SENATE.]

TUESDAY, March 3.

Adjournment.

him with the intended recess of the two Houses of Congress, and agreed thereto; and Messrs. MITCHILL and ADAMS were appointed the com

Mr. MITCHILL reported, from the joint com-mittee on the part of Senate. mittee, that they had waited on the President of the United States, who informed them that he had no further communications to make to the two Houses of Congress.

The Senate took into consideration the resolution of the House of Representatives for the appointment of a joint committee to wait on the President of the United States to acquaint

A message from the House of Representatives informed the Senate that the House, having finished the business before them, are about to adjourn. The Secretary was then directed to inform the House of Representatives that the Senate, having finished the business before them, are about to adjourn, whereupon the Senate adjourned without day.

Importation of Slaves.

DECEMBER, 1806.]

Importation of Slaves.

[H. OF R.

a plan, but I should suppose that they might be disposed of in service, in such States as would admit them, at the discretion of the Secretary of the Treasury. If forfeited to the United States, we can, by a general provision, do what we please with them. And I have no doubt that what we do will be both prudent and humane.

so far as it respected persons coming to reside | vagabonds. My colleague ought to show what in the State, they were manumitted, as a mat-is to be done with them. I am not prepared with ter of course.* He believed that no contract for their sale within the State would be of any validity; nor did he believe any power had been given to the United States to render such sale valid. If there were such a power, its tendency would be to introduce into that State persons contrary to its laws. If such a sale were valid, it would interfere with those laws; and if not valid, it would be a perfect nullity, and the provision be thus altogether inoperative. It was admitted that there was no probability of such an importation into States where slavery was not allowed; yet such a thing might take place, and Congress ought not to legislate under the idea that it would not take place.

Mr. EARLY observed, that this motion could only be viewed as an old thing offered in a new shape, intended to have the same effect as the motion offered the preceding day declaring persons of color imported into the United States free. He thought it betrayed great inconsistency. Those who advocated it had yesterday supported an amendment which, by declaring all such persons free, went directly to interfere with the laws of States where slavery was permitted; to-day they gravely maintained the inexpediency of any such interference whatever. The great difficulty insisted upon was, that the operation of this law in States where slavery was not permitted, would contravene the existing laws by forfeiting the imported slaves. But this difficulty had no solidity in it-it was altogether ideal, as from the nature of things the case of an importation in such States could not occur; at all events, it was among the most improbable events in nature.

Mr. BIDWELL moved to strike out all that part of the fourth section which related to the forfeiture of negroes.

Mr. EARLY asked, what substitute was intended.

Mr. D. R. WILLIAMS.-I agree with the gentleman from Massachusetts, who spoke last, that the amendment ought not to be adopted. It is incumbent on the gentleman who introduced it, (Mr. BIDWELL,) to tell us what is to be done with these negroes, if they are not to be forfeited. I say, it is his duty to inform us how they are to be disposed of. Give up the idea of forfeiture, and I challenge the gentleman to invent fines, penalties, or punishments of any sort, sufficient to restrain the slave trade. The same identical persons will break this law who have broken the act of 1794. And who are these persons? They are the gentleman's own countrymen; they are the people of Rhode Island, who are concerned in this business. You cannot stop the trade by penalties. I have myself seen a ship of more than three hundred tons, the George Washington, sold for five dollars. Nobody would bid. The gentleman over the way shakes his head; he acknowledges the truth of my remarks on his countrymen.

If

Mr. BIDWELL knew nothing of the New England men being concerned in this trade. He lived in the interior of the country, and had little acquaintance with mercantile men. they were concerned, he was willing that they should be punished by fine and penalties, and to any extent; but he was still opposed to a forfeiture of the negroes generally by a law of Congress. The States may determine, perhaps, whether it shall be done.

Mr. QUINCY, of Massachusetts.--I think I now understand the plan of my colleague, (Mr. BIDWELL,) and I like it less than before. It is "to

Mr. BIDWELL replied, that he should move that the committee rise, and that the bill be re-leave them to the operation of the laws of the committed.

Mr. QUINCY, of Massachusetts.—I am opposed to the motion of my colleague, (Mr. BIDWELL,) to strike out the forfeiture. The United States ought to retain the control of them. What is to be done with them, is another question. But for the United States to divest the old owners of their right, and provide no means for their protection afterwards, appears to me cruel and dangerous. They are helpless, ignorant of our laws, and of our language and manners. How are they to be supported? If imported into the South, they will be slaves; if into the North,

* With this agreed the practice of all the free States at

that time, and the laws of several of them-as New York

and Pennsylvania-in the former of which nine months, and in the latter six months, was allowed to the sojourner and traveller to depart with his slave, with the alternative of taking the character of a resident if he remains longer, and thereby subjecting his slave to the emancipation laws

of the State.

respective States." This is only another form of expression of leaving them to be slaves. It is leaving the title of these persons according to the laws of the State into which they are imported. Is the gentleman sure this will not be an encouragement? It certainly will be, if the importer can find means to evade the penalty of the act; for there he has all the advantage of a market enhanced by our ineffectual attempt to prohibit. If he relies upon the penalty, I have no doubt it will be evaded. Persons without responsibility will be made captains of these ships, or other means devised to escape the penalty, and as his property is, by this amendment, secured to the owner, great profits

will result from the traffic.

Mr. EARLY. I did suppose that the United States would pass a law themselves, as soon as they had the power, to prohibit the slave trade effectually. But the gentleman from Massachusetts (Mr. BIDWELL) proposes that Congress

H. or R.]

Importation of Slaves.

[DECEMBER, 1806.

shall relinquish all the credit of this measure, I would suggest, whether, instead of selling those and resign it up to the States. This, I hope and unfortunate beings as slaves, provision might trust, Congress will never agree to. not be made, that they should be disposed of for a term of years; say seven, eight, or ten years, until they should be able to support themselves, and at the end of the term they should be free. portation, they certainly have power to say, that the imported shall have no right or claim whatever in them; and also to declare what shall be their state and condition when importmined this principle in May, 1800. They passed an act, in addition to an act, entitled "An act to prohibit the carrying on the slave trade from the United States, with any foreign place or country." Mr. EARLY. In answer to the gentleman from Connecticut, I will acknowledge that there is an inconsistency in this bill. But it seems very wonderful that the gentleman has at last found it out. I offered an amendment, a short time since, in order to obviate this inconsistency; but, unless I am much mistaken, that very gentleman voted against it.

If the amendment prevails, I tell you that slaves will continue to be imported as heretofore. I tell the gentleman from Massachusetts, what every man in the Southern States knows al-If Congress have power to prohibit their imready, that slaves will continue to be imported, unless you forfeit them. You cannot get hold of the ships employed in this traffic. Besides, slaves will be brought into Georgia from East Florida. They will be brought into the Mississippi Ter-ed. Indeed, sir, Congress have already deterritory from the bay of Mobile. You cannot inflict any other penalty, or devise any other adequate means of prevention, than a forfeiture of the Africans in whose possession they may be found after importation. I tell you this is the only effectual method. I implore Congress to look seriously on this subject. I implore them, if they do any thing, to pass a law which will not disgrace themselves.

Mr. PITKIN, of Connecticut.-Mr. Chairman, I rise, sir, for the purpose of making a motion, which, I trust, will supersede the one now before the committee. It is, that the committee In the name of all the friends of this bill, I should rise, and that the bill before them be re-offer my most grateful acknowledgments to the ferred to a select committee. Under this motion, I presume it will be in order to state my reasons, generally, without being confined to the question of amending the fourth section of the bill, which is now before the committee.

gentleman for proving, in the most incontestable manner, the absolute necessity of that very provision in the bill which he opposes. He has shown, most undeniably, that you must forfeit the negroes, that you cannot possibly get at the vessel or the captain, to operate on them. In the name of common sense, I ask you, then, what can you find to operate on, but the ne

staring them in the face, gentlemen are opposed to the measure. I wish the gentleman from Connecticut, from the immensity of the resources which he has displayed on this subject, would tell us what, beside the negroes, can be found for the law to operate upon.

I am willing that the committee rise, but not for the purpose mentioned. The gentleman moves you to rise, and refer the bill to a select committee; and for what? To determine the principle of the bill; not to specify the detail. What can the select committee report? Unless instructions are given them, they must report the same bill, and then you will be just where you are now.

As the persons thus brought into the country contrary to law, are to be "forfeited," they are to be proceeded with, as appears by a subsequent section of the bill, "in the manner pre-groes imported? and yet, with these truths scribed by the act, entitled, 'An act to regulate the collection of duties on imposts and tonnage.'" What, sir, is this process? They are to be seized by the revenue officers as goods, wares, and merchandise, imported contrary to law. They are to be libelled in the federal courts, are to be condemned, and then sold to the highest bidder by an officer of the court at public auction, and one-half of the avails, at least, is to be paid into the Treasury of the United States. This, sir, is a proposition, this is a mode of proceeding against those persons, to which I cannot bring my mind to consent, unless absolute necessity should require it. What, sir, shall we, in a law made for the express purpose of preventing the slave trade, declare that these unfortunate blacks, brought into this country, not only against their own will, but against the express provisions of the law itself, shall be sold as slaves for the benefit of the United States, and the price of their slavery be lodged in the public coffers? I trust not, sir; I believe some other mode may be devised to prevent the slave trade. While I am unwilling to give my assent to this mode of disposing of them, I am free to confess that I feel the force of the remarks made by the Southern gentleman, that, unless some care should be taken of them after they are landed, the property, and perhaps the lives of those who live in States where slavery is permitted, would be insecure. And here, sir, I

The question being taken on the committee's rising, it was carried-ayes 72.

Mr. PITKIN hoped they would not have leave to sit again.

Mr. SLOAN.-Notwithstanding the very high respect I entertain for the gentleman who reported this bill, I think it is easier to make an entire new one, than to undertake to amend this, so that it will answer.

The question being taken on the committee having leave to sit again, it was lost-ayes 45, noes 57.

The bill was then recommitted to a committee of seven, consisting of Messrs. EARLY, T. M. RANDOLPH, KELLY, J. CAMPBELL, KENAN, COOKE, and VAN RENSSELAER.