Imágenes de páginas
PDF
EPUB

fact, there is no property in man; so far from it, slave labor is not so valuable as free; and consequently the master is a loser by keeping him. He is valuable only when he is let out, or is made an article of produce or of merchandise. In all cases of labor, the free man is the cheapest; and the result would be, the planter would be a gainer by changing his system of labor. As a practical evi

dence that such would be the fact, we have only to look at the North and at the British West India Islands, as a fair illustration. Therefore, if any gentlemen, who really entertain any honest fears in regard to immediate emancipation, and, like Mr. Henry, are fearful of pursuing the path that leads. to universal liberty, they have now only to turn. their eyes to us and to the isles of the ocean, or compare the condition of the North with that of the South, to allay their fears. But if, on the other hand, they mean to change the policy of the country, and to make this continent a dwellingplace for slaves, instead of a land for the free, then, we say, it is time for the lovers of liberty-for we cannot say for the American people — to arouse themselves, and see that such shall not be the

case.

Gov. Randolph asked Mr. Henry, "Where, in the paper submitted by Mr. Withe, do you discover the people of Virginia are tenacious of their rights only? It declares that all power comes from the people, and that whatever is not granted by them remains with them; that among other things remaining with them are liberty of the

press, right of conscience, and some other essential rights." He then goes on to say,—

[ocr errors]

"The honorable gentleman and some others have insisted that the abolition of slavery will result from it, and at the same time have complained that it encourages its continuation. The inconsistency proves, in some degree, the futility of their arguments. But, if it be not conclusive to satisfy the committee that there is no danger of enfranchisement taking place, I beg leave to refer them to the paper itself. I hope there are none here, who, considering the subject in the calm light of philosophy, will advance an objection dishonorable to Virginia,that at the moment they are securing the rights of her citizens, that an objection is started, there is a SPARK of hope that these unfortunate men, now held in bondage, may, by the operation of the general government, be made free. But, if any gentleman be terrified by this apprehension, let him read the system. I ask, and I will ask again and again, till I be answered, not by declamation, where is the part that has a tendency to the abolition of slavery? Is it in the clause which says that the migration or importation of such persons as any of the States now existing think proper to admit 'shall not be prohibited by congress prior to the year 1808?' This is an exception from the power of regulating commerce, and the restriction is only to continue till 1808. Here congress can, by the exercise, prevent future importations; but does it affect the existing state of slavery? Were it right here to mention what passed in the convention on the occasion, I might tell you that the Southern States, even South Carolina herself, conceived this property to be secure by these words. I believe that,

' Elliot's Reports, vol. ii. p. 436.

whatever we may think here, there was not a member of the Virginia delegation who had the smallest suspicion of the abolition of slavery. Go to their meaning. Point out the clause where this formidable power of emancipation is inserted. But another clause proves the absurdity of the supposition. The words of the clause are, 'No person held to service or labor in one State, under the laws thereof, escaping into another State, can, in consequence of any law or regulation therein, be discharged from such service or labor; but shall be delivered up, on claim of the party to whom such service or labor may be due.' Every one knows that slaves are held to service or labor. And, when authority is given to owners of slaves to vindicate their property, can it be supposed they can be deprived of it? If a citizen of this State, in consequence of this clause, can take his runaway slave in Maryland, can it be seriously thought that, after taking him and bringing him home, he could be made free?

"I observe the honorable gentleman's proposition comes in a very questionable shape, and is still more extraordinary and unaccountable from another consideration, that, although we went article by article through the Constitution, and although we did not expect a general review of the subject, as a comprehensive view had been taken of it before it was regularly debated, yet we are carried back to the clause giving that dreadful power for the general welfare. Pardon me, if I remind you of the true state of that business. I appeal to the candor of the honorable gentleman; and, if he thinks it an improper appeal, I ask the gentlemen here, whether there be a general, indefinite power of providing for the general welfare. The power is, 'to lay and collect taxes, duties, imposts, and excises, to pay the debts, and provide for the common defence and general welfare.' So they can only raise money by these means, in order

to provide for the general welfare. No man who reads it can say it is general, as the honorable gentleman represents it. You must violate every rule of construction and common sense, if you sever it from the power of raising money, and annex it to any thing else, in order to make it that formidable power which it is represented to be."

In reviewing these remarks made by Gov. Randolph, we will first make the inquiry, what was said in the convention? Certainly, if any thing was said too improper to be repeated before the convention of Virginia, the ideas should be considered too improper to be acted out before the world. But here, we suppose, Mr. Randolph alludes to the vaunted compact; but what does it all amount to? Why, some of the members of the convention said. something which Mr. R. was ashamed to repeat,

-

that South Carolina was satisfied, because congress permitted the slave-trade to continue twenty years longer; and the delegates of Virginia were satisfied, because congress permitted a man to be transferred from one State to another, if he owed service or labor to any one who might claim this ownership of labor, if it was proved to be due. But, as Mr. Wilson, of Philadelphia — as we shall see said, there was no compact; this paper was a straight-forward paper; it meant what it said, and nothing more. Pennsylvania, thereby disclaiming any compact, and Massachusetts, fearing the slaveholder might take advantage of what might have been said, disclaimed having any thing to do with such a compact, and introduced an

amendment to do away the authority of the master; and congress afterwards refusing to admit the word "freeman" in some of the amendments Virginia recommended, (which was probably put in for the very purpose of doing away the objections of Mr. Henry,) which amendments were afterwards adopted as part of the Constitution, after having this word "freeman" stricken out, consequently leaving, and, as we must perceive, with design, the amendments devoid of any expression that would involve them in contradictions, and consequently left the word "person" in the Constitution to mean all persons, whether white or colored, bond or free; so that, even if the convention had made an open and avowed compact, the people disannulled it.

Is there not a dishonorable suggestion in that sentiment, that, while they were legislating for the freedom of the white citizen, "there might be a ray of hope the black man should be free;" and yet, by artfully contrived wordings of certain portions of the Constitution, it is here given us to understand a sixth part of the population of the country was to be kept in bondage, and no power lodged any where to have their fetters broken? O shame! where is thy blush?

The question might here be asked, what are the debts of the Union, and how came they to be contracted? Were they contracted, and are they only to be contracted, for having our guns scoured, and hiring men to butcher one another? and do we contract, and must we not contract, debts for any

« AnteriorContinuar »