Mr. TALIAFERRO and Mr. NICHOLAS advocated the opinion of Mr. JONES.

Mr. GALLATIN thought this was bringing a great and important question before the House in a very indirect way. Before we decided upon this claim, a committee ought to be appointed to inquire what progress had been made by the commissioners appointed to settle the claims of Georgia; and if the question came before the House in any shape, it ought to be in the only proper one, "to whom does this Territory belong?" Mr. G. was decidedly against the reference of the petition to a select committee.

Mr. CLAIBORNE said the petition contained other subjects than the right objected to by Georgia. The navigation of the Tombigby and Mobile rivers, of which they were deprived, was essentially necessary to the commerce of that part of the world, and their claim to this was certainly worthy of attention. The committee, in their report, might be silent as to any subject which would involve the objection urged against the reference.

Messrs. MACON, SEWALL, and RUTLEDGE, were also in favor of the commitment. After a long debate, Mr. MACON waived his motion, so as to have the petition referred to the committee to whom was committed a similar petition on the 24th ult.-which was agreed to.

THURSDAY, January 2.

RICHARD DOBBS SPAIGHT, from North Carolina, appeared, produced his credentials, was qualified,

and took his seat.

PETITION OF FREE BLACKS.

Mr. WALN presented a petition of Absalom Jones and others, free men of color, of the city and county of Philadelphia, praying for a revision of the laws of the United States relative to the slave trade; of the act relative to fugitives from justice; and for the adoption of such measures as shall in due course emancipate the whole of their brethren from their present situation; which he moved to have referred to the committee appointed to inquire whether any and what alterations ought to be made in the existing law prohibiting the slave trade from the United States to any foreign place or country.

H. OF R.

sures injurious to the human species, there were 700,000 blacks now in slavery in these States. They stated their application to Congress to be, not for the immediate emancipation of the whole, knowing that their degraded state and want of education would render that measure improper, but they ask an amelioration of their hard situation. They prayed that the act called the fugitive bill, which was very severe on that race of people, might be considered; also that the African slave trade might be put a stop to.

Mr. WALN moved its reference to the committee appointed to prohibit carrying on the slave trade to any foreign place or country.

Mr. RUTLEDGE thought any reference at all very improper; he hoped it would be laid on the table, and with a view never to be called up hereafter. Petitions of this sort had repeatedly come before the House, only with the difference of transfer of hands. When the Congress sat at New York, they spent much time and attention on the subject, but no sooner had it been decided that nothing could be done, than the same scenes were acted over again by repeatedly petitioning. Those gentlemen who used to come forward, to be sure, had not avowedly come forward again, but had now put it into the hands of the black gentlemen. They now tell the House these people are in slavery-I thank God they are! if they were not, dreadful would be the consequences. They say they are not represented. To be sure a great number of them are not. Farther, they say they are sent to the Southern States. Who can prevent that? Persons possessing slaves havea right to send them there if they choose. They tell you that they are brought from Africa. This matter is in a train to be prevented, the subject being now in the hands of a committee. Already had too much of this new-fangled French philosophy of liberty and equality found its way and was too apparent among these gentlemen in the Southern States, by which nothing would do but their liberty. This appeared to be the intention of the petition, but he supposed the people of the Eastern States had felt as much in having them among them as those of the Southern States in losing them, and therefore he believed gentlemen from those parts would vote with them. However, he considered this subject very improper and unconstitutional to discuss, and, from the ill effects it might produce, should say no more.

slavery, and the other was the slave trade. He did not wish to enter into general principles, because he conceived it as improper as any gentleman, but he could see no good reason why the petition might not be committed; every petition presented to the House ought to receive that attention, and a rejection of the present without examination could have no good effect.

The petitioners, after mentioning their sense of Mr. WALN thought the gentleman mistaken as the bounties of Providence in their freedom, and to the nature of the petition; it related but two the happiness they felt under such a form of Gov- grievances: one was, the operation of the fugitive ernment, represent that they cannot but be im-act, by which free men were carried and sold into pressed with the hardships under which numbers of their color labored, who they conceived equal objects of representation and attention with themselves or others under the Constitution. That the solemn compact, the Constitution, was violated by the trade of kidnapping, carried on by the people of some of the Southern States on the shores of Maryland and Delaware, by which numbers were hurried into holes and cellars, torn from their families and transported to Georgia, and there inhumanly exposed to sale, which was degrading to the dignífied nature of man. That by these and other mea

Mr. SMILIE was much surprised at the opposition of the gentleman from South Carolina to the reference. To be sure a great part of what these people asked, as far as he was acquainted with it,

was out of their power to grant, but there was much of the petition which was within the power of the House. So far as they had power, he considered it the duty of the House to attend and grant relief. He could wish to drop some ideas on the situation of those people, but felt a contrary impulse from motives of prudence. However, he must consider them as a part of the human species, equally capable of suffering and enjoying with others, and equally objects of attention, and therefore they had a claim to be heard.

Mr. Oris hoped the petition would not be committed; he had never seen a petition presented under a more dangerous and unpleasant aspect. It appeared to be subscribed by a number of individuals who were incapable of writing their names, or of reading the petition, and, a fortiori, of digesting the principles of it. It therefore was a petition of certain men made out by other men, who ought to have come forward themselves, but had forborne. To encourage a measure of the kind would have an irritating tendency, and must be mischievous to America very soon. It would teach them the art of assembling together, debating, and the like, and would soon, if encouraged, extend from one end of the Union to the other. A great part of the petition was improper, and the other part entirely unnecessary. No particular object or evils were pointed out in the fugitive law, but the truth was, they wanted a repeal of the law. Although, he thanked God he had no slaves, nor ever wished to possess any, yet he thought the subject ought not to be meddled with by the General Government, and if any grievances existed they were properly and only objects of legislation in the several States. It was the duty, and he thought the interest of the States, while they were kept in servitude, to ameliorate their situation as much as consisted with security. He thought those who did not possess that species of property had better leave the regulation of it to those who were cursed with it. However, it was unjust to intermeddle with it to the injury of the possessors.

JANUARY, 1800.

Mr. RUTLEDGE, in addition to his former arguments, observed, that so improper was it to consider this subject that some of the States would never have adopted the federal form of Government if it had not been secured to them that Congress would never legislate on the subject of slavery. Inasmuch, therefore, as it might rouse the jealousy and fears of those States, the least attention paid to it might do mischief.

Mr. THATCHER said that gentlemen generally set out wrong, on this subject, and leave off about half right; they debated till they were almost tired, and then the petition was not to be committed. If Congress had not power to legislate on the African trade, then why did they say it was with a committee? If they had power, where was the impropriety of referring, at least that part which could be considered? Would any gentleman say that it was policy not to legislate about 700,000 enemies, in the very body of the United States? While they were slaves they were enemies. He declared a greater evil than the very principle could not exist; it was a cancer of immense magnitude, that would some time destroy the body politic, except a proper legislation should prevent the evil. It must come before the House sooner or later. Then why postpone it? It was true the Eastern States were now suffering from the streams which issued from this great and dangerous fountain, but the evil ought to be stopped, ere it become too strong.

Upon principles less general, he contended the petition, which was couched in as decent and re spectful terms as was possible, should be referred. Whether the petitioners were black or white, whether they could write, or whether not, was entirely immaterial: they stated their sufferings under a law of the United States, and that was argument enough for a respectable reference. Because they could not write, were not their rights to be secured to them? Strange doctrine! A great reason why they could not write was their being brought up in early life in slavery.

If gentlemen saw so great evil rise out of the debate on this subject, why did they introduce the evil practice? They might have silently suffered it to have been committed; no evil could have arisen therefrom, because the committee would have reported only consistently with the power of the House to grant.

Mr. H. LEE observed that gentlemen were sent to that House to protect the rights of the people and the rights of property. That property which the people of the Southern States possess consisted of slaves, and therefore Congress had no authority but to protect it, and not take measures to deprive the citizens of it. He said he held himself not second to any gentleman in a genuine attachment Mr. BROWN, of Rhode Island, said he was in to the rights of humanity, but he could not believe hopes that every member belonging to the Norththat great ends would be answered by the refer-ern States would have seen by this time the imence of the petition, but much evil might accrue. It contained sentiments which he thought it would be highly improper so far to encourage. One object prayed for in this petition was now in the hands of a committee; let that committee report respecting the Guinea trade, let it be entirely obliterated; to that he would agree with all his heart, but he hoped the House would never intermeddle with the property of any of the citizens. Instead of voting with the worthy member who wished it to lie on the table, he would have it returned to the gentleman who presented it, as the only effectual means of checking an injurious practice.

propriety of encouraging slaves to come from the Southern States to reside as vagabonds and thieves among them, and have been tired of the bad policy. No subject surely was so likely to cause a division of the States as that respecting slaves. He did not hold a slave in the world, he said, but he was as much for supporting the rights and property of those who did, as though he was a slave owner. He considered this as much personal property as a farm or a ship, which was incontestably so. He went into a view of the federal compact, to argue the impropriety of legislating on the subject. This petition, he said, did not come from the blacks, but

Mr. WALN contended, that at least the House had the power of legislating on the state of free blacks as well as other people, and on the slave trade, much of which was still carrying on from Rhode Island, Boston and Penusylvania. This ought to be looked into. He denied that any idea had ever entered his mind on presenting the petition either to debate on the subject, or to will an emancipation of the slaves. Gentlemen from the South-religious body of people whose fanaticism leads ern States appeared to lament there were so many among them, but their conduct was very contrary to their declaration.

nor was he the least culpable, but executed a duty he conceived him bound to.

Mr. JONES said the petition threw so much aspersion upon the State he represented (Georgia) that he must think it his duty to rise Why was that State to be selected out from all others? However, he should follow the petition in its parts. in order to show that the petitioners actually had asked what it was not in the power of the House to legislate upon emancipation. It was said to merely affect the slave trade.

JANUARY, 1800.

vast a majority it would be lost. He thought it would be some consolation to his constituents, when he returned home, to say how few of the House of Representatives were the supporters of this dangerous petition.

Mr. WALN said if he had known that this petition would have caused so much alarm, he certainly should have desired the petitioners not to present it; but if they had still thought it necessary and been desirous of it, he should, as he then thought it within the power of Legislation, and still First, the petitioners contemplated that those peo-thought so, have presented it. He thought it his ple (the slaves) ought to be represented, "with us duty, whenever any individual conceived himself and the rest of the citizens of the United States." injured by a law, to receive his petition, and he Then they speak of the Federal compact, in which thought himself in no wise implicated in the manthey consider those people as interested in com- ner, form, or subject of the petition, or answerable mon with others, under these words: "we, the peo- for it as containing his opinions. If it should be ple of the United States of America," &c. I supposed that the assertions in the petition were would ask gentlemen whether, with all their phi- unfounded, or bore too hard on a certain State, the lanthropy, they would wish to see those people sit- only way to ascertain that fact was by referring to ting by their sides deliberating in the councils of a committee, that the necessary inquiries might be the nation? He presumed not. They go on far-reported. He again declared his disapprobation ther and say, 66 We do not ask for the immediate at this subject undergoing any discussion, nor emancipation of all, but we ask you to prepare the would it have taken place had not the gentleman way for the oppressed to go free, that every yoke from South Carolina commenced it. might be broken, thus keeping up the principle to do unto others as you would they should do unto you." The words need only be read to convince every man what is the tendency of their request. The gentleman farther says, that 700.000 men are in bondage. I ask him how he would remedy this evil as he calls it? but I do not think it is any evil; would he have these people turned out in the United States to ravage, murder, and commit every species of crime? I believe it might have been happy for the United States if these people had never been introduced amongst us, but I do believe that they have been immensely benefited by coming amongst us. It was the British Government that transmitted them down to us when in a colonized state, but being here, and being the property of individuals, after obtaining our common liberty and forming our Federal compact, property and safety were guarantied to every individual and State in the Confederation. How then can this House meddle with that part of our property? The General Government has no power over it. With respect to that part of the petition which said that these people were crowded into cellars and transported to Georgia, Mr. J. informed the House that the importation to that State by sea had been prohibited; none had come there by sea for many years, and offenders against that law were fined £100 sterling for each individual thus introduced. He hoped the petition would be treated with the contempt it merited, and thrown under the table.

Mr. RUTLEDGE rose to move that the question might be decided by yeas and nays. It was a practice he generally was against, and scarcely ever moved, but he considered this of importance sufficient to demand it. It was a question in which the interests of a great number of people in this country were involved. He had no doubt it would be lost by a very great majority, and he thought it would have a good effect to be recorded by how

Mr. PLATT conceived that everything which was brought before that House ought to be committed, unless there was manifest indecency in the language, or it should appear that the relief prayed for could not be granted consistently with the power of the House. In his opinion, except one of these two causes prevented, it unquestionably ought to be thus disposed of. As for indecency of expression, he could perceive none, either in the petition, or in the arguments of the gentlemen who advocated its reference. A third reason indeed might be mentioned, which was, that the persons whose names were signed did not give consent to the petition, and therefore it was not their act. Neither of these reasons was proved to have existed.

Although, agreeably to the Constitution, Congress could not make any laws to prevent the emigration or importation of any persons whom the several States should, at the adoption thereof, think proper to admit, yet Congress could, and had made laws relative to fugitives from justice and previ ous to the year 1800. It was this law they prayed the amelioration of, and that the power of persons over their slaves might be limited, and that the law might be so amended as to prevent its violation. It was for that, and not for the general aboli tion of slavery they prayed, and surely they ought to be heard; their prayer ought to be committed for that purpose.

He disclaimed the least desire, but an abhorof rence, of any principle that would rob persons their property, but at the same time he was not such a dupe to words as to be of the opinion held up by a gentleman that because the French had used the words "reason" and "philosophy" he should discard them, and with them humanity!

Mr. THATCHER thought that to make use of the incapacity of these people to read or write, as an argument against committing their petition, must arise out of prejudice in his colleague against the