it cannot deprive them of the privileges of citizens of the District whenever they come into it. It is true it can- not, because there would be a gross and glaring absurdity in securing, as the Constitution does, the rights of citizen- ship in each State, to citizens of every other State, and, at the same time, denying the rights of citizenship in this Dis- trict — the common property of all the States — to the citi- zens of those States. And, besides, the very act of consti- tuting this ten miles square a District of the United States necessarily gives to the citizens of each and all the States common rights in it; not the rights which they each enjoy in their respective States — as the terms in which the gen- tleman states his argument would seem to imply — because that would constitute twenty-lour difterent rules of action, but the right of each resident and sojourner here, of being protected by the lawx made for the District, and the whole District. The exception, then, of a right to disfranchise a citizen of Virginia who may come here, rests iipon a principle hy^ving no possible relation to the case in question. But further. The gentleman from Virginia says that no person held to service or labor in a State, under the laws thereof, escaping into this District, can be discharged from such service or labor, but must be delivered up to the party to whom such service or labor may be due, and that this constitutes an exception froilv;the general power to legis- late " in all cases whatsoever for this District. I admit it does, and why? Plainly because the Constitution having expressly secured the right to the slave-owner to reclaim hia slave in any and every State of this Union, it would be a clear evasion of it, as well as a manifest absurdity to deny him that right, in a District which is the common property of the very States within which his right of reclama- tion is secured by the Constiti.tion. The exception in this case rests, therefore, substantially upon an express provi- sion of the Constitution, which, by no possibility of construc- tion, can sustain the exception in question. Again: The Constitution provides that " notax orduty shall be laid on articles exported from any State. No pre- ference shall bo given by any regulation of commerce or re- venue to the ports of one State over those of another ; nor shall vessels bound to or from one State be obliged to enter, clear, or pay duties in another." And the gentleman from Virginia contends that this prohibition must be regarded as extending to the commerce and the ports of the District of Columbia ; and if so, his inference is, that an implied pro- hibition of the abolition by Congress of slavery and the slave trade in the States must also be taken to extend to this District. The first clause of the provision of the Constitution ]v.r' referred to was designed to exempt the exports of the coun- try from taxation, and must, of necessity, be taken to extend to all the ports within it; otherwise, the entire object of the clause might be directly defeated. The remaining clauses of the provision, it will be observed, have exclusive refer- ence to the equality of privileges of the several States which they aim to preserve, by prohibiting Congress from favoring ♦he commerce, or the ports, or the navigation of one, at the expense of another. This it might do, in effect, jf the ports, and commerce, and navigation of this District might be exempted from the operation of the clauses in question. Thus, a preference of the port of Alexandria over that of Baltimore would disturb the equality of privi- lege which the Constitution intended to preserve between Virginia and Maryland. But what has all this to do with the subject under dis cussionl The provisions witli regard to commerce, &c. do not specifically reach it ; and it is only, therefore, from the supposed analogy between the implied limitation of the power of Congress in the cases cited, and the limitation sought to be established in the present case, that an argu- ment can be drawn in favor of the latter. But where is the analogy between an implied prohibition to abohsh sla- very in the States, and an express prohibition of a prefer- ence of the ports of one State over those of another State 1 There is, indeed, a prohibition in both cases, but here the analogy ceases. If this is sufficient to establish the posi- tion of gentlemen, let us see what other positions it may es- tablish. Upon the same ground that Congress is prohibit- ed from abolishing slavery in the State of Virginia, for example, is it also prohibited from forbidding in that State the sale of lottery tickets, and the practice of gambling, and the crime of kidnapping. But could it not have enacted a prohibition of these practices in the city i were inhabitants of this Disti .swcr it. I can only say ths this House seven years agi_ '.■.•:■ ;• >• j;,i.\: '..a :<:■■ ,r. the Clerk's office ever since, open t^ ia- r-'^ctioi), axitl that it has been, during the past year, among the published doc- uments of this House; and, moreover, that it purports on its face to be a petition of inhabitants of this District. Under these circumstances, I submit whether there is not a sufficient presumption that it is what it purports to be, to put gentlemen upon proof of the contrary. And now, Mr. Speaker, let me entreat gentlemen to look into this petition. I do this the more earnestly, because they will find the names of many there, whom, I am per- suaded, they will not be inclined to charge either with ig- norance or fanaticism; but on whose truth and intelligence and judgment they will place the most confident reliance. They state facts which they arc in a condition to know, and advance opinions, the soundness of which is not liable to be affected by " northern prejudices" on this sub- ject. They are in the midst of slavery, and understand what it is. They have witnessed the slave trade, and know something of its horrors: and without any of the doubts of gentlemen in regard to the power of Congress on this sub- ject, and without any of the apprehensions with regard to the effect of its discussion upon the public peace and safe- ty, which has been made the subject of such glowing de- scriptions and gloomy anticipations, here and elsewhere, they fearlessly announce the truth in regard both to slave- r}' and the slave trade, and urgently appeal to Congress " as the only body invested by the American Constitution with power to relieve them." I submit, Mr. Speaker, whether it is not time that these petitioners, sustained as they are by the concurrent suppli- cations of their Northern brethren, should be heard and re- garded ; and whether the fact that eleven hundred citizens of this District have signed the petition which has just been read, is not a sufficient reply to the argument which has been drawn from considerations connected with a regard to the public safety. But further : The subject of the abolition of slavery, it is well known, was fully debated in the Legislature of Virginia in the year 1832, when the " injustice, tyranny, and oppression" of the slave system were openly and 10 btjklly maintained ;♦ and an effort was seriously made to commence a system of abolition which should look to the final, and not distant, extinction of slavery in that State. And did that discussion produce any symptoms of insurrec- tion among the slaves'? No, Sir. And why, indeed, should It 1 If you, sir, were the owner of one hundred slaves, and should seriously set about measures to give them the boon of freedom, do you think that the first intimation of it would beget in them a spirit of rebellion, and that it would rise in proportion as you should advance your bene- volent plans towards their consummation 1 To suppose this, is to suppose what I want evidence to believe of the African rac-e — that they are so lost to gratitude as to find no inducement to its exercise in such a manifertation of benevo- lent regard for them as this. Suffer me, sir, to dwell a few moments longer on the in- dications of opinion in Virginia on this subject, pending the agitation of the question in the Legislature of that State. While the subject was before a committee of the Legislature, the Editor of the Richmond Enquirer, a well known leading public journal at the Scat of Govern- ment of Virginia, said : " It is probable, from what we hear, that the committee on the colored population will report some plan for getting rid of the free people of color. But is this all that can be done? Are we for- ever to suffer the greatest evil which can scourge our land not only to remain, but to increase in its dini«nsions7 'We m-ay shut our eyes and avert our faces, if we please,' (writes an elo- f]uent South Carolinian, on his return from the North a few weeks ago,) ' but there it is, the dark and growing evil, at our doors; and meet the question we. must at no distant day. God only knows what it is the part of wise men to do on that momen- tous and appalling subject. Of this lam very sure, that the difference — nothing short of frightful — between all that exists on one side of the Potomac, and all on the other, is owing to that cause alone. The disease is deep seated; it is at the heart's core; it is consuming, and has all along been consuming,our vitals, and I could laugli, if I could laugh on s-uch a subject, at the ig- norance and folly of the politician who ascribes that to an act of the Government, which is the inevitable effect of the eternal laws of nature. What is to be done? Oh! my God, I don't know, but something must be done.' Yes, something must be done; and it is the part of no honest man to deny it; of no free press to affect to conceal it. When this dark population is growing upon us; when every new census is but gathering its appalling numbers upon us; when within a pe- riod equal to that in which this federal constitution has been in existence, those numbers will increase to more than 2,000,000 within Virginia; when our sister Slates are closing their doors up- on otn- blacks for sale; and when our whiles are moving west- wardly in greater numbers than we like to hear of ; when this, the fairest land on all this continent, for soil and climate and situation combined, might become a sort of garden spot if it were worked by the hands of white men alone, can we, ought we to sit quietly down, fold our arms, and say to each other, 'well, well, this thing will not come to the worst in our day. We will leave it to our children and our grand-children and great-grand-chil- dren to take care of themselves, and to brave the storm?' Is this to act like wise men? Heaven knows we are no fanatics. We detest the madness which actuated the Amis des Noirs. But something ought to be done. Means sure, but gradual, system- atic but discreet, ought to be adopted for reducing the mass of evil which is pressing upon the South, and will still more press upon her the longer it is put off. We ought not to shut our eyes nor avert our faces. And though we speak almost without a hope, that the committee or the Legislature will do any thing, at the present session, to meet this question, yet we say now, in the utmost sincerity of our hearts, that our wisest men cannot give * The gentleman who opened the debate on the side of aboli- tion, said: " It was a truth held sacred by every American and by every Republican throughout the world, and he presumed it could not be denied in that Hall, as a general principle, that it is an act of injustice, tyranny, and oppression, to hold any part of the hiun^an race in bondage against their consent. That circum- stances may exist which may put it out of the power of the own- ers, for a time, to grant their slaves liberty, he admitted to be possible ; and if they do exist in any case, it may excuse, but not justify, the owner in holding them. The right to the enjoy- ment of liberty is one of the most precious, inherent, inalienable rights which pertain to the whole human race, and of which they can never be divested, except by an act of grosn injustice." too much of their attention to this subject, nor can they give it too soon." The hon. gentleman from Virginia will .suffer me to com- mend this expression of sentiment to the deliberate atten- tion whiL-h the high standing and responsible position of Us author, and tlie peculiar circumstances under which he wrote, eminently entitle it. Especially would I commend to the hon. gentleman from South Carolina the declara- tion of the "eloquent South Carolinian," embodied in the article I have ju.st read. The able Editor of the Richmond Enquirer, and his eloquent correspondent, both had a near view of the evils of slavery, and describe them in a language which at once attests their sincerity, and commands assent to the correctness of their views upon this "momentous and appalling subject." I will add, that the other leading paper at the capital of Virginia, the Richmond Whig, made about the same time the following declaration : " We affirm, that the great mass of Virginia herself tri- ' umphs that the slavery question has been agitated, and ' reckons it glorious that the spiritof her sons did not shrink ' from grappling with the monster. We affirm that, in the ' heaviest slave districts of the State, thousands have hailed ' the discussion with delight, and contemplate the distant ' but ardently desired result, as the supreme good which a ' benevolent Providence could vouchsafe to their country." Mr. Speaker, if it was " glorious" and safe for Virginia to " grapple with the monster" in 1832, is it inglorious and unsafe for the Congress of the United States to grapple with the same monster now? Suffer me, Mr. Speaker, to present one more expression of opinion on this subject. I leave Virginia, and go over the mountains into the valley of the Mississippi ; and I there find the following leeeiu resolution or lUe o^uuu uf Kentucky upon the subject of emancipation : " Resolved, That a committee often be appointed, to consist of an equal number of ministers and ciders, whose business it shall be to digest and prepare a plan for the moral and religious in struction of our slaves, and for their future emancipation, and to report such plan to the several presbyteries within our bounds, for their consideration and approval." The coramitfcc appointed under this resolution, of whom John Brown, Esq. was chairman, and the Rev. John C. Young, President of Danville College, Secrctar)', made a report, in which, among other things, they say : " 1. A part of our sy.stem of slaveiy consists in depriving hu- man beings of the right to acquire property. 2. The depriva- tion of personal liberty forms another part of our system of sla- very. 3. The deprivation of personal security is the remain- ing'conatituent of our system of slavery." Its effects are said to be : " 1. To deprave and degrade its subjects, by removing from them the strongest natural checks to human corruption. 2. It dooms thousands of human beings to hopeless ignorance. 3. It deprives its subjects, in a great measure, of the privileges of the gospel. 4. This system licenses and produces great cruelty. 5. It produces general licentio\isness among the slaves. 6. This system demoralizes the whites as well as the blacks. 7. This system draws down upon us the vengeance of Heaven." These several points, in their order, are illustrated and enforc- ed at length. Then follow confutations of the various arguments of the defenders of tlie system. Then — " As the conclusion of all that has been advanced, we assert it to be the unquestionable duty of every Christian to use vigor- ous and immediate measures for the destniction of this whole system, and for the removal of all its unhappy effects. Both these objects should be contemplated in his etloits." Mr. Speaker, is it regarded by good and intelligent men in Kentucky as safe openly to recommend a " destruction of the whole system of slavery?" and shall we be quailing before the dangers of doing it in the District of Columbia 1 But, sir, I have another authority on this subject. I re- turn from the Valley of the Mississippi to this District,and, lookincr into the United States Telegraph of the 4th of Sep- tembcr°last, I find the following : Speaking in the name of the Southern people, the Editor says : " We hold that our sole reliance is on ourselves : that we ' have most to fear from the gradual operation on public ' opinion among ourselves, and that those are the most in- ' sidiousanddangerousinvadersof our rights and intercBts, 11 ' who, coming to us in the guise of friendship, endeavor to ' persuade us that slavery is a sin, a curse, an evil. It is ' not true that the South sleeps on a volcano — that we are ' afraid to go to bed at night — that we are fearful of murder ' and pillage. Our greatest cause of apprehension is, from ' the operation of the morbid sensibilitj' which appeals to ' the consciences of our own people, and would make them ' the voluntary instruments of their own ruin." So, then, the fears are not of insurrection, hut of co- eoitncf — not of the physical force of the slaves, but of the power ot'"public opitiion !" Need I, Mr. Speaker, repeat the expression of my sincere conviction, that the fears expressed by gentlemen on this floor are groundless 1 And is it not apparent, that the true ground of fear on this subject is to be found in a con- tinuance of the "dark and growing evil," so well described by the "'eloquent South Carolinian," to which our atten- tion has been directed? Permit me to add, in the language of the Richmond Enquirer, in the article I have read, that " our wisest men cannot give too much attention to this subject, nor can they give it too soon." But there is another objection sometimes urged against legislating on the subject of slaver)', which must not be overlooked in this discussion. Every attemjit to disturb the existing relation of master and slave, it is said, tends to dis- turb the balance of the Constitution, inasnuich as it was among the compromises which entered into the formation of that instrument, that three-fifths of the slaves should be represented in this body. Now, sir, in the first place, let it be observed that we are not asked to legislate on the abolition of slavery in Virginia or South Carolina, but in the District of Columbia; and that our legislation disturbs the balance of the Constitution only by the influence of its example upon the slaveholding States. In the second place, I contend that a just exercise of all tlic powers granted m the Constitution can never disturb its true balance, but is itself the preservation of that ba- lance. If the Constitution authorizes Congress to abolish Slave- ry in the District of Columbia, and the tendency of the ex- ercise of that power should be to aliolish Slavery in the Slave States, and thus reduce their representation in this bo