4: ; .'Volume ;irifNfeABE'w
,7
. - - .-1, . ' . - rr-r ... , . P .'" -W- 1 1
UlLCKai, IV. -'C. WEDNESDAY ITIAtlCn 3,
EDITOR JUND PROPRIETOR.
V.
. u v PA YABLE 'iJ JIDVAJSTCE. v
. V
PUBLISHED: WEEKLY, BIT
I
TERMS ni ;v: : : v. ;
rjHE NORTH CAROLINA S'PANOARb
13 PUBLISHED WtKLY, AT
XffBEE DOLLARS PER Jk.'N'NVMIN'ADVAljirCE. '
yiirtie persons wto remitby Mail (postage paid) Fire
Polla", will be entitled to a receipt for Six Dollars
or two years subscription to the Standard one co
ny two years, or two copies one year.
rlifour copies, :- : : ; . ; $10 00
: : -20
twenty" : :. : '35 00
The same rate for six months.
iL.ny person procuring and forwarding five ubscH-
jr3 with the cash ($15.) will be entitled to the Stand.
,id one yer free of charge. . .
. tKjti9Ement8 not exceeding fourteen !ineswill
he inserted one time for One Dollar, and twenty-fire
cents for each subsequent insertion ; those nf great
er length, in proportion. .Court Orders Judici
al Advertisement will be charged twenty-fire per
cent higher than the above raies. . A deduction of
S3 1-3 per cent, wilt be made to those wbo advertise by
tbe year. QcJ-If the number of insertions be not mark
ed on them, they will be continued nntil ordered out.
Letters to the Editor must coxae free of postage, Tor they
B1y not be attended to
IPEECH OF MR. DOBBIN, ;
OF NORTH CAROLINA, . - ,
Delivered in the Housu of 'Representatives, Feb
ruary 1 1th, 1847, on the three million appropri
ation bill and against the " Wilmot proviso."
Mr. Chairman: I do not rise upon this occa
sion fur the purpose of re-publishing another edition
of the history of the Mexican war. Its origin, its
rise, and its progress, are familiar to the humblest
cottager of the country, as well as the most active
politician in the capital. The fame of those gal
lant soldiers who fought and achieved the brilliant
victories of Monterey and Resaca de la Palma
his crossed the confines of our own republic, and
has elicited the applause and admiration of the
mightiest Powers on earth.
But, Mr. Chairman, there is a war of recent ori
gin ; upon the origin, the rise, and the progress
of which, I do propose to make some remarks this
morning. I mean tne war receniiy wagea upon
tbe reputation, the constitutional
rights.
and do
mestic institutions of thesouthern Stales. An hon
orable gentleman from New York Mr. Strong
the other day, who had the manly independence
and the patriotism to oppose that war, concerning
which I now purpose to speak, announced in this
House, that if the manner in which this belliger
ant proposition originated, -and the circumstances
under which, it was brought to fight, con Id be
made a matter of public history it would at once
be curious, entertaining, and amusing ; for, nc
cording to, the insinuations, or, perhaps the posi
tive affirmations that have been made, gentlemen
were so solemnly impressed with the magnitude
of this movement, that, although many of the
Ibices of our northern friends were secretly com
bined in the alliance; yet, that it soon became ap
parent that it was a matter of too momentous im
portance, for the public to suppose for a day that
one man alone was its projector. It is said, there
fore, that while one distinguished gentleman from
New York Mr. Grover advised this proposition,
another gentleman from Ohio Mr. Brinkerhoff
wrote, and another distinguished gentleman from
Pennsylvania, Mr. Wilmot. introduced it
Before I reply, Mr. Chairman, to the untenable
pretexts promulgated on this florvr; in justification
of this unnecessary and inexcusable assault be
fore 1 Siiy anything in regard to my dfnsive ope
rations ; bnfore I begin to vindicate the reputation
and the constitutional rights of the South, which I
think have here been unjustly and cruelly assailed,
I propose to make n few remarks.' upon the pecu
liar and curious manner the very peculiar and
curious manner, in which this war has thus far
been conducted. 1
At the last session of Congress, this warlike
manifesto first made its appearance ; an adjourn
ment took place, and the achievements were thus
far "bloodless:" we indulged the hope that the
war was over; but it seems thai mis was oniy me
ending of the first campaign. On a memorable
occasion, a fw weeks since, when all was calm
nnd qriiet; when no cloud of domestic discord ob
scured the horizon; when no man dreamed of the
renewal of these hostiJi.'s, an honorable gentle
man from Nw York Mr. King appeared upon
uV stagp, clad in the habiliment, the amiable and
inoff naive habiliment, of a " personal explana
linn" and with a countenance that always seems
os if ' his thoughts were turned on peace," he
proclaimed to us that his w voice" was " still for
war;" and that the armistice which we thought
was in existence, was to end, and the war to bo
prfweutd with vigor.
But, Mr. Chairman, without intending anything
unkind to the honorable and distinguished gentle
men who seem to have acted thus far as the gen
erals in this warlike campaign, I cannot refrain
from alluding to the manner'in which they have
made the distribution of the various duties emong
the generals who have Commanded their forces.
The honorable gentleman fiom Now York Mr.
Rathbun. who advocated this proposition, announ
ced to us, in the the most solemn and deliberate
manner, that slavery was ah evil; lhat it was a
blighting curse, and it great calamity ; and, in an
eloquent burst of indignation, proclaimed lhat any
northern man who dared here, to" countenance the
extension of slave territory, would be swept away
by a tornado from the North. Yea, sir; his elo
quence mounted still higher: he said that such a
one would be destroyed "by thunder manufactur4ination and recrimination; and exciting as this
edat the North, second only to the thunder of the topic is, I still indulge the belief that there is good
Creaior himself!" Well. Mr. Chairman, after
proceedinglhus far, it was very surprising to some
but not to all that that samt honorable gentle
man, who denounced slavery as this blighting
curse, mildew, calamity, and misfortune, wound
up his speech by telling us, lhat if we would agree
that our slaves should not be included in the ap-
poriionment of representatives; we might go, and
welcome, into any territory with Hum An, air.
Chairman f did not that experienced and dexterous
debater for a moment forget that thunder which
he previously declared would destroy any man
who countenanced the -extension of slave territory T
Uid he noi forget that; when he put himself in the
position of countenancing tbis extension of sfave
territory, whether it carried with it political pow
er or not, he rendered himself liable to ' the thun
ders, if any such exist, which he said were pre
pared for gentlemen who gave their support to
such a proposition? Did he not forget that, by
thus agreeing to consent that this slave territory
miht be extended, on the conditions he mentioned.
Ac came within the operation of this terrible tor
nado and northern thunder t I agree that he said,
he spoke for himself alone. But the same honor
able gentleman, in the same speech, proceeded to
allude to the proposition of the Governor of ,Vir-
g'aia, to become relieved of their free negroes by
ending them to the North, whfln so moch senti-
mental sympathy' was professed for therh." That
proposition the gentleman spurned with' scorn andj
indignation j and, instead of generously opening
northern doors to aftmit the free negro, and relieve
him from the croel atmosphere of slavery, be de
nounced the idea ns almost on insult to the North.
Then, Mr'Chnirman.' I ask; ihe' House to at
tend precisely to the' character of the gentleman'3
speech. He denounced slavery as' a curse and an
evil ; proclaimed that northern thunder would des
troy any northern man who would' countenance
the extension of -slave territory ; and concluded by
saying it our slaves were not represented, ne
would not object to its extension ; and by denounc
ing the idea of receiving our free negroes at the
North.' Sn that the sum and substance of his
speech is. unless vou. agree that ' slaves shall not
be counted in the apportionment of representatives,
your slaves shall not go South, arid your free ne
groes shall not go INorth. That was the condition
in which he would place the South." A
That was one course of argument; that was
one planrof the campaign. adopted by the gentle-
man from rew-York; wnicn real ly seemed to
dread the political power' more than it abhorred
the. slavery of the South.
But the honorable gentleman from Pennsylva
nia, fMr. WilmotJ who was the author of this
declaration of war upon the reputation and consti
tutional rights of the South, adopted a different
course. He with somewhat vehement declama
tion, stated that nil he wanted. was, that the Gov
ernment should assume a position of " neutrality,"
and he capped the climax of his doctrine of neu
trality, by introducing a positive proposition, in
viting the Government to interfere 1 The gentle
man proceeded to speak very kindly of the spirit
of compromise ; but evinced bis compromising
spirit by advocating a proposition which violates
all the compromises of the Constitution, and the
Missouri compromise also. He denounced the
idea of allowing slavery to make further aggres
sions upon the South, and as he considered this
M a matter of naked and abstrnct right," he would
have his shoulder drawn from its socket, before
" he would yield an inch " Yet he stated as for
himself, he had " no squeamish sensibility," "no
morbid sympathy" for the slaves, and admitted
that he f had advocated the annexation of Texas
vrith slavery in it !
Political power, therefore, was the first weapon
used in the fight. Professed government "neu
trality," explained to mean governmental interfe
rence, was the Second ; but the third was brought
out yesterday ; and then the honorable gentlemen
from Ohio Mr. Brinkerhoff and New York
tKMr WaaHI inwvlrasf Ihaoirl f rtnr Ksvinhr ns
invoked the aid of our Saviour,
one who " spake as neyer man spake," contended
. . . ' .
that we rould not dare throw "the mantle on
Christianity around this curse," and proceeded, at
least one or tnemt in in mosi pious nnu aurcung.
manner, by well digested course of reasoning,
to consign the hapless slaveholder to moral degra
dation in.ihis world, and to eternal perdition m
the world to come 1
- Before I proceed, then, Mr. Chairman, to reply
to thergumrnts used by these gentlemen, I take
the liberty of doing what I regret these gentlemen
did not do, of making at least a respectful allusion
to the Constitution. T have always thought, sir, it
was the pride and boast of Americans that we not
only livpd in the enjnymrni of the blessings of a
free Government, but that our rights, our prop-
erty, and happiness are protecieo oy . a -oruien
Constitution, which we are nil taught to rrgara ns
:ir.-rl ind inviolable: a Constitution written by
hp hands that had in st wielded the sword in
the cause of human freedom; a Constitution die-
tated bv hearts burning with an ardent love
of
of
Jibertv. and mst released irom me mraiuom
tyranny. And when a wise legislator one wnu
appreciates his responsibility as a representative.
and his rights ns a cilizen is invneo, inio a new
finld of legislation, he turns to the pages ot the
Constitution to loarn whether he has ihe constitu
tional right to act, before he proceeds to the subor
dinate considerations of policy and expediency.
And, sir, if there ever was a question which should
call into exercise all our self-control, all our wis
dom, all orfr patriotism, and a strict adherence to
ihe Constitution, it is this question of slavery; this
dangerous rock upon which wise and good men
have gloomily foreboded lhat our ship of State
would one day be wrecked, and the world be call
ed sadly to gaze upon the sundered and bleeding
fragments of our once glorious and happy Union.
But if we are true upon ibis occasion to our-
selves, true to the Constitution, the sheet anchor oi
our safKy, this storm cloud that now darkens our
political horizon, and threatens to break in its lury
and scatter desolation and dismay through our
wide-spread republic, will pass off in harmless
silence, and leave behind it a clearer sky and a
more genial sunshine. Sir, however exalted may
be the patriotism, however honest the motives,
however disinterested ihe philanthropy, of ihe
rnntlrrfien who have originated this scheme, I do
9
not
hesitate, here in my place, upon the solemn
resDonnbiliiies of a man and a Representative, to
contend lhat, in my opinion, it violates lhat written
Constitution which we have sworn to support ; that
it is pregnant with mischief to the peace and har
mony, and, in the estimation of many wise men,
wiih the ultimate destruction of this Union.
Mr. Chairman, I do not propose to declaim about
this, but to discuss it I scorn to indulge in crim-
sense enough left, that there is patriotism enough
left in this House, to enable us 4to reason togeth
er" about it, and to remember 'that this is not a
noisy debating society, gotten up for amusement,
but the House of Representatives of a great and
proud republic. Sir, 1 distinctly take the position
that slaves are recognised as properly under our
Constitution; lhat in that Constitution safe
guards to protect thit peculiar properly ate ex
pressly contained ; and that without the -incorporation
of these, safeguaids; this glorious Union
could not have been consummated. This Feder
al Government exists under the Constitution ; it
derives all its power from the Constitution ; it
must be administered by rules prescribed solely
by that Constitution, and possesses no powers but
those " expressly" delegated to it.". And I con
tend, sir, that any act of Congress which prohibits
the citizens of: the southern States from carrying
iheir slave property with them into territory' the
common property of the United States, violates
most palpably the faith and compromise of lthe
Constitution ; is unwarranted by any .clause con
tained in thai instrument; is sectional, unequal, op
pressive - because while iTahnounces to the citi
zens of one section of the Union that they may go
and enjoy this territory With all their property, in
the same breath it notifies the citizens of another
section if they go and settle there they must Icrivo
their slave property behind thern, in which prop
erly they have invested millions of money "under
flhe sacred guarantees of the Constitution.
.r And "here I am met at the very?lhreshkt?by
gentlemen, who notion ly deny iharslave's 'are' re
cognised as property, r but repel the charge with
eloquent indignation, as a -slander 'upon that free
Constitution, . and a libel upon the ise and good
tnerr who framed it 7 Here 1 take issue Avhh'them.
And they make this charge, so$e of them, not
withstanding the ; debates of' the 'Convention in
which the Constitution was framedhow, that of
all the questions that were agitated, slavery, 'sla
very was the one-that excited most their alarm
and their hopes. . We find, as was read here yes
terday, that there were, fanatics in thajconvention,
who denounced slavery as . a curse and a sin.
They were from the North. We find,' also, that
other gentlemen, grave and wjse men, vindicated
slavery as an indispensable requisite in this coun
try, we find that representatives from the South,
particularly from Georgia and 'South Carolina,
solemnly declared that if the attempt were made to
infringe- upon their slave property, they would not
come into the Union ; and that northern men,
equally wise and patriotic, expressed their opinion,
that if slavery were recognised in the Constitution,
the North would hesitate to come into this Union.
But, sir,, we find faither that these 'good and wise
men,, burning with a desire to consummate this
Union, compromised their personal opinions on
the altar of patriotism. We read in this very Con
stitution a clause which -protects the slaveholder,
and-enables him to recover tbe slave which escapes
into another State ; another clause establishes the
basis of: representation by which negroes are not
to be counted merely as persons, but to assume
the mixed character of persons and property -Jive
slaves being considered as three persons ; 'another
clause. by which a tax was authorized to be laid
upon the importation of slaves showing a recog
nition of them as property. And, Mr. Chairman,
what else do we find ? We find that these good
and wise men not only did this, but they permitted
the Constitution - to tolerate, and countenance the
idea of our people employing their vessels, man
ning their ships, and embarking, in what is (de
nounced as " the nefarious traffic in human flesh."
We .find these good and wise .men -tolerated
the idea of extending and increasing slavery,: by
expressly, providing for the importation of slaves
for twenty years. . And yet gentlemen, learned m
constitutional law. acquainted wiih - the history of;
tbe Convention, solemnly announced ineir opin
ion lhat slaves are not recognised as properly in
this Constitution! And who were the men who
framed this instrument? Who were tbe men who
j incorporated mto it this doctrine, and recognised the
inclihfliAn rt e aDAPn lav n t rmAw (a Arm 1 1 I hn
- ..;..., ... v...
importation of slaves for twenty years? Sir, they
were jut " fresh from the battle-fields of liberty;'
their, ministrations were upon the holiest altars of
the innermost sanctuary of freedom; while the
degenerate patriots of modern times are scarcely
entitled ."to enter the porch of the temple."
Sir, we don't ask the privileges which our fa-
there granted, of importing slaves from abroad ;! not the " Wilmot proviso." When the honora
tve do not even ask you to receive into the Union i hie gentleman fronv Mississippi Mr. Roberts
! territory with slavery now in it; but we ask you
not to interfere with the slave property we already
have, and which, in the Constitution, you have
agreed to protect Here I would rejmark that the
name of the venerated Madison is invoked.' He
has. been called to the stand, as a witness, by the
gentleman fiom New York,1 Mr. Wood. And
allow me to say, that my friend was a litile mge-
nious in this matter, and acted the cautious tacli-
cian, for he prefaced it with quite an air of great
candor and fairness, by saying lhat he would not
read from -Mr. Sherman, a northern authory, but
he would rend from Mr. Madison. Mr. Chairman,
why did not the gentleman read from Mr. Sher
man ? As he took, the liberty of reading from
Mr. Madison, will he permit me to read from Mr.
STierman ? When the question was discussed in
the Convention as to the propriety of allowing a
tax to be levied upon imported slaves, Mr. Sher
man contended thntjf you incorporated the doc
trine of taxing staves imported, you admitted in
the Constitution that they were property. Hear
Mr. Sherman. I lake the extract from the Madi
son Papers:
- " Mr. Sherman said it was better to let the south
ern States import slaves than to part with them, if
they made lhat a ine qua non. Ht was opposed
to a lit on slaves imported, because it implied tbey
were property." . - ,
. Does not this extract explain the true reason
why the honorable gentleman declined reading
from ihe speeches of Mr. Sherman, a member of
ihe Federal Convention from Connecticut ? For
if the gentleman had read Mr. Sherman, he would
have seen that he distinctly admitted in the debates
that the article of the Constitution, authorizing a
lax on imported slaves, to which I have alluded,
recognised, by implication, that these slaves were
and should be considered as property. Sir, the,
proceedings of the convention in regard to lhat
matter are curious, entertaining and instructive.
They show lhat there was a compromise even as
as to the word used. . The matter-was referred to
a committee of eleven ; the word " slaves-' was
stricken out, but there was inserted a tax upon them)
which-was the compromise ; thereby showing on
the face of the Constitution that they are recog
nised as property:
The gentleman from New York read an ex
tract from what Mr. Madison said, conveying the
idea that there could not be such a thing as property
in human-beings. I remember an expression Mr.ftreaty at Ghent with Great Britain, an article was
iviaaison usea, ana in ine very speecn 01 air. iviau-ison-
he alluded to the distinction between slaves
and other property. Slaves not being ,ffikemer
chandise, consumed." Mr. Dickinson wished the
clause about ." the migration and importation of
persons
to have the word " slaves" in it, instead of
nrnn" fimiffprnwir Mnrris also desired it
! Mr. Sherman liked a: description better than the
term proposed, which -had been declined by the
bid Congress, and were not pleasing to some peo
ple." The word " persons," therefore, was used,
and when the vote in Convention was about to be
taken on tbe second part of the clause about the
tax or duty imposed, " Mr. Sherman was against
this second part as acknowledging men: to be prop
erty, : by taxing them as such under the character
of slaves.' . Then followed'" Mr. King, and Mr.
Langdort considered this as the price of the first
part.'.' .General Pinckney admitted that it was so.
Thus showing that while one party preferred the
word, ". persons' the other did not object when it
was -accompanied with a lazing clause also.'
But, Mr. Chairman, although honorable gen
tlemen who have lately participated in this de
bate, have not shown sufficient respect to the Con
stitution to read us anything from it which toler
ates this proposition which tbey make, one hon-
' orable gentleman who partlcirated in this debate
c.1 an curiy penou oj ine session, iwr. ireuiij-i. con
tended that in that clause oi the Constitution,
which authorizes Congress to make all " needful
rules and regulations" respecting the territory of
tne United slates, there is contained the power to
" regulate" slavery, ;and to prohibit the importa
tion pf slaves into 'this territory. Now, Mr. Chair
raanvl know" the impatience'with.htch the com
mittee always Jisten to arguments' in regard Jo
conaitutibhal. Tqaestions.Iashal( not, ' tberefore,
proceed elaborately tfr dTscussihefn. ' But, sir,
can it be supr?5sed for "one moment that it e,ver en
tered into the . conceptions oft the wise men who
framed the Constitution,, that those words ..?.need
ful regulations would be construed (o authorize
the prohibiting us front carrying our slave pro
perty into the Territories of the United States,
when tbey contended so stTenuousIyt ably, and
zealously, for the doctrine of ihe Constitution re
cognising slaves as property, and protecting them?
Can this be true of the men who said the Union
should not be formed,.if they were not even per
mitted to import slaves . for twenty yea rs ? - Is it
possible that they ever supposed that under these
I words needful regulations," respecting territory,
Biucjf wuiu uc tuuuucu wnnin me limns wnere
it then existed, and that we should practically be
deprived br our property, being prohibited from
carrying it into territory won "by our common pat-
riotism, treasure, and blood? No
sir; it never
enrereu into ineir conceptions., were our wise
men who defended so ably southern lights, wide
awake on the subject of their slave property, when
all other clauses were discussed, but asleep when
this was asserted ? Did they not understand the
meaning of langauge? Is the word "needful"
synonymous with the 'wort! "expedient or judi
cious ?" Or rather, do not lexicographers define
it to mean "necessary, indispensably requisite ?"
Whnf is meant by " regulations ?" Sir, tbe clause
of the. Constitution which gives to Congress the
power to " regulate Commerce," did any one ever
suppose that this gave us a power to prohibit com
mence? - -
But the. honorable gentleman from Pennsylva
nia, Mr. Thompson, the other day, very calmly
and dispassionately told us, if a majority of Con
gress were of the opinion that it was needful "
to prevent citizens fiom carrying their slaves into
the Territories belonging to the United States,
why, the doctrine of submission was incornorated
into the Constitution; and that we ouht always
to bow to the will of the majority. I am perfectly
wining 10 concede ine propriety or a respectful
yielding; on the part .'of minorities; but, when
gentlemen place a strained and unnatural construc
tion upon a clause of the Constitution, the tenden-
icy of which is to infringe upon our Tights, and ul
timately to take away our property; and when, as
the dnly argument in defence of it, you reply to
us, that the doctrine of submission is ingrafted on
the Consiitution, and we must bow to it without a
question, it is rather too heavy a draught upon our
patience and pnuosopny
Sir. it was said here the other day, that this is
j was speaking, the gentleman from New York
' lir. oroverj aimosi lnierropieu him by denying
it to be the " Wilmot proviso," contending that it
is the " Jrflerson proviso." The gentleman froxn.
Ohio, Mr.-Brinkerhofli on yesterday, affirmed,
with a great deal of zeal and eloquence, with an
air of grieat triumph, lhat Mr. Jefferson counte
nanced this doctrine; and the honorable gentle
man made a great flourish herje with the Journals
of the Congress of 1784. Now, in reply to this,
the first remark I have to make is, that Mr. Jef
ferson's proposition, whatever' it was, was made in
1784 prior to the adoption of the Constitution.
But it may be said the very fact that Mr. Jefferson
countenanced the doctrirve of prohibiting slavery
in the Territory of the Northwest even Mr7i, show
ed lhat, in his heart, he was. opposed to the exten
sion of slavery. I will remark that this was in
1784; that, since lhat period, slaves have gone on
increasing, by the natural increase; until there are
more than three millions; that, under the Consti
tution, the importation of slaves was allowed for
twenty years longer and, if Mr. Jefferson were
olive this day, acquainted with the history of lha
slaves, acquainted wiih the history of the South,
acquainted with the insidious design and hope ul
timately to abolish our slave property, by cop fin
ing it within narrow limits, until an exhausted
soil and a crowded population shall -make it a
burden and tax, he would never for one moment
tolerate this " Wilmot proposition " as a matter
of policy, and certainly he was loo well Verse in
constitutional law to countenance ns a constitu
tional right ,
That is the answer to tbe charge in reference to
Mr. Jefferson, and the-attempt to len(fthc sanction
of his grent name to this startling proposition to
do gross injustice to one-half of this Union, in the
name of philanthropy, but in the spirit of misguid-
fd fanaticism '
i . - -
. But, so fur from his heart being in the thing, "one
Of the proutfest monuments erected to his fame
one of ihe .chief glories of his administration
was the acquisition of Louisiana with iTavery
and no anti-slavery clause I So that Mr. Jeffer
son, after the Consiitution was framed, adorned
nis nuiiiiiii&iraiiuii oy uiu acquisiiion 01 Slave icrri
tory, and lived and died a slaveholder' himself;
And not only are slaves recognised by the Ccn
stitution as properly, but they a reso '.'recognised!
in ine nrsi treaty 01 nrace, in 10: nna m our
incorporated, making an express provision to in
demhify those of our citizens who lost their slajye
property ; ana if. you examine into the Journals of
Congress and the reports of committees, you xvill
see that bills were reported and passed, appropria
ting moneys to tbSse whose slaves were lost And
I understand it is the fact, that Mr. Adams, the
venerable member from Massachusetts, himself inx
troduced that article into the treatytand so avow
ed on the floor of Congress. 1
But I know, Mr. Chairman, the great impor
tance that is attached to great names, and it is very
natural that gentlemen should desire not only to
throw the mantle of Jefferson, "the great apostle
of liberty," around their doctrines, but also that, of
Madison,. " the father the Constitution." An4 I
heard the gentleman from Ohib, Alr. Root, who
had the book,1 say he could read from it, to show
that Mr. Madisonf 'ht the "Congress of 1790, ad
mitted that Congress had the constitutional rrghf
to regulate slavery- in the Territories; and also
the gentleman from -New; York M. Rathbun
contended for it as a proposition that could hot be
disputed. Now, when 1 heard that announced,
having,-1 thought of' late formed, a somewhat' a
miliar -acquawiipcewith the ' opinions of Mr.
Madison, I 'nevertheless elti little appreheniive
tbat'somethinffia his writings had esc! ped my at
tentfoB.' and? that the gentleman had found Mr.
rMadison i as a potential authority on their side.
Sir, I look ihe liberty of reading the book triyself,
and the speech attd page referred to by. the gen
tleman ; and, according to my . construction, the
nonorabie gentleman has entirely mistaken Mr.
MadisonVmeaning.
It was upon apetilion introduced into the Con
gress of 1790, lhat the question was discussed Jy
many gentlemen, and among others by Mr,' Madi
son, of the constitutional power of Congress to in
terfere with the subject of slavery. b"3t more par
ticularly what is called and understood as tbe
"slave-trade," was the subject-matter of discussion.
Well, it is perfectly well known by genilemen:
that that , is a question totally distinct Trom the
question of our domestic slavery. But here is the
part oLihe speech of Mr. Madison nil tided to by
the gentleman from Ohio and the gentleman from
New York. The intelligent reader can , place
the proper construction upon it, according to his
own jadgrmenL
Mr. Madison says :
Tbe petition prayed in general terrrs for the
interference of Congress, so far as ihev were con
stitutionally authorized ; but even if its prayer was
in some degree unconstitutional, it might be com
mitted, as was the case on Mr, Churchman's peii-
lion, one part of which was supposed to apply for
an. unconstitutional interference by ihe General
Government. He admiiteJthat Congress is re
stricted by ihe Consiitution from taking measures
to abolish tbe slave-trade; vet there are a variety
of ways by which it could countenance the aboli
tion, and regulations might be made in relation to
iheintroduclioh of them into the new Stales to be
formed out of the Western Territory."
Now, the Constitution, on its face, prohibits
Congress from preventing tbe importation of
slaves into the States of this Union, " now exist-
until 1808. This express provision, deny
ing to Congress the power to prevent the impor
tation oi slaves until 1808 into the States " now in
existence," would seen, to indicate that the power
did exist then at once to prevent importation into
Territories or future Slates. The Constitution
expressly, in distinct terms, refers to the im
portations into the States then existing; ancTihis,
I think, was the point Mr. Madison was talking
about. Ho referred to " the abolition of ihe slave
trade," and not the introduction of slaves already
here from one State into the Territories. This, I
ihink, is ihe fair construction of Mr. Madison's
speech. ' '
But, Mr. Chairman, I will not proceed further
with this argument in regard to the Constitution
I deem it demonstrable, that the sovereignty' over
the Territories, the' common property of the Uni
ted States, is in the people of the States, and that
this Government has no other power over them
but that which is expressly delegated. " And the
power contended for is certainly not delegated.
And the reader of the Constitution will observe,
that the clause which gives JUongress power "to
exercise exclusive legislation, in a ll cases .what-
soever, over such Lhstrict (not exceeding ten -miles
square as may become the seat of Government,
is much stronger than the clause which relates to
olher Territories belonging to the Uuited States.
In ihe first, to Congress is granted," exclusive leg
islation ;" and yet many of the wisest statesmen
doubt the powr of Congress t interfere with the
subject of slavery in this District; while now, it is
here boldly contended that Congress derives pow
er to prohibit slave property fn the other Terriu
Ties from the Words,"1.' needful regulations."
I ask ,-even if tho Constitution does grant us the
power, is it expedient arid just to use it f Why
do grntlemer press this question upon ns"? ' What
patrioRc motive or" consideration is therb that de
mands it? What m there in the crisis which
cans-ior iw vna motive can prompt iherri,i
What object can they accomplish1 what go&Tj ef-.
feet by it? Dogentlornen tell me slavery is a
sin ? Sir, I confess my astonishment at avowals
I have listened to lately 1 heard the gentleman
from New York Mr. Wood earnestly denounce
it a contrary to the vYordof God, and assert that
"the mantle of Christian ifygu Id not be thrown
around it," He invoked 'the aid of Him wno
" spake as nevman spalcb," to sustain him in his
position againsi it : he went to the Wprd of God,
and almost went as far as a'genllcraan who pre
ceded him, who consigned us, rj the rrrost solemn
manner, not only to degradation 'white we live,
but to eternal perdition when we die.
Sir I was pained (6 bear this doctrine avowed
here. forces from me afew words in vindica
tion of thepeople of ihe South, arid an allusion to
that-sacrcd volume which should rievet be alluded
to in ihe most fjeatrd debate withour solemnity
and reverence. 1 do not' profess to be a; learned
theologian. I do not claim to be as deeply versed
in scriptural learning as I ought1 to be. Per
haps my reading, sir, has been too casual and in
attentive ; for surely, the parV that consigns ine
slave-holder o perdition on accqunt of the sinful
ness of- slavery has escaped my attention, ".'I ask
gentlemen to point out the scriptural denunciation
of slavery. Where, iri the Old or New Testa
ment, do you fimHt? .1$ it denounced at the time
when ihe white tents of Israel were spread at ihej
loot ot the Mount, and the voiceof Jehovah, amid
ih thundering? and lightnings of Sinai, gave the.
moral law toMoses? Does ihe honorable gen
tleman read, m that moral law nny warning to
man against this terrible sin of holding slavepro
perty ? 4 Does he infer it from that commandment
thich proclaims the seventh day as, the Sabbath'
of the Lordtind saith to man, " in it thou shah
not do any work, thy man-servant nor thy maid
strvant t" Does he infer it from that other com
mandment which saith "thdu shall not covet thy
neighbor's house, no his man-servant, nor his
maidservant, nor anything that is thyr neigh
bor's?" Or is jt fo'und in the New Testament,
whereHhe. Apostle preaches thus : "Servants, be
obedient tb them that are ySur. -masters according
to tho flesh withear and trembling?" Is it found
in the same jfpostle's admonition to roasters to act
well'their part, "khowing that yburMaster also
is in Heaven ?'' Ist found 1 in the Epistle to
Timothy : " Let as many servants as are tinder
the yoke count their masters' worthy of all honor,
that the name of"Qod and bis doctrine-be hot blas
phemed ?" , . - fl .
. Sir. fanaticism, fanaticism must yield this point;
intelligent piety has yielded it; philosophic Chris
tains have yielded it, Sir. when Moses came to
find among the Jews slavery, sif institution of the.
worst sort slave who,badbeen taken captive.
slaves by crime-llaves by birth da be denounce
it ?-r ;Did"he;becpme'ari Abpliiionist, and proclaim
it n crime and sin, and that it must be abolished ?
Nd ; .be only sought to regulate-it; . And when
our Saviour made his advent on earth, what,' sir.
docs history teach ul both sacred and profane.
''J.
that he endangered his salvation if he held .slave
property? Did He-preach the necessity of its
abolition? of its sinfulness? Have the honora bio
gentlemen perused the epistle of Paul to Philemon,
which was sf rit by Onesimus, n runaway slave?
Paul sent him home to his Christian master: and
in his epistle to Philemon, he says of Onesimus,
" Whom I would have '.retained with mej' but
without. thy mind would I do nothing." ; Sir, if
Paul under Divine inspiration, thought slavery a
crime tie would have told Philemon, "Sir, re
member you must die and are- accountable to
God;-take off his shackles, and liberate 'your
slave." xx o ; he recommends nrm to his mercy,
and sent him back to his mastery because, he said,
he riad-no authority to1 keep him a very useful
Tctson, by whicli out friends in some portions of
the Union mighi profit ! 1 know ' it is said tho
word servant does not mean Hare; 1 challenge
investigation on this 'subject.. : The. word- traos
LiUd servant. In the Greek,, is dovlos, which .
mean slave, andis used in contradistinction to
words used to mean "a- btrelrng! or servant.?'
And I now insist lhatlgeutlemon, before they do
nounce us and consign us to indimy aod eternal
perdition, invoking the Word of .God agamst 'os,
shall first read that holy book; and -know 'whar it
contains. .. 4
Mr. Chaiiman, I have not thrust this discussion
here.. I did not commence this discussion about
scriptural authority. But when gentlemen ' say
that the judgments of God will be upon us, and
consign us to infamy in ihis'woild and 'perdition
in another when the gentleman from Ohio, in
hrs fervent manner, seemed to lift up his heart and
call, upon his God to smile oh their efforts--when
northern men claim the authority Tof the Bible
against us, 1 have thought it right to' refer to that
book, not to prove slavery a Divine institution or
a very great blessing, but to show that they are
too hasty in their reft rence to scriptural authority.
I do not include all the gentlemen from the 'North
in the category, for 1 recognise some of them who
stand with us, whom .1 cordially take by the hand -as
friends in this" crisis. But I refi r to gentlemen
who delivered studied pieces nf declamation against
our domestic institutions, who thus invoiced tha
Word of God who spoke wjih the, fervid zeal" of
I a Crusader. bent on rcscumg Iho! South from the
grasp of lire heathenish slaveholder who read to
us ait act of a southern Legislature preventing the
slaves from being taUghrta: read and write, land
said, ?4the eye of the intellect was put out by this
system."... And here I would remark, that this act
ot Assembly was rendered necessary, on account
of just; such movements as ihh, calculated to put
mischief, in the mind of the slave, and making
rijjid liws indispensable. And -I would further
remu rkYih.it gentlemen are laboring under ftlse
, impnssions as. to the moral condition ol our
.slaves many q whom are instructed, and manyf
of-whom are not kept m such religious igndrantn
as not to be able to compete, wilhitnUch success,
in their biblical, knovyjedge with some rtbopa
hjgh plnces, deplore their degradation, ; ; : i
But it is said that these efforts are,mada to beot,
e fit tne negro. 1 hold, Mr. Chairman .rthat iA
black and white races xannbt to exist sunder the
samegovernment upon an equal fueling. I chal
lenge nny. body Jo. cefhtrovert jt. I will'ljwt gd
intomy oifo country for proof of this, but will re
fer to the .Nprth, where our frihds claim to br;
and qo doubt many are, actuatctTin reference.to
lb is m.ittcr by pure and disinterested, motives-.
Shivery is technically abolished there, but servi
tudorAUU;.&tiu wlicn toe legislotor, clad in thft
garb of philanthropy takes trie tSegro to. the hall
of legislation, tears his chains from him, and-bids
him go and be free, he practically stops him at the
door ami tells him, When you go to Thejheatr
remember you are n black man, and take' your
scat in cq humble place ; when you go to church
to worship God, remember ybrrr color, and sit
not with the jvhiteman, j-ourliberatoc, but your
superior,. . Dire nor intrude at the same tabid
with us. .. And when you die and are to be boTled,
your graveyards and ours are tobe separate. ' I
do not say lhisiin a spirit of denunciation of the
North; far from ft ; and in every Stale it may hot
be true; but it sustains mo in iKe proposition I
laid down, that rtte bl-ick apd white races cannot
coexist under the samo government upon an equal
fooling. .rh right of silffrage iritarelygiven to
them, in Ihe Northland in the State jwhich my
friend near mo in part rrprrsents. f New York.)
KvheU thepttempt was recently made, to give bira
tyis JJgbt, ihe proposition Xvns rejcicq wjih scorrr,
by jne hundred thousand majority.
- But t say, if you attempt to libe rate th fse's laves
in our country, in our limited territory, you can
do them no good;. and you do the whites essentia)
Gajin. 1 lyive seen lately a summary of curious
fac'ts prepared 'by n genii eman who looks into
statistics, and these facts indicate efeaily lhat in
khis counlrj, wheri you liberate theso slaves they
are more-sgraded'tban wnrn tbey are slaves, and'
commit more crime. Diffusion will come nearer
promoting ultimate peaceful emancipation thah
any. movement that can be made. " And coningtd
Uhe South, southern gentlemen will bear me out,:
that the crime committed in the South iS by the
free pegro, : not by the slave. And although we
have in our midst some free negroes of -the best
character, yet they do not receive from the white,
man cither the same protection or sympathy thai
the slave does, whose master protects huh both
fiom principle find interest, s , l ; -,.
The following will serve to show how slightly
if, at all, Ue '.moral condition of -the colored man'
is : improved in - ihe States .where he , is mancr-'
patf-d ; and If this be the picture where the blacks
are so fewVin numbers, what can -be expected it
our slaves trre to beacon fined to their present ter'
Tjtorial fimits, and numbering more than three
millipnsand, then emancipated? ' '"'' -
In Massachusetts there is one free negro to sevV
enty-four ofthe white population, and yet oni siicth
of the convicts are freenegroea. InTCobaecticut
there is one free negro to tbirty-fouT of the white
populationrand yet one third of .the convicts are :
free negroes, i In. New York there is one fre ie
gro,to thirty-fiveofthe white population, and yet
one-fourth of'the convicts are free negroes." -IirP
N,ew Jersey there, isjne -free negro to thlrteeri f
He" white, popnlatibn,. and hyetf one-third of lhe
prisoners are tree negroes. ; in t'jennsylvanwaneTe'
is one free rfegro t'th7rty-fourof the whit pojlin.-
lion, and onet bird pftbe prrsoriers are'freernegroes. -
But tbe gemlefnerl sav tbev want to elevate the
"white man at' the SdUth save us, sir, from the
elevation -to result from turning loose three rr.tt
history ? .Did he jiot find Cfn in existence tfslat
ry, the wo-rjtt that the world-fens evr seed
slavery which gave' the master a control over th
servant greater and more unlimited than we have 1
.Were not human beings then bought and sold ?
Did our Savior: in his hoftr (cachings, warn roan