MARCH 4, 1836.] Alabama Pre-emption Rights-Cumberland Road. [SENATE. hard that these individuals, after having made their improvements, and believed that they had secured to themselves a home, should be deprived of them by floating Indian reservations, which they could not possi The course proposed by the Senator from Pennsylvania, on the other hand, would, if adopted, be the most decisive that could be pursued. It would allow the petitioners, in their quality of citizens of the United States, to present themselves before the Senate, to have a hear-bly have anticipated when they settled on their lands. ing, and it would at the same time show them how vain and futile was the hope of their ever producing any action in Congress. Sir, I have done. I felt bound in justice to myself, differing as I do with many of my friends, briefly to state the grounds upon which my ac tion rests. R. C. NICHOLAS, Senator from Louisiana, appeared, and took his seat. Mr. PORTER presented the credentials of R. C. NICHOLAS, appointed a Senator from Louisiana, and the oath was administered. The CHAIR announced that, in compliance with the instructions of the Senate, he had appointed Mr. WALKER to be a member of the Committee for the District of Columbia, in the room of Mr. TYLER, resigned. Mr. KING, of Alabama, expressed his hope that, by universal concurrence, Mr. KENT would be considered as chairman; and such was understood to be the decision of the Senate. On motion of Mr. WEBSTER, the Chair was empowered to appoint a member of the Committee on Finance, to fill the vacancy caused by the resignation of Mr. TYLER. ALABAMA PRE-EMPTION RIGHTS. Mr. EWING, of Ohio, from the Committee on the Public Lands, made an unfavorable report on the memorial of the Legislature of Alabama, asking for preemption rights for settlers on the public lands, who were deprived of their improvements in consequence of Indian reservations. Mr. EWING said he had been instructed by the committee to report against these pre-emption claims, on the ground that, in the opinion of the committee, the grant of pre-emption was a mere gratuity, and that the petitioners had no legal right whatever to the lands they had been deprived of. Mr. KING, of Alabama, freely admitted that the laws granting pre-emption rights gave mere gratuities, and that the individuals had no legal right to the land they had been deprived of. But the Government had, in a spirit of wise liberality, made grants to those individuals who had settled on and improved the lands, educated their children, and added to the resources and population of a growing country. These grants were general, and, in pursuance of the Indian treaty, these individuals were deprived of their improvements for the purpose of locating floating Indian reservations. It was extremely VOL. XII.-46 He should move to lay the report on the table, and when it came up again he hoped he should be able to satisfy the Senate that this wise gratuity of Congress towards these individuals should not be departed from because they had unfortunately come under the operation of circumstances which were unforeseen and unexpected. The report was then laid on the table. EXPUNGING RESOLUTION. Mr. BENTON remarked that he was under a pledge to the American people to bring forward a motion for expunging from the journals of the Senate certain resolutions which had passed that body. He had not made this motion up to the present time, because he thought it was a motion of that character requiring the Senate to be full when it was made. The Senate was not yet entirely full; there was still a vacancy, but it would probably be filled in the course of two weeks. He therefore thought proper now to give notice (though he was not called on by any rule of the Senate to give such notice) that, as soon as that vacancy was filled, he should bring foward his motion to expunge the resolu tions he had referred to. CUMBERLAND ROAD. On motion of Mr. HENDRICKS, the Senate resumed the consideration of the bill for the completion of the Cumberland road in the States of Ohio, Indiana, Illinois, and Missouri; and the question was then taken on the first part of Mr. Clay's amendment, to strike out $320,000, the appropriation for the road in Ohio, and insert $200,000, and carried by the following vote: YEAS--Messrs. Black, Calhoun, Clay, Crittenden, Goldsborough, Hill, Kent, King of Alabama, King of Georgia, Knight, Leigh, Mangum, Moore, Naudain, Porter, Prentiss, Preston, Swift, Tomlinson, Walker, White--21. NAYS-Messrs. Benton, Buchanan, Ewing of Illinois, Ewing of Ohio, Grundy, Hendricks, Hubbard, Linn, McKean, Morris, Niles, Robbins, Robinson, Shepley, Tallmadge, Tipton, Wall, Webster, Wright--19. Mr. HENDRICKS stated the effect of this vote. There was $182,000 appropriated last year, and if the amendment of the Senator from Kentucky [Mr. CLAY] prevailed, it would reduce the appropriation now to a less amount than was appropriated to the road in the State of Indiana at the last session. Mr. KNIGHT, in voting, had went on the principle that $200,000 was as much as could be economically expended in one year. But after hearing the statement of the Senator from Indiana [Mr. HENDRICKS] he would change his vote. Mr. KING, of Alabama, had not been in his place when the bill was up before. He thought the sum of $200,000 an amount' which, if expended as it ought to be, was sufficient for one season. He thought they ought to complete a part of the road as far as they went, and not leave any of it in an unfinished state, so that it might With that view of the be transferred to the States. subject, he should vote for the reduction of the amount appropriated to $200,000. Mr. CLAY could go for the $200,000, but not beyond it, and went into a detail of the several amounts that had been appropriated and expended on the road. He had supposed the appropriation was to go to grading the road in Illinois. If it was to be Macadamized with material to be hauled some thirteen miles, the road form the Wabash to the Mississippi would cost from ten to fifteen thousand dollars per mile. For one, he was not willing to put such an expenditure upon it. The road from Maysville to Lexington, Kentucky, had cost only at the rate of five thousand dollars per mile. He was opposed to commencing a system in Illinois that would incur an expenditure of from ten to fifteen thou sand per mile. He had an amendment he intended to offer at some future stage of the bill. Mr. HENDRICKS went into an argument to show the advantages of a large appropriation over a small one. There was only about half the distance to work upon the road in Ohio that there was in Indiana. The difficulty in procuring stone was not so great as some gentlemen had imagined, as there were gravel beds of considerable extent convenient to the road. After some remarks from Mr. NILES, Mr. BENTON referred to some of the arguments used by him the other day, to show that it was really wasteful to make these small appropriations. Mr. KING, of Alabama, said the road had cost more than it was really worth. He would prefer that a reasonable estimate should be made of the expense necessary to complete it, and that companies should be incorporated by the Legislatures of States through which it passed, to make it; and that Congress should make an appropriation to assist them in doing it. He had no doubt it would cost less in that way. He adverted to the manner in which it was pressed upon the Senate by the members immediately interested. They would be glad in his State to have an appropriation even to their common roads. He was disposed to be liberal, but not lavish. He had no disposition to embarrass any of the new States. He lived in one himself. He would vote to limit the appropriation to $200,000. Mr. ROBINSON said the system of making this road had been changed, and the expense of construction greatly reduced. He ventured to assert there was no one place where stones would have to be drawn the distrance of twenty-five miles. There was one place where a bridge was to be built, to which stones would be drawn thirteen miles. He spoke of the great importance of the road, and would feel sorry if measures should be taken to prevent its being Macadamized. The Government had induced people to believe it would go on and make this road, in consequence of which they had been induced to purchase the Government lands at an advanced price, and not to go on with it would be doing injustice to them. Its importance in a national point of view would be enhanced by the increased expedition in transporting the mails. Mr. TIPTON said the argument founded on the scarcity of stone did not apply in Indiana, where it was abundant. The engineers, in their estimate, had reported that the greatest amount that could be advantageously expended in one season was $600,000, and the smallest $350,000, which was in the bill. They did not ask a pledge to make it at the expense which the gentleman from Kentucky [Mr. CLAY] had said it would cost, by hauling stone twenty-five miles. Mr. KING, of Alabama, would ask the Senator from Indiana if this road did not pass through an extensive prairie? If it did, he well knew the difficulty and expense in making roads through them, and explained the nature of them at some length. A railroad would, in his opinion, through that level country, answer a better purpose, and cost less, than Macadamized road, and he would prefer that it might be changed to a railroad. Mr. HENDRICKS said that the remarks of the gentleman would apply to Illinois, but not to Indiana. As the road had been graded with a view to Macadamizing it, the grading would have to be changed, and nearly [MARCH 4, 1836. all the expense of grading that had been done would be lost. The question was then taken on the second part of Mr. CLAY'S amendment, to strike out $350,000 for the road in Indiana, and insert $100,000, and lost: Yeas 22, nays 22, as follows: YEAS-Messrs. Black, Brown, Calhoun, Clay, Crittenden, Goldsborough, Hill, Kent, King of Alabama, King of Georgia, Leigh, Mangum, Moore, Naudain, Niles, Porter, Prentiss, Preston, Swift, Tomlinson, Walker, White-22. NAYS-Messrs. Benton, Buchanan, Cuthbert, Davis, Ewing of Illinois, Ewing of Ohio, Grundy, Hendricks, Hubbard, Knight, Linn, McKean, Morris, Nicholas, Robbins, Robinson, Shepley, Tallmadge, Tipton, Wall, Webster, Wright—22. Mr. CLAY then submitted the following amendment: "provided the expenditure of that portion of the ap propriation to be made in the State of Illinois shall be limited to the graduation and bridging of said road, and shall not be construed as pledging Congress for future appropriations for Macadamizing said road." He would add a single remark: If the object was to make this a Macadamized road, it would be cheaper to make both a railroad and a Macadamized road-a railroad to transport the stone upon for the Macadamized road. He hoped they would be content with the $200,000. Mr. ROBINSON answered the objection, that stone was scarce in Illinois-portions of the country abounded there with limestone, and opposed the amendment offered by Mr. CLAY. Mr. CLAY had hoped that an amendment so innocent in its character would not have been opposed. If the amendment was not adopted, the Government would stand pledged to go on and Macadamize the whole road. He hoped the amendment would be adopted, and demanded the yeas and nays, which were accordingly ordered; and, on taking the question, Mr. CLAY's last amendment was carried: Yeas 30, nays 14, as follows: YEAS-Messrs. Black, Calhoun, Clay, Clayton, Crittenden, Goldsborough, Hill, Kent, King of Alabama, King of Georgia, Knight, Leigh, McKean, Mangum, Moore, Naudain, Nicholas, Niles, Porter, Prentiss, Preston, Robbins, Shepley, Swift, Tallmadge, Tomlinson, Walker, Wall, Webster, White-30. NAYS-Messrs. Benton, Brown, Buchanan, Cuthbert, Ewing of Illinois, Ewing of Ohio, Grundy, Hendricks, Hubbard, Linn, Morris, Robinson, Tipton, Wright—14. Mr. BLACK moved to amend the bill by an appropriation of $150,000 for the repair of the road from Chattahoochie to Chotocton, and from Mobile to New Orleans. Mr. BLACK contended that the road embraced in his amendment had as much of a national character as the road through Ohio, Indiana, and Illinois. The transportation of the great southern mail was upon it. He hoped his amendment would be agreed to. The population was so sparse in places along these roads that they were not able to keep them in repair. Mr. EWING, of Ohio, thought there was merit in the amendment offered by the gentleman from Mississippi, [Mr. BLACK,] and, if he would offer it in a separate bill, he would be disposed to vote in favor of it. Mr. LINN did not wish to see the bill clogged, to break it down by the amendment offered by the gentleman from Mississippi. Mr. PORTER was not sure that his friend from Mississippi was serious in offering this amendment, but he was inclined to give it his strenuous support, for there never was a measure more imperiously called for. He thought it was of equal importance with the bill itself. Mr. P., in reply to Mr. EWING, vindicated the expedi ency as well as the constitutionality of the amendment, and said he was anxious to have it tacked to so strong a measure as the great Cumberland road, in order to secure it from the President's veto. He felt confident, though, that when the President came to examine into the matter, and saw that this road was as national even as the one from New York to Washington, that he would give it his approval. He trusted that the friends of the bill would not object to the amendment. The claims of his section of the country were so strong, and the injustice of refusing it so manifest, that he had every hope that gentlemen, on a proper consideration, would give it their support. [SENATE. King of Georgia, Knight, Leigh, Linn, McKean, Morris, Nicholas, Niles, Robbins, Robinson, Ruggles, Shepley, Swift, Tallmadge, Tipton, Tomlinson, Walker, Wall, Webster, White, Wright--34. On motion of Mr. NAUDAIN, the bill was further amended, by providing that the money appropriated for the completion of the road in the States of Ohio, Indiana, and Illinois, shall be expended for the completion of the greatest continuous portion of such road possible, so that such finished parts shall be surrendered to said States respectively. Mr. CRITTENDEN then moved to amend the bill by striking out the words "to be repaid out of the fund reserved for making roads leading to said States." After some further remarks from Messrs. CRITTENDEN and NILES, The Senate adjourned over to Monday. MONDAY, MARCH 7. Mr. MOORE was very glad that the amendment had been introduced. He thought, so far from clogging the bill, that it would render it more palatable in some quarters; and only regretted that the appropriation proposed had not been larger. Mr. M. then spoke of the difficulties in transporting the mail; and suggested to the gentleman to modify the amendment, so as to make it read "for repairing and constructing the main post road leading from Washington to New Orleans." This, by der of the House, appointed by the Chair, in the room making the object more national, would go some way towards removing the objections to it. Mr. BLACK accepted the suggestion, and modified his motion by adding the words, "being the road on which the great southern mail is transported from Washington to New Orleans." After some further remarks from Mr. MOORE, Mr. BLACK said he did not offer the amendment with a view to clog the bill. He thought it as proper a place for it as to make it a separate bill. Mr. KING, of Alabama, could not vote for the amendment offered by the gentleman from Mississippi. He was not aware that he was going to offer it. No considerations of local interest could induce him to vote for an unconstitutional appropriation. He hoped the gentleman from Mississippi would withdraw the amendment, and not encumber the Cumberland road bill with it. Mr. TIPTON was not prepared for the amendment proposed by the gentleman from Mississippi, and although compelled to vote against it, yet if gentlemen coming from the Southwest will propose to apply the two per cent. fund of their States to this object, he would make no objection to it. One objection to the amendment was, that they had no estimates, and knew not the length of the road, or how it was to be constructed. He must oppose this new proposition, coming in at this late stage of an important bill. Let gentlemen propose a bill for making the surveys, and he should vote for it, and when full information was obtained, he had no doubt but the measure would pass on a proper application. The honorable R. C. NICHOLAS was announced as a member of the Committee on Finance, under the or of the honorable JoHN TYLER. ABOLITION OF SLAVERY. The Senate proceeded to consider the petition of the Society of Friends of Philadelphia, praying for the abo lition of slavery in the District of Columbia. The question being on the motion of Mr. CALHOUN that the petition be not received. This Mr. CUTHBERT observed that the indisposition under which he labored, as well as the extreme length to which this discussion had been carried, would make him prefer, if he could think it proper to do so, to avoid addressing the Senate on this occasion. At best, he should be able to speak but briefly, and with his usual difficulty, and he should incur no risk, therefore, of being charged with having unnecessarily protracted the debate. certainly was a subject on which, as an individual, he could not feel indifferent; and if he could be so, he should only be criminal to the deepest interests and feelings of the people he represented. He should, therefore, on a few points which appeared to be the most important, express the opinions he had formed; and here let him be understood in making a clear and uniform distinction, in all that he might say, between those who lead and those who follow-between those who, under the influence of vanity and a criminal ambition, had meditated and attempted the wildest and most dangerous projects, and those well disposed persons who, misled by a mistaken philanthropy, may yet recover their sober and steady judgment. He hoped, nay, he felt confident, that they would recover from their delusions. Mr. BLACK observed that the proposition was barely for repairing a road already laid out, on which the Do I (said Mr. C.) feel any apprehensions of a danmail had long been carried. It had been said that this gerous increase and wide-spread prevalence of the spirit project would expend ten millions of dollars. This of abolition? do not, (said he,)—I would belie my own could not be so, for the two per cent. fund had long judgment, if I felt any serious disturbance on this subbeen expended. If this appropriation was to be made ject. Why am I (said he) insensible to these terrors? in Ohio and Indiana, and was constitutional, it certainly For this plain and obvious reason, that the spirit of abowas not unconstitutional to make this road in the south-lition was not an American spirit; it was transplanted western States. It certainly was of far greater importance than any road contemplated in the bill, and he was surprised at gentlemen's opposition to it. After some remarks from Messrs. MORRIS, CRITTENDEN, and PORTER, On taking the question, Mr. BLACK's motion to amend was lost: Yeas 6, nays 34, as follows: YEAS-Messrs. Black, Clay, Crittenden, Goldsborough, Moore, Porter--6. NAYS-Messrs. Benton, Brown, Buchanan, Calhoun, Cuthbert, Ewing of Illinois, Ewing of Ohio, Grundy, Hendricks, Hill, Hubbard, Kent, King of Alabama, from a foreign soil; it belonged not here, and was a base mockery of what had passed in another country, whose relations to their slave population were not only not similar to ours, but stood in absolute contrast with them. Has this spirit (said Mr. C.) grown among ourselves? has it originated on this side of the Atlantic, or has it been caught by contagion from England? It was caught by contagion, certainly, for it had nothing proper to American growth, nothing congenial with American feelings, and was wholly foreign and unsuited to the genius of our people. Then, if it came across the Atlantic, if it had not kindred feeling here, was there any reason to apprehend that it would ever take a firm root in our soil? He felt assured not. The colonies of England, where abolition took place, were all governed with as absolute a sway by the mother country, as the slaves in this country were ruled by their masters. They had no privilege of self-government; they had not even the privilege of interposing their advice when the mother country was about to take from them their property; their fate was absolutely determined by the will of the mother country, and they could not even raise a voice of their own, to delay the evils which that Government was about to inflict upon them. And what then was the character of the white population of the West India islands? Had these people ever any fixed character? The owners of property in the West Indies were not even, a majority of them, residents there. A few luxurious feeble slaveholders resided in the mother country; these were represented in the islands by their agents; also a small number sent from Europe to manage the business of these non-residents, and there being no inspection of society there, they led depraved and licentious lives, destined to a short period. The whole desire of the owners residing in the mother country was to exact as much as possible from their estates in the colonies for the maintenance of their luxuries at home, and their vast possessions in the islands were managed by the agents, solely with a view to their selfish interests. Was this the relative condition of the white and black population in the southern States; and was such a state of society as he had described to be found in them? Why, every gentleman's good sense revolted at the comparison. Our States were actual sovereignties, combined together into one great republic. Here, then, was the difference between this country and the British colonies. The question as to emancipation was not the same with us as with them; it was not only not similar, but in direct contradiction to it. A [MARCH 7, 1836. with such a Government as ours, with such a population, and with such relations of society, could hope to propagate their miserable delusions? What must be thought of their wickedness, as well as their total destitution of all the common feelings of humanity? Did they not show the weakness of their understandings, as well as the depravity of their hearts? And who and what were they? Boys from the cloisters of a college, ignorant of the form and spirit of our free institutions, and unacquainted with the state of society, their blinded and illdirected philanthropy would intermeddle with; bigoted priests, forgetting their sacred calling and the service of their God, regardless of that holy religion whose leading principle was peace and good will among men, would introduce discontent, discord, and even rebellion, where there was contentment, happiness, and peace; others, of the vain, ambitious, and restless, who, conscious of the want of those moral and intellectual powers which alone are truly calculated to elevate the individual, seek to rise into consequence by the aid of a popular delusion. What was the leader of all these? Who and what was he? Had he been marked out by the Almighty, and gifted with those great and powerful intellectual qualities with which Providence endows those who are to accomplish great revolutions? He had never heard that this individual ever possessed any such attributes. He was not a Wilberforce, to draw with him the feelings and opinions of a nation in favor of universal emancipation. Here (Mr. C. said) he would observe that if Wilberforce had been an American, he would have been an anti-abolitionist; he would never have sought to alter such a state of society as exists in the slaveholding States, and never would have incurred the risk of producing such fearful evils in a population where there was so little that required amelioration. Was there any one who supposed that an enlightened statesman, possessing the talents, the general intelligence, the en of government that Wilberforce did, would cherish for a moment the wild and visionary schemes of these abolitionists? Was there any man on that floor, whether from the North or from the South, who avowed himself an abolitionist? If there was, let him speak. There was none, then-not one. Here was an answer to the abolitionists. There was not one man on that floor who avowed himself a follower of this pitiful mockery of English philanthropy. These several State Governments not only administer-larged and liberal views of society and of the principles ed all their own internal concerns by their own laws, but all the other State Governments were in no manner permitted to interfere them. They watched over the peculiar safety and interests of their own citizens, and were not to be regarded, not even to be looked at, by the Governments of their sister States. Here, then, was a strong reason why we ought not to feel any apprehensions of the progress of the spirit of abolition. state of society, such as he had described in England and her colonies, existed not here. We had a numerous, active, and spirited population, advancing every moment in all that belonged to morals and intelligence-a population in which general education was an actual passion, in which to enlighten the people was a principal care. All that could dignify, all that could strengthen, all that could adorn human nature, was here found; it was native, and not of to-day, but came to us through a series of generations. And second to that state of society, the relations subsisting between masters and slaves bad, for a series of years, been approaching to that state of perfection which had never before been exhibited in any slaveholding country. Could any one suppose that a population such as this could be disturbed by the illdirected efforts of a parcel of miserable deluded fanatics? No change in their situation could be made without actual ruin, without actual extermination. Hence the gloomy and alarming picture drawn by his friend from South Carolina, [Mr. PRESTON,] a picture which owed the darkness of its colors to the strength of his own imagination; a picture which was designed from the regions of romance, and not from sober reality, had no terrors for them; one glance at a brighter prospect, and truth owning its sway, they were freed from the melancholy presentiments but momentarily indulged. Then, what was to be thought of the folly of those abolitionists who, If our Government and the connexions of our society and Government were such as he had described them, and as every gentleman believed them to be; if their influence was felt as he had supposed throughout the country, (and to doubt that they were so felt would be to doubt that ours was a thinking and sagacious people;) if such was the character of the American people who had uniformly expressed their detestation of the plans of the abolitionists, then let him say that, so far from being influenced by any terrors arising from the events of the last year, his confidence in the stability of the Union, and in the permanency of our free institutions, had been strengthened. No man who had attentively observed the progress for years of certain doctrines, but must have come to the conclusion that strenuous and persevering attempts would be made for the emancipation of the African race in this country. He believed every gentleman knew this, and the only question was, would or would not the American people encourage such attempts? Did they encourage them? No. Was saying that they discouraged them using a term sufficiently strong? Every where these attempts had been met by the most decided opposition-everywhere it had encountered the universal scorn and detestation of the community, and the feeling with which this spirit of abolition had been met had of itself been sufficient to kindle and strengthen the spirit of American patriotism. And was patriotism a mere word to flatter the people, or to adorn a speech with rhetorical flourishes? No. It was a holy feeling, springing from the purest and noblest principles of our nature, and, where government was well understood, gave double force to every social virtue. [SENATE. fore the Senate for the disposal of the memorial; the one not to receive the memorial at all, and the other to receive it, and then reject its prayer. He should separate himself, in the vote he should give with regard to the first, from friends with whom he had acted; friends they were; and when he spoke of the sincerity and purity of their course in that body, he did not speak vain words. He knew that they were influenced by a sincere and honest conviction that the pressing of the first motion was not for the public good; but his judgment differed from theirs, and he believed it to be his duty to support the first motion, though he held that belief with great diffidence, because he saw the whole force of the reasons which gentlemen urged against it. Our people had evinced that patriotism in resisting with energy and success that wide-spread and wild spirit❘ of fanaticism which threatened to produce jealousies and heart-burnings in a united and happy country; and so far from the events of the past year having tended to weaken the bonds of this Union, they were only calcu lated to show its durability and its strength. As the lofty pine on the mountains becomes more firmly rooted as it is shaken by the tempest, so had the love for this Union taken deeper root in our hearts. As we watch over the infant sleeping in our arms, it becomes nearer and dearer to our hearts, so was this Union more deeply rooted in our affections the more it was cherished. Yes, he felt with his friend from Alabama [Mr. KING] how kindly they were treated by their northern fellow-citizens. They did not (said Mr. C.) coldly do their duty to us as signified by the terms of the constitution. With a warm affection for their southern brethren they rush-grievances. The first step, with regard to the right of ed to their aid; with a strong and willing indignation they rebuked the spirit of discord and mischief; and with a generous zeal put themselves in hostile array against those we have a right to term our enemies. They had (said Mr. C.) done us full justice, and that justice was given with a promptitude and warmth of feeling truly consistent with the American character. There was one principle which had not been recog nised in the course of this discussion, and gave him greater confidence in the strength of our institutions. It was this: although this debate had been protracted to an unusual degree, and accompanied with all that energy which belonged to the American character, yet, with a spirit of conciliation and harmony not to be found in any other legislative body in the world, they all concurred in the desire to accomplish one object, differing only as to the manner of accomplishing it; and the result was, that, throughout the country, there was a strong party formed in favor of all that was good against that which was evil, and a powerful influence was now operating against these miserable fanatics for the safety of our institutions. There is another additional point of strength (said Mr. C.) in our position, which would soon become well known to the mass of the people of the United States. It was that these liberated blacks (should the abolitionists succeed in their projects) would find no spot on which to rest a foot in this widely expanded Union. Would they find it in New York? Let the events of the last season speak. Would they find it in friendly Philadelphia? No. The tumultuous assemblages in that city, the well known state of popular feelings there, as evinced not long ago, sufficiently showed that the black portion of its population would never be suf fered to increase. I pronounce (said Mr. C.) that there is a stronger natural horror and aversion for the black race in the North than in the South. What, then, would be the consequences of emancipation? If the northern people could not tolerate the small number of blacks now among them, how would they admit the vast number that will be set at large by the plan of emancipation? And if they would not admit them, were they to be caged up with the people of the South for mutual massacre and destruction? No; the inevitable consequences of emancipation, so readily presented to the view, showed the absurdity and impossibility of the scheme, and that it never could gain strength or durability among a reflecting and reasoning people. He would say one word as to the two propositions be Of the two propositions before the Senate, he felt himself compelled to vote for that which was the strongest in opposition to the memorial. He had found no constitutional reasons for opposing this measure, no wellfounded objections, under a proper construction of the constitution, to giving this vote such as his friends believed; it did not appear to him to be violating that part of the constitution which secured the right of the people peaceably to assemble and petition for a redress of petition, it was not pretended had been prevented. The people had assembled without let or hinderance, and had petitioned. The question, then, was, how this vote would affect the second part of the right of petition, and how far the petition was for a redress of grievances. With respect to the latter, it was not pretended by any one that slavery in the District of Columbia was a grievance of which the petitioners had a right to complain; and as to the first, the petitioners had a hearing, and their petition had been fully discussed. The member who introduces a petition states the substance of it, and any member may demand that it shall be read. Then, what was denied to the petitioner? Was he indignantly refused a hearing? By no means. The motion applied not to the petitioners themselves, but to the substance of their petition. You make (said Mr. C.) the most prompt and deci ded objection to the prayer of the petition which the rules of the body permit, and you do it with a due regard to the feelings of those who presented it. You say to them no more than a kind and indulgent parent has a right to say to his own child: that their request is so unreasonable that the granting of it would be productive of so much mischief to themselves, as well as to others, that it could not for a moment be listened to. Was this unkind, or language unbecoming a parent addressing his child? Your purpose (said Mr. C.) is to warn them, in the most decided terms, that to persevere would bring ruin on themselves, as well as produce the most fearful evils; and you entreat them to abandon a course destructive of the best interests of the political family, without producing the least good to themselves or to those for whom their sympathies were excited. The rule (said Mr. C.) under which this motion was made was founded on the constitution itself; and, so far from determining that you shall receive a petition, it made the first question to determine whether it shall or shall not be received. What, then, was their duty? It is a duty (said Mr. C.) which we owe to ourselves, to those whom we represent, and to the petitioners, to express what we know to be the determination of the whole southern people on the subject, in the most decided and most intelligible form. Should the petitioners not know this, they might be led into a course of perseverance productive of great and continued excitement; and what might now be resisted by quick and decided action might hereafter be more difficult to quell, and not to be put down but by a heated and protracted debate, shaking the very foundations of this republic. |
