for that opinion I am responsible to my constituents, and all who confide in me, or have any claims upon me; so far my personal interest extends.

It is with the deepest regret, the most mournful reflections, that I compelled to say I had been constrained to come to the conclusion that in this I had been entirely in the wrong. I have been obliged to conclude, from that vote, that a majority of this House were deliberately and fatally of opinion that a slave has the right to petition this House.

From this proposition, if true, a corollary follows, as conclusively and inevitably as a corollary follows from a demonstration of any proposition in Euclid, that the constitution of the United States is no effective barrier to the action of Congress on the right of property in a negro slave to alter or abolish it.

This has filled my mind with the melancholy anticipations of all its natural and awful consequences; and this is the general understanding, as far as I am informed of the meaning and import of that vote, which has caused so much dissatisfaction in so many who are interested so many of the slaveholding community.

I have heard and am cheered with hope that such is not the construction put on this vote by many who voted, and have been thus understood. The motion to reconsider would seem to indicate that this hope is not entirely unfounded.

In the few considerations that I shall throw out, let me then avoid every thing that is calculated to irritate and unsettle the deliberate judgment of gentlemen in the decision they shall now make upon this momentous question, so full of consequences of fearful import. Let me not throw out any thing that wears the appearance of a threat, or any single word that addresses itself to passion of any kind.

Sir, let not the gentleman from Pennsylvania [Mr. SUTHERLAND] imagine that any question of order, or any question as to time and manner of introducing this subject, can materially affect the impression that this vote will make. Knowing that my own confidence was greater than is common to gentlemen of the South, and knowing that that confidence is shaken to its foundations, I cannot but feel that the confidence of others, less firm than my own, must be shaken also.

|

[H. OF R.

Mr. Speaker, we have taken an oath to support the constitution. That constitution was framed to support this and all other property. If, then, we appeal to any powers, rights, or reasons, above and beyond that instrument, we disregard the bond which is the only obliga. tion and contract between us; and, as it seems to me, with all respect to the opinions of others, we disregard the oaths we have taken to support it. It is in vain to put the case of a slave condemned to be hanged for crime, and applying for pardon, with no one to apply to but us. In such a case he is out of the power, custody, and protection, of his master, and is not the subject of property. Any general proposition that slaves can petition cannot be maintained in this way. The law makes provision how he may be pardoned without applying here. The faith and confidence of the South cannot be restored by extravagances of this sort.

We must come to the simple question: Do you, the majority, mean that our slaves can petition Congress? If so, say so-plainly, calmly, and promptly. If not, say the reverse, and let us know what you mean. It is due to us, and to yourselves, that you should be now understood upon this point. I hope that you will not answer to this inquiry under any party drill, as is supposed by the gentleman from South Carolina, [Mr. PICKENS,] but that you will give us your real opinion. I, like that gentleman, wish the South to know, since this question, never before thought of, as far as I know, has been raised, the exact truth. I wish the South to know the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth. I do not wish, by any irritating, provoking, or even vindictive, and much less by appealing to the tender feelings of kindness and sympathy, to aggravate or appease any passion or feeling, but to get from the House a cool and deliberate expression of opinion on this point.

I can assure the gentleman from South Carolina, that my course has not been produced by any drill on either side. I am certain, however, that even this question has been made, and I fear will continue to be made, subject to the inveterate party feelings heated to frenzy. In such a state of things nothing is sacred. I know there are those in this country, of all political sects, who are willing to make any use of this subject of negro slavery. I am and have been daily sensible of these operations going on around me, and see their effects.

Although the doctrines of the abolitionists give good cause for uneasiness, and although the late proposition Sir, the very moment the gentleman from Massachuin another branch of this Legislature, to incorporate the setts put his question, I felt it, and saw it in all its sad Colonization Society in this District, is far more calcula- consequences. I felt nothing but sorrow and sadness. ted to create uneasiness; yet both together, and all that When the Chair announced to the House that it was a has happened before, bear no comparison to the belief question of novelty and difficulty, I felt surprise, and even that Congress will assume the ground that they may re- astonishment. I thought it was so easy to have escaped ceive the petitions of slaves; that the constitution is no any further trouble about it. Not much acquainted security for the property in negro slaves. Nothing can with questions of order, I became somewhat resigned to satisfy us while we are even left in doubt on this ques- this, and felt still nothing but sorrow that such a firetion. The point has been made and seriously urged, not brand should have been thrown in among us, mingled only by the gentleman from Massachusetts, [Mr. ADAMS,] with a dread of its consequences, until a gentleman from but by others also, that a slave has the right to petition. New York (the chairman of the Committee of Ways and The venerable and distinguished gentleman has urged Means) attempted to make sport, and turn it off as a that a slave in the streets of Constantinople may petition" hoax" or a "joke," originating in the South. Sir, the Grand Seignor, or-Grand Mogul, and that he dare this produced in me feelings of any kind rather than not refuse to listen to him, and therefore infers that a what had prevailed with me before. If the gentleman slave may petition Congress; if he can prove that Con- from Massachusetts was "hoaxed" it was his misfortune, gress are the masters of the slaves, here his cases might but that was no reason why an attempt should be made be analogous. He has referred to the right of a British to "hoax" us in so solemn and serious a matter. The subject to petition. In that case all are free. He has gentleman from Pennsylvania [Mr. SUTHERLAND] reurged that the right to petition is older than, and para- lied upon this as some excuse for the introduction of mount to, the constitution. All this goes to show, if it this monstrous proposition in this House. Gentlemen shows any thing, that the constitution does not secure all, and surely a gentleman who has stood as high, and the property in a slave. The constitution was formed to deservedly so, as the Ex-President, must be taken to be protect person and property. This argument places the serious when they make from their places propositions whole South, person and property, under the discretion of this, or indeed of any kind, be they what they may. and at the mercy of a majority of Congress; and, like the When, then, a gentleman occupying a place as high in Grand Seignor, in Constantinople, they may make them this House and this country as the chairman of the Comall free or slaves, at their pleasure.

mittee of Ways and Means proposed to treat the subject with levity, and justify the introduction of a paper of that kind into this House, and a proposition so fraught with mischief, upon the ground that some one from the South had played a trick on the gentleman from Massachusetts, I was struck with surprise, as well as with other emotions that I need not now express in terms. There are things of which sport cannot be made; and this is one of them. What would you think of a man that would attempt to make fun of death? As well might gentlemen undertake to do that.

(FEB. 11, 1837.

Yet, sir, if they claim to hold our property, and consequently our safety and independence, at their discretion, it is but too plain that this claim will produce any other fruit sooner than brotherly love and kindness. That however the personal friendships (no other cause of dif ference existing) may continue the same, and probably in most instances will continue, still the general and final result will and must be, not the kind and gentle grasp of love and friendship, but the ungentle grapple of death; and the issue must be blood. A reflection not more terrible to one than to the other, and not more to either than to all men; but an issue to be deprecated, as should also all things calculated to lead to it, by all men in their sober senses, and from which may God in his mercy shield me, and mine, and my country!

Mr. LANE said he had moved the reconsideration of the vote taken upon the first resolution, for the purpose of substituting one less equivocal in its character-a resolution not susceptible of any and every possible construction-that shall banish all doubt from the mind of the good man and the patriot-that shall not arm the fanatic of the North, or the discontented politician of the South, with weapons to disturb the public repose. That, before he proceeded to assign the reasons which had induced this course, he desired the indulgence of the House while he should set himself right before his constituents, the House, and the country, in relation to this subject. It was one upon which his opinion had been made up long before he had a seat in this hall; and since which he had seen nothing, heard nothing, to shake, much less change it, either in reference to the power of Congress, or its duty, in its action upon abolition petitions.

That Congress have no power to interfere with slavery, as it exists in the States, is a proposition too clear to admit of a doubt. The wildest fanatic does not claim this power on the part of Congress.

The ladies of the North appear to be very anxious about their sisterhood at the South. God bless them, sir. I wish them all happiness, North and South, in whatever situation they may be found. Let me not say a word to wound or offend them; but I am persuaded they give themselves a great deal of unnecessary trouble about us. As they seem to have set out as valiant chevaliers, determined to break a lance in defence of the oppressed, it is probable that any appeal to them looking like a regard to their own interest would be coldly received; yet I would modestly say to them that, living among the people myself, I have some chance to know something about the effect likely to be produced in the South by their interference; and I am afraid the benefits will not be as great as they suppose. I will say, sir, to the gentlemen and ladies of the North, and to the gentlemen from that quarter in this House, and especially to the gentleman from Pennsylvania [Mr. SUTHERLAND] who last spoke, that I neither ask nor despise the sympathy of the North, or of him, so kindly ex pressed, but that, in fixing their eyes upon our dangers and perils, they are very prone to forget their own. They all seem to forget that, while they kindle up strife, rebellion, and civil war, as they think, only in the South, and weep over it, the flame they are kindling may reach their own dwellings-ay, sir, may break out first in their own quarters. While they fix their imaginations upon kindling fagots and smoking habitations in the South, the real flame may appear bursting loose from their own bedchambers, their own dwellings; and their own wives, husbands, friends, and children, may be the first and real sufferers. I do not address myself to the fears or passions of any, but to their reason. And, sir, if zeal has left any reason remaining, cannot gentlemen perceive that civil war, division, and disuuion, with all their horrid consequences, cannot be confined to one quarter of the Union only? Let me address myself to a consideration that will bring men to reflection, if any thing can-to dollars and cents. If men cannot think of their own wives and children, and the dangers and perils that will befall them on account of their imaginations too strongly dwelling upon the dangers, real or fancied, they think impending over our wives and children, they may be brought to feel, or their huckstered, adored thousands and millions in manfactories, when a single fagot ap-gether with the slave trade-a traffic carried on, within plied would reduce them all to ashes and smoke in an hour. Do they suppose that there is no discontent in their own country? No combustible matter that would take fire from a spark kindled in the South? However, it is useless to address reason to those whose zeal has caused them to overlook this.

Whether we sit here as brothers, consulting upon the common welfare, happiness, and prosperity, of our common family and country, or whether one portion of us is making claims to power never granted over the other, whether the constitution bas any obligatory force to protect our property, seems now about to be decided. I have lived in friendship and at ease, mingling equally with men here from all parts of the Union, and no man has felt more gratefully the kindness and friendship of Northern brethren, and acknowleged it more openly or frankly than I have done, or returned it more cordially.

That Congress does possess that power over the subject, in the District of Columbia, to the same extent with the States, in their respective jurisdictions, to his mind, was equally true. That, while he honestly entertained this opinion, he was free to state that its exercise, to any extent, would be injurious to that species of property in the hands of the owners in the neighborhood of the District, and fearfully dangerous to the tranquillity of

the Union.

Sir, (said Mr. L.,) what do these petitioners, called abolitionists and (by way of contempt) fanatics, but whom he would cali, whether male or female, the citizens of the United States, call upon Congress to do? To abolish slavery as it exists in the States? No, sir. To interfere with it in any manner in the States? Certainly not. They set forth that, in their opinion, slavery, in the abstract, is a great moral, political, and religious evil, and pray for its abolishment in the District of Columbia, to

the District, as inhuman as it is disgraceful to the Ameri can people. That, as a member of the Committee on the District of Columbia, he had examined the jail, the common property of the people of every portion of this Union, and, to his surprise, he found that prison the common receptacle for the safe keeping of slaves, bought up in the neighboring States by the dealers in human flesh, and there detained until the master or an agent shall find it convenient to drive them to a Southern market; and all this without regard to comfort or conve nience. In one ins'ance he found, in a damp loathsome room of eight feet square, a mother and six or seven children. Nor is this all. Within this District are private prisons, into which they are driven in droves, and kept for weeks and months, and then shipped to the South. This, all this cruelty, this loathsome suffering, this inhuman traffic, is carried on in open day, in presence of

the American people, at the seat of liberty and boasted freedom. It is this cruel, this disgraceful trade, those petitioners humbly and respectfully pray you to abolish. To this end, to remedy this evil, (Mr. L. said,) as a member of this House, he would receive these petitions, refer them, and act upon them promptly and effectively. He would treat them kindly, and combat their errors with reason. Mr. L. said he did not intend in these remarks to include the individual who should purchase a slave or slaves for his own use, or part with those for which he had no use.

Mr. L. said, upon the resolution rejected, reconsidered, and now a substitute proposed, he had but little to say. He had voted against its adoption, moved its reconsideration, and would now vote most cheerfully for its substitute. The honorable gentleman from South Carolina [Mr. PICKENS] says he voted for the resolution because that punishing a member for presenting a petition from slaves was conclusive they had no right to petition; while Mr. L. had voted against it for the reason that its adoption presupposed a right in the slave to petition. If no such right existed, why resolve that it should be a crime to present? Why not resolve at once the absence of the right?

Sir, it is remarkable that an honorable gentleman from South Carolina, alive to this subject, should have presented to this House a resolution so equivocal in its language, so doubtful in its character. What is the language, what the meaning, what the construction it would have received if adopted?

"Resolved, That any member who shall hereafter present any petition from the slaves of this Union ought to be considered as regardless of the feelings of the House, the rights of the Southern States, and unfriendly to the Union."

It provided, that any member who shall hereafter present any petition from the slaves of this Union. The plain and inevitable inferences to be drawn from this sentence are, first, that the members of this House have been in the habit of presenting such petitions; secondly, that it had been lawful to do so; and, lastly, the slave not only possessed such right, but had exercised it.

[H. of R.

the honest abolitionist evade it. Mr. L. said, in conclusion, that now, the event having passed, without being in any degree affected by this exciting subject, and with reference to which much of the past excitement may be attributed, he hoped, for the tranquillity of the nation, of the business of this House, the resolution now proposed in the place of the one on a former day rejected would be adopted, with such a majority as shall speak peace to the South, and that cannot be misunderstood at the North.

Mr. WADDY THOMPSON said he regretted to dìffer from his honorable colleague [Mr. PICKENS] on any question of such interest to the South as the one immediately pending; but he felt it due to those gentlemen who had shown a disposition to meet this question, to say that he was satisfied with the amendment proposed by the gentleman from Pennsylvania, [Mr. INGERSOLL,] because he believed it covered all the material points, if not the whole ground. Although he did not feel authorized to take the responsibility of accepting it as a modification of his resolution, still he would consider himself justified in voting for the amendment. He was glad to give gentlemen from the North the opportunity of setting themselves right on this subject; and although he might be disposed, under certain circumstances, to cavil for the ninth part of a hair, yet he would consider himself as doing that which was most improper if he were to split hairs on a question like the present-a question of pacification. He considered it to have been his duty to have said thus much; and, if he had not mistaken the general sentiment of the South, they would respond to it.

Mr. HOWARD moved a reconsideration of the vote by which the resolution of yesterday, directing Mr. Whitney to be brought before the bar of the House, was adopted; which motion was entered, and lies over. [It being a privileged question, was entertained by the Chair, and recorded.]

The subject was further discussed by Messrs. WISE, HARRISON of Missouri, ASHLEY, (the last two gentlemen in explanation,) UNDERWOOD, CRAIG, and ANTHONY, (the latter merely urging the House to take the question, as they had already consumed a whole week in a debate which could in no way benefit the country, any portion or section of it, or even a solitary individual.)

Mr. TAYLOR rose amidst loud cries of "question!" He said it had been his intention to submit a few remarks to the House in support of his proposition, but he was admonished by the loud calls of "question," and would most cheerfully yield to the expressed wish of the House. His chief object in rising, however, was to state, that the gentleman from Pennsylvania having offered a modification, and Mr. T. having been urged by one of his colleagues to accept it, he had then declined, and he now desired to give a single reason. He had done so for the purpose of waiting to see what the views of other members were, and having listened attentively to the debate in its progress, he had become satisfied that the acceptance of that amendment as a modification of his own would insure greater harmony in the House, which being all-important in the consideration and disposition of the question, therefore he accepted it.

Sir, had this resolution been adopted, and trust me, you would have seen the disappointed and ambitious politicians of the South, if any such there are, fanning the flame of discontent; yes, upon every stump, at every master, in every hall, sounding the alarm, danger, danger, disunion! The resolution would have been tortured into any and every possible meaning, to prove any and every thing. It would have been rightly denounced at the South as loosening instead of drawing the cord upon the slave. The South would have been in a political flame; in the North, the politicians would have blown the tide of abolition to its height, and all brought to bear upon the administration. In the face of all this, the honorable gentleman from South Carolina [Mr. PICKExs] says the rejection of such a resolution has driven the South to the fearful precipice of disunion; that they tread upon volcanoes. Sir, it was the rejection of that resolution which has saved them from the precipice, and calmed the troubled spirit of the volcano. Let honor. able gentlemen from the South join with their real, not pretended, friends; let them go with him and those with whom he acted-with the friends of the constitution, of the Union, of liberty, of equal rights-with the democratic party, the friends of the administration, in the adoption of a resolution, in its language pointed, in its meaning clear and obvious. A resolution that all who see, hear, or read it, shall understand it as one man- Mr. ADAMS then read certain amendments he wishthat the slaves of this Union have no right to petition Con-ed to move, one of which was to insert, where it was regress for the abolition of slavery. Such a resolution will be understood in the South, and will be satisfactory to all. The fanatic of the North cannot pervert it, nor

Mr. T. subsequently explained that, in accepting the amendment of the gentleman from Pennsylvania, she wished, at the same time, to retain also the original res olution, to come in after Mr. INGERSOLL's, and form, together, one distinct proposition.

ferred to, the words of the resolution of the 18th of January, ordering "all petitions, memorials, resolutions, and papers, relating in any way, or to any extent what

ever, to the subject of slavery, or the abolition of sla very," to be laid on the table, without being printed or referred, and that no further action should be had thereon.

Mr. A. then addressed the House at length, and went on to show that he was in no way responsible for the debate which had occurred. He now believed the paper to be a forgery by a slaveholding master, for the purpose of daring him to present a petition purporting to be from slaves. That having thus reason to believe it a forgery, he should not present it as a petition, whatever might be the decision of the House on the question before them. If he should present it all, it would be to invoke the authority of the House to cause the author of the forgery to be prosecuted for the forgery; which he certainly would do, if there were a competent judicial authority to try the offender, and he could require and obtain evidence to prove the fact.

[FEB. 11, 1837.

What was the position of the House? He would venture to say that it was the first time, since the formation of this Government, that the House had been called on to do a deed like the present. What was the question of privilege? It was, whether a member should be brought to the bar for an alleged disrespect to the House; and the vote of the House upon such a question is a judicial rather than a legislative proceeding. The power of punishing for contempt is one inherent in all legislative bodies, to protect them from insult, and to enforce their authority; but those who are the objects of that power are entitled to all the privileges of defendants in courts of justice. After that question had been discussed, and after the collected reason of the House had seen that such a proposition could not be sustained, another resolution was introduced, which had also been decided to be in order as a question of privilege. The judgment of this House had been given. The verdict of acquittal had been entered in favor of the accused; and now, for the first time in the history of this nation, after having been solemnly acquitted here, as in a court of justice under other circumstances, we were called on to open this verdict of acquittal for the new action of the House. It was the rich prerogative of that justice which is tempered by mercy to hold out its hopes, its blessings, and its privileges, to the accused, to the last syllable that was possible. When a verdict of "guilty" had been returned, a new trial might be granted; but where before had it been heard that, after the innocence of an accused person had been solemnrecorded, he should again be brought up for a new trial before the same tribunal?

Mr. GRANGER said he was about to proceed to address some remarks to the House, but it had been intimated to him that the proposition of the gentleman from Massachusetts [Mr. ADAMS] had been accepted. [Cries of no! no! order! order! question! question!] Mr. G. said he would tell the House, once for all, that, if he stood there until to-morrow's sun should rise, nothing should put him down but the rules of the House. Sir, (said Mr. G.,) has it come to this, that when a question of this magnitude is under discussion, involving the most important, and, as he supposed, well-settled principles of law, and when gentlemen dare not to have resort to the gag-law of the previous ques-ly tion, a member claiming his privilege here, and claiming to be heard in the exercise of that privilege, is to be hunted down with cries of "order! order! question! question?" I am the last man to be silenced in that way, nor will I yield the floor.

The ground he had taken in the commencement of this controversy was well known. This was the first moment in which a coldness had ever existed between the honorable gentleman from Massachusetts, [Mr. ADAMS] and himself. Mr. G. had thought that that gentleman had unnecessarily thrown into the House a question on which he had not been well advised, and on which he should have been better informed before he had brought it to the consideration of the House. He (Mr. G.) had no disguise on this subject. Let any man present here a petition from slaves, in reference to the question of the abolition of slavery, and he would be the first man to record his vote that no such right of petition existed. The institutions of our country had been so established that, if the right of slaves to appear in this hall and petition for their freedom was acknow!edged, from that day there would be here nothing but a continued scene of anarchy and confusion.

This was

It is a well-settled principle in law that no man shall be twice put in jeopardy for the same offence; yet here, after the legally constituted tribunal of our country has recorded its verdict of acquittal, the seals of that verdict are to be torn open, and the gentleman from Massachusetts is to be again put upon his defence; for it is useless to deny that, if the resolution, the rejection of which has been reconsidered, is now open for amendment in the manner proposed, it is equally so for the introduction of a proposition of censure as severe as that upon which this discussion commenced. As there is nothing in our rules requiring immediate action upon a motion to reconsider, it is in fact establishing the doctrine that, after this House shall have passed its judgment of acquittal upon a person brought to the bar for a contempt, it can, at any time thereafter, open that verdict, and change its decision to one of more or less severity than the former, according to the temper of the House at the moment of its action. It appeared to him that such a proposition was too monstrous to be tolerated.

Although he would not willingly weary the attention of the House, which at last he had been so fortunate as to secure, he would detain them long enough to say that the position he had taken might be illustrated by instances that would occur to the mind of every gentleman who heard him, and which were freed from the excitement with which this question was mingled. We had ordered a citizen (R. M. Whitney) to the bar of the House, to answer for an alleged contempt towards one of its

a position too plain to be controverted. He did not know whether the abolitionists contended for such a doctrine, for he knew very little of their views or opinions; nor did he know whether the gentleman from Massachusetts himself contended for it. He (Mr. G.) had very little to say as to the probability of a dismemberment of the Union arising from these causes, or of the wisdom or folly of legislating upon these abstract prop-committees, and he will probably be brought before us ositions. He would say, however, that there was a point beyond which he would not go, not particularly in reference to the gentleman from Massachusetts and his position now, but for the great cause of justice to every citizen who should be placed, here or elsewhere, on his trial. The Speaker had decided that the resolution of the gentleman from Virginia [Mr. PATTON] still held the question as one of privilege; that resolution had been rejected; the vote had been reconsidered, and the House now again stood on the same question of privilege upon which it had yesterday recorded its verdict.

on Monday. Suppose that, after a full action of the House upon his case, a resolution should be passed, and he be discharged without censure: will any gentleman contend that such a vote could be reconsidered, and this citizen, for the same act, be again placed upon his defence? Or, suppose a case that has happened, and very probably may again happen: a citizen is brought to our bar for a breach of privilege, consisting in an assault upon a member. The accused is acquitted upon the testimony of witnesses to the transaction who chance to be present, but who reside in remote sections of the Union.