Newspaper Page Text
• *very, than that it continues to exist among I
them f or can any one'desire more concln-1
•tve proof that any attempt by Congress to
•fleet this object by the force of private law
would be an interference with tne rights of
property, against the wishes and consent
of those concerned, and for none of the .
Surprises for which Congress is authorised
y the Constitution to take private property '
for public use ?
Hence your committee believe they have ;
proved, beyond the power of contradiction >
that an interference by Congress with slave
ry in the District of Colunbia would be a
violation oftlie public faith—ofllte (aitli re
posed in Congress by the stut >8 which ce- :
ded the territory to the Federal Govern-,
ment, so far as the rights and interests of:
those citiaens residing w ithin the ceded ter
ritory are concerned.
Your committee will now’ consider this
proposition in reference to the interests of
lite Slates of Maryland anti Virginia.
They were sloveholding States at the time
they made their cession, and they are so
•till. They entirely surround this District,
from which they are only seperated upon all
•ides by imaginary lines. They made the
cession, for the great national objects which
have l>een already pointed out, and they
made it from motives of patriotism alone,
and without any compensation from the
Federal Government lor the surrender of
jurisdiction over commanding positions in
both Stales. The surrender was made for
purposes deemed sufficiently important by
all orginal States, to be provided for
in the Constitution of the United States;
a«d it wns made in conformity with that
provision of the Constitution. It is surely
unnecessary, after this statement of facts,
to undertake to show that those patriotic
States made this cession for purposes of
good to the Union, and consequently to 1
theiusekes, and not for purposes of evil
to themsekes; and consequently to the
Union, and that the Government of the!
United States accepted the cession for
the same good, and not for evil purposes.
If, then, it can be demonstrated that the j
abolition of slavery in the District of Col
umbia would produce evil, and not good,
Co the States that made the cession, the con
clusion is inevitable that such an act on the '
part of Congress would be a violation of
the faith reposed in it by those States. To |
all to whom this is not perfectly palpable
without an argument, the following consid
erauoas are presented:
It has been already said that the States
of Maryland and Virginia surrounh the
District. It has also been shown that, in
reference to slavery within the District, ! lhe
relations of Congress are entirely those
of a local legislature, and that .its action l
therefore, in this capacity should be gov
erned by the same reasons which would
have governed those States themselves in
relation to this subject, if their jurisdiction
over this territory had never b een surren
dered. Let us suppose then that this juris
diction had never been surrendered bv
Maryland and Virginia, and that it was now
proposed that they should abolish slavery
and relinquish all power of legislation over
free blacks, within the portions of those
Slates which constitute the District of Co
lumbia, retaining their respective institu
tions of slavery in all the remaining portions
of their territory. Who is there that would
not be amaxed at the folly of such an act ?
Who does not see that such a step would
neces«arily produce discontent and insurrec
tions in the remaining portions of those
States? Who does not perceive that under
such circumstances the District would con
stitute at once a nutral ground, upon which
hosts of free blacks, fugitive slaves, k. incen
diaries, would be assembled in the work of
general abolitionism ; and that from such
a magaxine of evil, every conceivable mis
chiefwould be spread through the surroun
ingcountry, with almost the rapidity of the
movements of the atmosphere? Surely no
one can doubt the certainty of the conse
quential evils in the case supposed. How
then can any doubt, or deny the dangers in
the case before us ? The territory is the
same ; it is soi rounded by the same portions
of slaveholding States; and the only differ,
ence is, that in the case supposed, the aboli
tion would be the work of State authorities,
while, in the other, it is sought to accom
plish it by the authority of Congress. The
condition of things before and alter it was
done, is the same in both cases, and the
opportunities for mischief, in case the work
be accomplished, are equal in both. Can
it be necessary to say more to establish the
position, that any interference with slavery
in the Distrct of Uoliumbia, on the part of
Congress, would be a violation of the pub
lic faith, the faith reposed in Congress by
those States, and without which they never
could have been induced to have made that
cession ?
It only remains under this head, to show
that Congress could not interfere with Sla
very in the District of Columbia, without a
violation of the public faith, in reference to
the slave-holding States generally, as well
as to the States of Virginia and Maryland.
—The provision in the Constitution author
ising Congress to accept the cession of a
territory for a Seat of the Federal Govern
ment, and to exercise exclusive jurisdiction
over it, was as general and universal as ti
ny other provision in that instrument. In
its national objects, all the States weie e
qually interested, and so far as there was
any danger that the powers of local legisla
tion conferred on Congress might interfere
with, or injuriously affect, the institutions
of the various States, each State possessed
an interest propoi tioned to the probable
danger to itself. As far as your Commit
tee know orbeliev , however, no apprehen
sion of an interference on the subject of do- i
mestic slavery was entertained in any quar
ter, or expressed by any statesman of the
day. /
An examination ot the commentaries on
the Constitution will show that various ap
prehensions were entertained as to the pow
er* conferred on Congress by this clause,
such as that privileged classes of society
might be created within the District; that
a standing army, dangerous to the liberties
of the country might be organized, and
sustained within it, and the like : but not a
suggestion can be found that, under the lo
cal powers to be conferred, any attempt
would be made to interfere with the private
rights of th<* citizens who might be embra
ced within the District, or to disturb or
change, directly or hy consequence, the mu-
nicipal institutions ot the States, or that the
subject of domestic slavery, as it existed in
the States, could be iu any way involved in
the proposed cession. At that lime, all the
States held slaves. Many of them have
since, by their own independent action,
without influence or interference from the
Federt.l Government, or from tlivir sister
States, effected, in their own limeand wav,
tire work of emancipation ; others of the o->
rigimil Slates remain as they were at the
! time of the adoption < f the Constitution, in
reference to this description of property,
and several new members have been admit
ted into the Union as slave-holding States.
All the States which have held, or now hold,
slave properly, have invariably considered
the institution as one exclusively subject to
State authority, and not to be affected, di
rectly or indirectly by Federal interference.
The practice of the Government as well as
its theory, has established this doctrine, and
the action of the States, in retaining or a
bolishing the institution at pleasure, has
conformed entirely to this principle. Now
the subject of Federal interference has be
come one of some agitation, and Congress
is solicited (n adopt measures in relation to
the District of Columbia, which have been
shown to be most dangerous and destruc
tive to the security and interests of the two
; staveholding States by which it was ceded
to the Federal Government. Your Com
mittee will not trouble the House to prove,
that any measure of the Federal Legisla
ture which would have this tendency in
those two States, would, from the very ne
! cessity of the case, and the unity of the
interest wherever it exists, have the same
! tendency, measurably, in all the other
slave-holdingmembeis oftheUnion. This
position is too plain for argument. If, then,
i all the Stales were equally interested in the
i national objects for which this territory was
ceded as the Seat of the Federal Govern
ment; if that cession was designed by the
; framers of the Constitution to enure to the
benefit of the whole confederacy, and wos
made in furtherance of that design and if
■ Congress, contrary to the i.bvious intent
and spirit of the cession, shall do an act
not required by the national objects con-
i teinplatcd by it, but repugnant to the inter
i esls ami wishes of the citizens of the ceded
territory, and calculated to disturb the
I peace and endanger the interests of the
slave-holding members of the Union, such
an act must be in violation of the public
faith: of the faith reposed in Congress by
the Slates that made the cession, and which
would be deeply injured by such an exercise
of power under it ; and also of the faith
reposed in that body by all the States, inas
much as no independent State in the Union
j can be injured in its peace or its rightful
interests by the action of the Federal Gov
<ernment, without a corresponding injury to
every member of the confederated States.
Your committee have already shown
that an interference with slavery in the
District of Columbia, would involve a vio-
I lation of the public faith as regards the
■ rights and interests of the citizens there*
i They recur to this topic, however, on ac
count of its importance, and for the purpose
of putting it in another light, and, as they
consider, upon unanswerable ground.
They are aware that under the Constitu
tion, Congress possesses “ exclusive legis
' lation” over the aforesaid District : but
the power of legislation was given to be ex
ercised for beneficial purposes only, and
cannot, therefore, be exercised, consistently
with public faith, for any object that is at
war with the great principles npon which
the Government itself is founded. The
Constitution, to be properly understood,
must be taken as a w hole. Whenever a
i particular power is granted, the extent to
which it may be carried can only be infer
red from other provisions I y which it mav
be regulated or restrained. The Consti
: tutiou, while it confers upon Congress ex
clusive legislation within the District does
not, and could not, confer unlimited or des
potic authority over it. it could confer no
power contrary to the fundamental princi
ples of the Constitution itself, and the es
sential and unalienable rights of American
citizens. The right to legislate, therefore,
(to make the Constitution consistent with it
self,) is evidently qualified by the provis
ion that “ no man shall be deprived of life,
liberty, or property without due process of
law,” and various others of a similar char
acter. We lay it down as a rule, that no
Government can do any thing directly re
pugnant to the principles of natural justice,
and of the social compact. It would be totally
subversive of all the purposes for which gov
ernment is instituted. V’attel says : “ The
great end of civil society is, whatever consti
tutes happiness with the peaceful possession of
property.” No republican would tolerate that
a man should be punished, by a special statute,
for an act not legally punishable at the time of
its commission. No republican could approve
any system of legislation by which private con
tracts, lawfully made, should be declared null
mid void, or by which the property of an indi
vidual, lawfully acquired, should be arbitrarily
wrested from him by the high hand of power.
; But these great principles are not left fortheir
support to the natural feelings of the human
heart, or to the mere general spirit of republi
can g ivernment. They are expressly incor
porated in the Constitution, and they have also
been recognized, and insisted on by the .Su
preme Court of the United .States, which lays
down the following soundand incontrovertible
doctrine : “ There are acts which the Federal
or State Legislature cannot do, without exceed
ing their authority. There are certain vital
principles in our free republican Government,
which will determine and overrule an apparent
and flagrant abuse of legislative power: as to
authorise manifest injustice by positive law, or
I to take away that security for personal liberty
or private property, for the protection whereof
the Government was established. An act of
the legislature, contrary to the great firstprinci
i p/cs of the. social compact, cannot be considered
n rightfid exercise of legislative authority.
The obligation of a law in governments esta
blished on express compact, and on republican
principles, must be determined by tne nature of
the power on which it is folded. A few in
stances will suffice toexplain. A law that pun
ished a citizen for an innocent action, or that
was in vi ilation of an existing law ; a law that
destroys or impairs the obligation of the lawful
private contracts of citizens ; a law that makes
a man judge in his own case ; or a law that
takes property from A and gives it to B. It is
against till reason and justice for a people to
entrust a legislature with such powers, and there
fore it cannot be presumed that they have done it.
The legislature may enjoin or permit, forbid
or punish ; they may declare new crimes, and
establish rules of conduct for future cases ; but
they cannot change innocence into guilt, or
| punish innocence as a crime or violate the
rights of an antecedent lawful coi.t'act, or,
the right of private property. To maintain
that our Federal or State Legislatures possess
such powets, even if they had not been ex
pressly restrained, would be a political hiresy,
altogether inadmissible in our free republican
Government." Now, every principle here af
firmed by the court, applies to, and protects, the
people of this District, as well as the people of
the States. The inhabitants of this District are
a pact of the people of the United States. Ev
ery right and interest secured by the Constitu
tion to the people of the States, is equally se
cured to the people of the District. Congress
can therefore do no act affecting property or
person, in relation to this District, which it is
prohibited to do in relation to the citizens of the
States, without a direct violation of the public
faith. Eor instance : It is a well settled consti
tutional principle, that “ private property shall
not be taken for public use, withoutjust compen
sation.” Now, the true meaning of this provis
iouobviously is, that private propel ty shall be
taken only tor public use, but shall not be taken
even then, without adequate remuneration. It
is evident, however, in reference to slavery, ei
ther that the Government would use the slaves,
or that it would not. If it would use them, then
they would not be emancipated ; and it would
be an idle mockery to talk of the freedom of
those wlio would only cease to be private, to be
come public slaves. If it would not use them,
then how could it be said that they were taken
for the public use, consistently with the provis
ion just recited ! But even if they could be ta
ken without reference to public use, they could
not be taken withoutjust compensation. It is
exceedingly questionable, however, whether
C ongress could legally apply the public revenue
to such an object, even with the consent of the
ownersol the slaves. As to emancipation without
their consent and without just compensation, your
committee will not stop to consider it. It could
not bear examination. Honor, humanity,policy,
all forbid it. It is manifest then, from all the
considerations herein staled, (and there are o
thers equally forcible that might be urged,) that
Congress could not abolish slavery in the Dis
trict of Columbia, without a violation of the
public faith.
Your committee will only add one or two re
flections upon this interesting point.
What is the meaning ofthc declaration adop
ted by the House, in relation to the District of
Columbia I Is it not, that Congress cannot and
will not do an act which.it lias solemnly proclai
med to involve a violation of the public faith 1
Does it not allord every security to the South
which it is in the power of the Federal Govern
, ment to afford ? Is it not tantamount, in its
| binding obligation upon the Government, to a
positive declaration, that the abolition of slave
ry in the District ot Columbia would be uncon
stitutional ? Nay, kit noteven more efficacious
in point of fact ! Constitutional provisions are
matters of construction. The opinion of one
House, upon an abstract controverted point,
may be overruled and reversed by another. But
when Congress has solemnly declared that a
particular act would be a violation of the pub
i lie faith, is it to be supposed that it would ever
' violate a pledge thus given to the country ?
Can any abolitionists expect it ? Need any
: citizen of a slave State tear it? What is pub
lic faith but the honor of the Government 1
\\ hy are treaties regarded as sacred and invio
lable I Why, but because they involve the
pledge and depend upon the sanctity of the na
tional faith? Why are all compacts or promis
es made by Governments held to be irrevocably
binding ? W by, but because they cannot break
them without committing perfidy, and destroy
ing all confidence in their justice and integrity ?
Surely then, yonr committee may say with
the utmost confidence, (and the sentiment will
be ratified by every American heart) that the
declaration now promulgated in relation to this
subject, will not be departed from by any suc
ceeding legislation except under circumstances
(should any such ever arise in the progress of
our country,) in which a departure from it would
not be regarded by the slaveholding States them
selves, as a wanton or arbitrary infraction of
the public faith !
Your committee are further instructed to re
port,that, in the opinion of this House, Congress
ought not to interfere in any way with slavery
in the District of Columbia—
2dly. Because it would be unwise and impolitic!
It will be palpable to the minds of all, that if
the committee have succeeded in establishing,
as they think they have, that any such interfer
ence on the part of Congress would be a viola
tion of the public faith, it would be a work of
supererogation to attempt to show, that such an
act would be unwise and impolitic : as there
may be some, however, who may not agree with
them in their arguments or conclusions upon
that point, they feel bound, under the instruc
tion of the House, to offer a few suggestions un
der this head.
The Federal Government was the creation
of the States of the Confederacy, and the
great objects of its creation and organization
“ were to form a more perfect union, e tablish
justice, insure domestic tranquility, and pro
vide for the common defence and general wel
fare.”
Apply these principles, then, to an interfer
ence by Congress with slavery in the District
of Columbia. Such action, to be politic, must
be in accordance with some one ot those great
objects; and it will be the duty of the commit
tee, in as concise a manner as possible, to show
that it would not be in accordance with eitherof
them.
First, then, as to the District itself.
It has already been shown, that any interfer
ence, unsolicited by the inhabitants of the Dis
trict, cannot “ establish justice,” or promote the
cause of justice within it, but directly the re
verse. No greater degree of slavery exists here
now, than did exist when the constitution was
adopted, and then the inhabitants of the Dis
trict were citizens ofthc States of Maryland and
Virginia, and had a voice in the adoption of that
instrument. Surely their subsequent transfer to
the jurisdiction of Congress, made in conformi
ty with that constitution, could not deprive them
of the protection to which they were entitled bv
these great leading principles of it. On the
contrary, they had every right to expect that
Congress would “establish justice,” as to them,
in strict compliance with the great charter un
der which it acted, and by which it is forbidden
to interfere with their rights of private property,
without their consent, or in any way to affect,
injuriously, their domestic institutions. Os
those institutions, slavery was, and is, the most
important ; and any attempt on the part of
Congress, acting as the local Legislature of the
District, to abolish it, would not only be impo
litic, but an act of gross injustice and oppres
sion.
Secondly, as to the States of the Union.
Here again your committee have but to refer to
their former remarks, to show that the abolition
of slavery in the District would not “establish
justice,” but work great injustice, to the sur
rounding States in particular, and to all the
slave States in general, and in a degree propor
tioned to their proximity to the District, and to
the influence upon the institution of slavery in
the Union, of such action on the part of Con
gress. They have also shown, that the aboli
tion of slavery here, so far from tending to“ en
sure domestic tranquility,” would have a di
rect tendency to produce domestic discord and
violence, and servile war, in all the slavehold
ing States. As these consequences, then,
would follow such action in reference to the
States, your committee need not say, that in
stead of providing for “ the common defence by
THE STANDARD OF UNION.
it” Congress would be called upon “to pio
vide tor the common defence” in consequence
of it, and to an extent which cannot now be
foreseen. Seeing, then, that the American
Confederacy was formed for the great objects
ot providing for “ the common defence and gen
eral welfare,” it follows, necessarily, that Con
gress is not only restrained from the commission
of any act by which these objects may be frus
trated, but that it is bound to sustain and pro
mote them. The same provision of the con
stitution* which requires it to call out the mili
tia to “ suppress insurrections,” unquestionably
imposes the corresponding obligation upon it, to
commit no act by which an insurrectionary spir
it may be excited. The same provision which
enjoinsit on the Federal Government, to“guar
anty to each State a republican form of Gov
ernment, and to aid and protect each State a
gaiust domestic violence,”! evidently implies
the collerative obligation to take no step, of
which the direct and inevitable tendency would
be to overthrow the State Governments, and to
involve them in wide spread scenes of misery
and desolation. In one word, if it be the duty
ot Congress, as it most clearly is, to support and
preserve the constitution and the Union, then
it is manifest, that it is bound to avoid the adop
tion ot any legislation which may lead to their
destruction. Your committee consider these
positions too obvious to require argument or
illustration. They consider it equally manifest,
that any attempt to abolish slavery in the Dis
trict would necessarily tend to the deplorable
consequences to which, they have adverted.
Congress, therefore, is bound, by every princi
ple of duty which forbids it to interfere with
slavery in any of die States, to abstain from a
ny similar interference in tie District of Colum
bia.
Your committee have already adverted to the
evils that would necessarily result to the sur
rounding States, and to the slave States general
ly, from an interference by Congress with the
institution of slavery in the District of Colum
bia. The nature and magnitude of those evils,
however, require, that they should be exhibited
more fully and distinctly. The question is,
whether slavery ought to be abolished in the
District ol Columbia? Now suppose the affir
mative ot this proposition were sustained by
Congress, what would it be but indirect legisla
tion, orrather direct interference, as regards
the rights and property of the southern States.
And can any one imagine that such a state of
things would be patiently borne? But this is
not all ; nay, it is not half the evil that would
follow. Could slavery be abolished in the
District without leading directly and inevitably
to insubordination and revolt throughout the
South ? And can any one desire to produce
such results ? Is there a man who has forgot
ten the history of St, Domingo, er the insurgent
attempts at Charleston, or the tragical scenes at
Southampton ? or the recent and lamentable
occurrences in the States of Louisiana and Mis
sissippi ? Or is there an individual who
would wish them repeated, and extended
throughout the entire region of the South 1
Why, then, will infatuated individuals persist in
pressing a scheme, which is not only impracti
cable, as regards the States, but fraught with e
vil to the very objects i’ is proposed to benefit ?
True philanthropy would avoid this subject, see
ing the distraction it creates, and the dreadful
consequences it involves. It would leave it to
those whom it most concerns, and who alone are
competent to act upon it. It would trust to
time, and the gradual operation of causes which
may arise of themselves, but which can neither
be produced, nor hastened by foreign interfer
ence, or the power of this Government. Why
then, your committee earnestlyrepeat, why urge
a measure which is clearly impracticable in it
self, which none but the slaveholding States
have a right to act on, and which has increased,
and will always increase, the hardships and
restraints of those for whose imaginary benefit
they are waging this cruel and fanatical crusade?
We have said that the scheme of general e
mancipation is impracticable. The slightest
reflection must satisfy every candid mind of the
truth of this assertion.
Admitting that the Federal Government had
a right to act upon this matter, which it clearly
has not, it certainly never could achieve
such an operation without full compensation to
the owners. And what would probably be the
amount required ? The aggregate value of all
that species of property is not less probably
than four hundred millions of dollars! And
how could such an amount be raised? Will the
people of this country ever consent to the im
position of oppressive taxes, that the proceeeds
may be applied to the purchase of slaves? The
idea is preposterous; and not only that, but it
is susceptible of demonstration, that even if
an annual appropriation of ten millions were
actually applied to the purchase and transpor
tation of Slaves, the whole number would not
be sensibly diminished at the expiration of half
a century, from the natural growth and multipli
cation of the race. Burthen the Treasury as
we might, it would still be an endless expense
and interminable work. And this view of the
subject surely is sufficient of itself to prove,
that of all the schemes ever projected by fana
ticism, the idea c.f universal emancipation is
the most visional and impracticable.
But even if the scheme were practicable,
what would be gained by effecting it ? Sup
pose that Congress could emancipate all the
slaves in the Union, is such a result desirable ?
This question is addressed to the sober sense of
the people of America. Would it be politic
or advantageous? Would it contribute to the
wealth or grandeur, or happiness of our country ?
On tire contrary, would it not produce conse
quences directly the reverse ? Are not the
slaves unfit for freedom ; notoriously ignorant,
servile, and depraved? and would any ration
al man have them instantaneously transformed
into freemen, with all the rights and privileges
of American citizens? Are they capable of
understanding correctly the nature of our gov
ernment, or exercising judiciously a single po
litical right or privilege? Nay, would they
even be capable of earning their own livelihood,
or rearing their families independently by their
own ingenuity and industry ? What then would
follow from their liberation, but the most deplo
rable state of society, with which any civilized
country was ever cursed ? How would vice
and immorality, and licentiousness overrun the
land ? How many jails and penitentiaries, that
now seldom hold a prisoner, would be crowded
to suffocation? How many fertile fields, that
now yield regular and abundant harvests, would
lie unoccupied and desolate ? How would the
foreign commerce ofthc south decline and dis
appear? How many thousands of seamen, of
whom southern agriculture is the very life,
would be driven for support to foreign coun
tries ? And how large a portion of the federal
revenue, derived from foreign commodities ex
changed for southern products, would be lost
forever to this Government ? And, in addition
to all this, what would be the condition of
southern society, were all the slaves emancipa
ted ? W ould the whites consent that the blacks
should be placed upon a full footing of equality
with them ? Unquestionably not! Either the
one class pr the other would be forced to emi
grate, and in cither case, the whole region of the
south would be a scene of poverty and ruin. Or,
what is still more probable, the blacks would
everywhere be driven before the whites, as the
Indians have been until they were exterminated
from the earth. And surely it is unnecessary
to remark, that decay and desolation could not
break down the south, without producing a cor-
*Con. art. 1, sec. 8,
f Art. 4, sec. 4,
responding depression upon the wealth and en
terprise of the northern .States. And here let
us ask, too, what would be the condition of the
non-slaveholding States themselves, as regards
the blacks? Are they prepared to receive my
riads of negroes, and place them upon an equal
ity with the free white laborers and mechanics,
who constitute their pride and strength? Will
the new .States consent, that their territory shall
be occupied by negroes, instead of the enter
prising, intelligent, and patriotic white popula
tion, which is daily seeking their borders from
other portions of the Union? Shall the yeo
manry of those states be surrounded by thous
ands of such beings, and the white laborer for
ced into competition and association with them?
Are they to enjoy the same civil and political
privileges as the free white citizens of the north
and west, aud to be admitted into the social
circle, their friends and companions t Nothing
less than all this will constitute perfect freedom,
and the principles now maintained by those
who advocate emancipation would, if carried
out, necessarily produce this state of things !
Y ot, who believes that it would be tolerated for
a moment? Already have laws been passed
in several of the non-slavenolding States to
exclude free blacks from a settlement within
their limits; and a prospect of general and im
mediate abolition would compel them, in self
defence, to resort to a system of measures much
more rigorous and effective than any which have
yet been adopted. Driven from the south, the
blacks would find no place of refuge in the
north ; and, as before remarked, utter extermi
nation wotdd be the probable, if not die inevita
ble, fate of the whole race. Where if tlie citi
zen then, that can desire such results ? Where
the American who can contemplate them with
out emotion ? Where the aholitionist that will
not pause, in view ot the direful consequences
of his scheme, both to the whites and the blacks
jto the north and the south, and to the whole
j Union at large ?
Y our committee deem it their duty to say
: that, in their opinion, the people of the south
i have been very unjustly censured in reference
Ito slavery. It is not their purpose, however to
defend them. Their character, as men and ci
tizens, needs no vindication from us. Wherev
er it is known, it speaks for itself, nor would
any wantonly traduce it, but those assassins of
reputation, who are also willing to be destroyers
of life. Exaggerated pictures have been drawn
of the hardships of the slave, and every effort
made to malign the south, and to enlist against
it both the religious and political feeling of the
north. Your committee cannot too strongly
express their unanimous and unqualified disap
- probation of all such movements. The con
stitution, under which we live, was framed by
I our common ancestors, to preserve the liberty
and independence achieved by their united ef
forts in the council and the field. In ail our con
tests with foreign enemies, the south has exhi
bited an unwavering attachment to the common
cause. Where is the spot of which Americans
are prouder than the plains of Yorktown? Or,
when was Britain more humble, or America
more honored, than by the victory of New
Orleans? All our history, from the revolution
down, attests the high, and uniform, and devo
ted, patriotism of the south. Her domestic in
’ stitutions are her own. They were brought in
to the Union with her, and secured by the com
pact which makes us one people ; and he who
would sow dissension among members of the
same great political family, by assailing the in
stitutions, and impugning the character of the
citizens of the south, should be regarded as an
enemy to the peace and prosperity of our com
mon country.
If there is a feature by which the present age
may be said to be characterised, it is that sickly
sentimentality which, disregarding the pressing
claims and wants of its own immediate neighbor
hood, or town, or State, wastes and dissipates it
! self in visionary, and often very mischievous, en
-1 terprises, for the imaginary benefit of remote com
! munities. True philanthropy, rightly understood,
i and properly applied, is one of the purest and
j most ennobling principles of out nature; but, mis
| directed or perverted, it degenerates into that fell
I spirit of fanaticism which disregards all ties, and
! tramples on all obstacles, however sdcred or ven
! erable, in the relentless prossecution of its horrid
I purposes. Experience proves, however, that
when individuals in one place, mistaking the true
i character of benevolence, rashly undertake, at the
< imminent hazard of conflict and convulsion, to
remedy what they are pleased to consider evils
i and distress in another, it is naturally regarded
by those who are thus injured, either as a species
of madness, which may be repelled or resisted, as
any other madness may, or as manifesting a feel
ing of hostility on the one side, which must neces
sarily produce corresponding alienation on the
other. It is all important, therefore, that the spir
it of abolition, or in other words of illegal and of
ficious interference with the domestic institutions
of the south, should be arrested and put down ;
and men of intelligence and influence at the north
should endeavor to produce that sound and ration
al state of publie opinion, which is equally due to
the south and to the preservation of the Union.
And this brings your committee to the last posi
tion they have been instructed to sustain ; and
that is, that, in the opinion of this House, Con
gress ought not to interfere in any way with,
slavery in the District of Columbia.
3dly, Because it would be dangerous to the U
nion.
The first great object enumerated in the
constitution, as an inducement to its adop
tion, was to “ form a more perfect union.”
at that time, all the states held slaves, to a
greater or less extent ; and slavery in the
States was fully recognised, and provided
for in many particulars, in that instrument
itself. It was recognised, however, and all
the provisions upon the subject so regarded
it, as a State and not a national insti
tution. At tfiat time, too, as has been
before remarked, the District of Columbia
constituted and integral part of two of the
independent Slates which became parties to
the Confederacy and to the constitution it
self. Since that time an entire emancipa
tion of slaves has taken place in several of
the old States ; but in all cases this has been
the work of the States themselves, without
any interference whatever by the Federal
Government. New States have also been
admitted into the Union, with an interdic
tion in their constitutions against involunta
ry servitude. In this w ay, the slave States
have become a minority in representation
in the Federal Legislature. Their inter
ests, however, as States in the institution of
domestic slavery, as it exists within their
limits, have not diminished, nor has their
right to perfect security under the constitu
tion in refeference to this description of
property, been in any way, or to any degree
surrendeted or impaired, since the adoption
of that instrument by themselves and their
sister States.
The operation of causes, to a great ex
tent natural, and proceeding from climate,
soil, and consequent production, has render
ed slavery a local and sectional institution
and has thus added another to the most a
larming apprehensions of patriots for the
perpetuity of this Union—the apprehension
of local and geographical interests and dis
tinctions. How immensely important is it
then, that Congress should do no act, and
assume no jurisdiction in reference to this
great interest, by w hich it shall over appear
to place itself in the attitude of a local, in
stead of a national tribunal—a partial agent,
providing for peculir and sectional objects >
and feelings instead of a general and pater
nal legislature, equally' and impartially pro
moting the general welfare of all the States.
No one can fail to see, that ony other course
on the part of Congress, must weaken the I
confidence of the injured Slates in the fed
eral authority, and, to the same extent,
prove “ dangerous to the Union.”
Since the adoption of the Federal Con
stitution, the District of Columbia has been
ceded to the United States as a seat of the
Federal Government; but not only many em
inent statesman of the country, but all of the
slavehokling States, speaking through their
legislative assemblies, firmly believe and
insist that the cession so made has conferred
upon Congress no constitutional power to
abolish slavery within the ceded territory.
Y'our committe have abstained from an ex
amination of this question because they
were instructed to discuss it. But they
have no hesitation to say, that, in the view
they have taken of the whole question, the
obligations of Congress not to act on this
subject are as fully binding and insupera
ble as a positive constitutional interdlict, or
an open acknowledgement of want of pow
er.
Considering the subject in this light, your com
mittee have already proved, that any interference
by Congress with the subject of slavery, would be
evidently calculated to iujur the interests and dis
turb the peace of the slavehokling States ; and if
• tlfey have succeeded in establishing this position,
no argument is necessary to show, that such con
sequences, springing from the action of Congress
as the local Legislature of the District, would emi
nently endanger the existence of this Union. It
has also been shown, that Congress, as the Le
gislature of the Union cau have no constitutional
power over this subject; aud that its powers, as
a local Legislature of the District, were granted
for the mere purpose of rendering its general
powers pertect aud free from conflict and
collision with State authorities. It has also been
shown that these local powers should be so exer
cised as to confer the greatest benefits upon the
citizens residing within the district, with the least
possible injury to the peculiar interests of any
State, or the general interests of ail the States.
Your committee have also shown, as they think
successfully, that the abolition of slavery in the
District of Columbia would be a deep injury to the
citizens of the District, and, therefore, a violation
of the trust reposed in Congress as the local Legis
lature of the District; and, also, that it would in
flict an incurable injury upon all the slavehokling
States,& would,therefore, beanequal violation of
the trusts reposed in that body as the Legislature
of the Union. If, then, they have established
these positions, as they think they have, can any
one doubt that the action contemplated would be
“dangerousto the Union ?” being directly calcu
lated, as it would be, to weaken the confidence of
the District in Congress, as a safe and faithful
local Legislature, and the confidence ofthc slave
holding States an impartial guardian of their in
terests.
Important as the Union is to each State and
the whole American people, every one will admit
that, as far as possible, strict impartialityjand kind
I feelings to all the interests and all the sections of
! the country should characterize the action of the
i Federal Government. The Union was formed
| for the common and equal benefit of all the States,
and for the perfect and equal protection of the
rights aud interests of all the citizens of all the
States. Its only strength is iu the confidence of
the States, and of the people, that these great
benefits will continue to be secured to them, and
that these great purposes will be accomplished by
its preservation. Any action, therefore, on the
part of Congress, which shall weaken or destroy
that confidence in any portion of our citizens, or
in any State of the Union, must inevitably, to
that extent, endanger the Union iiself! Who
can doubt this reasoning? Who does not know
that the agitatiou of any question connected with
domestic slaver;’, as it exists in this country,
among any portion of our citizens, creates ap
prehension and excitement in the slaveholding
Slates? Who does not know that the agitation
of any such question iu either branch of Congress,
shakes their confidence in the security of their
most important interests, and, consequently, in
the continuance to them of those great benefits, to
secure which they became parties to the Union?
Who then does not believe that any action bv
Congress, having for its object the abolition of
slavery in any portion of the Union, however nar
row or limited it may be, would necessarily im
pair the confidence of the slaveholding States in
their security in relation to this description of pro
perty, put an end to all their hope of benefits to
be derived to them from the further continuance
of the Union, and alienate their affections from it?
Were Congress, in a single instance, to suffer it
self to be impelled by mere feeling in one portion
of the Union, to attempt a gratification of that
feeling at the sacrifice of the dearest interests and
most sacred rights of another portion who cau
doubt that the Union would be seriously endan
gered, if not destroyed! But this conclusion does
not depend upon reasoning alone—The evidences
of public sentiment on this point are equally
abundant and decisive. Y’our committee having
already extended their report beyond the limits
to which they could have wished to confine jt,
will enter into no details upon this portion of their
duty. Suffice it to say that the Legislatures of
several, if not of all, the slaveholding States, have
solemnly resolved that “ Congress has no consti
tutional authority to abolish slavery in the District
of Columbia.” It would be utterly impossible,
therefore, that any such attempt should be made
by Congress without producing an excitement,
and involving consequences, which no patriot can
contemplate without the most painful emotions.
It would be regarded by the slaveholding States
as an entering wedge to a scheme of general
emancipation, and therefore, tend to produce the
same results, in relation to the Federal Govern
ment and the Union, that would be produced by
the adoption of any measure directly affecting the
domestic institutions of the States themselves.
Your committee will not dwell upon the picture
that is thus presented to their minds. The reflec
tion it excites is one of umningled bitterness and
horror. It is one, they trust, which is never to
be realized. Looking upon their beloved coun
try, as it now' stands, the envy and admiration of
the world ; contemplating, as they do, that unri
valled constitution, by which a beauteous family
of confederated States, each independent in its
own separate sphere, revolve around a Federal
head with all the harmony and regularity of the
planetary system; and knowing, as they do, that
under the beneficent influence of our free insti
tutions, the people of this country enjoy a degree
of liberty, prosperity, and happiness, uotonly un
possessed, but scarcely imagined, by any other
upon earth; they cannot and will not advert to the
horrors, or depict the consequences of that most
awful day, when the sun of American freedom
shall go down iu blood, aud nothing remain of
this glorious Republic but the bleeding, scattered,
and dishonored fragments. It would indeed be
the extinction of the world’s last hope, and the
jubilee of tyranny over all the earth.
But your committee feel, that with these pain
ful impressions on their minds, they W'ould but
imperfectly discharge their duty if they did not
make an earnest appeal to the patriotism of the
American People to sustain the resolution adopt
ed by the House. And they would also appeal to the
good sense and good feelings of that portion of
the abolitionists, who acting under a mistaken
sense of moral and religious duty, have embarked
in this crusade against the South, solemnly invo
king them in the name of our common country,
to abstain from a system of agitation which has
not only failed, aud will always fail, to attain its
objects, but has even brought the Union itself into
a state of imminent and fearful peril. It is Con
fidently believed that this appeal will not be made
in vain, and that hereafter all who truly love their
country will manifest their patriotism by avoiding
this unhappy cause of discord ami disunion; and
that they will make make no further exertions up
on a subject, from the continued agitation of
which nothing but augmented evils can result.
Y'our committee conclude by reporting the fol
lowing resolutions, conformably to the instructions
given them by the House:
Resolved, That Congress possesses no con
stitutional authority to interfere in any way with
the institution of slavery in any of the States of
this Confederacy.
Resolved, That Congress ought not to inter
fere in any way with slavery in the District of Co
lumbia.
And whereas it is extremely important and
desirable, that the agitation of this subject should
be finally arrested, for the purpose of restoring
tranquility to the public mind, your committee
respectfully recommend the adoption of the fol
lowing additional resolution, viz:
Resolved, That all petitions, memorials, res
olutions, propositions, or papers, relating in any
way, or to any extent w hatever, to the subject of
slavery, or the abolition of slavery, shall, without
either being printer) or referred, be laid upon the
table, aud that no further action whatev.r shall
be had thereon.
Great Match Race.
We are indebted to our friend, W. T. Porter,
Esq. Editor of the New York Spirit of the
Times, for the following particulars of the great
match race between the north and south.
Aug. Constitutionalist.
NEW YORK, May 31,1836.
You, no doubt, will be glad to hear that Bas~
combe, the Southern Champion, beat us to-day,
in beautiful style, in I 49 and 7 514, carrying
114 lbs. on the Union Course.
I wish you joy, —having seen Bascombe im
mediately on his arrival here, I predicted his
victory over any thing we had at the north, as
yon will see on reference to my paper. About
40.Q00 persons were on the ground, and 100’s
of TOOO’s have changed hands.
In the Club Room, which I have just left, a
match has just been concluded between ths ri
val champions, of to-day, (Bascombe and Post
Boy) to run on the 4 mile day, (next Friday)—
aninside stake of $5,000 a-side, SSOO forfeit.—
Mingo and Ironette. will meet them on that day
in the same race. The South have met us on
our own ground —beat us fairly and honorably.
We give you joy.—Y r ou can excel us perhaps in
horseflesh, but so far as good feeling, hospitali
ty and chivalrous spirit is concerned, we defy
the world. In great haste.
Truly yours.
Time— ls/ Heat. ‘2d Heat.
2m. 2s. 2m
1 56 1 565.
1 54 1 56
1 57 159 j
7 49 751 j
[From the N. Y. Courier and Enquirer.]
THE RACES.
The great trial of speed between the North
and South came off" yesterday' on the Union
Course, L. .1. Never since the great race be
tween Eclipse and Henry, has the sporting world
been so much excited. Confident of success,
the pai tizans of the north Lad for some days past
been most liberal in their bets inorder to induce
the Southern sportsmen to back their favorite
steed, but without effect. The Southrons un
derstood their game, and played it well. Flush
ed with the anticipations of an easy victory, the
the backers of the northern horse, at length
were inconsiderate enough to propose largo
odds mthe event, three to two were freely of
sered and as freely accepted, and bets to an en
ormous amount were consequently made. John
Bascombe, a horse of great Southern celebrity,
was the selected champion of that part of the
Union, whilst Post Boy, of equal distinction on
the turf, was the chosen favorite of the North
ern sportsmen.
At an early hour yesterday, the steamboats
were crowded with vehicles of every description
from the coach and four, down to the humble
cart, and with pedestrians of all sorts and sizes.
The road from Brooklyn to the race course
presented a most lively scene, and from the
hours often to one, a living stream appeared to
pass along it, the number of spectators on the
course is variously estimated from fifteen to
twenty thousand, and the scene was one of the
most exciting ever witnessed. The backers of
Post Boy were prodigal in their offers to bet,
and found ready customers.
At a few minutes before two o’clock the bu
gle sounded a call for the competitors, find the
steeds were brought to the starting post. They
both appeared to be in perfect condition. John
Bascombe is a bright chrsnut, and Post Boy. a
dark Bay. On the tap oftlie drum .they start
ed in beautiful style, and at a rattling pace, Post
Boy taking the inner track. At the end of the
first half mile Bascombe took the lead and kept
it during the whole heat, coming in at least fifty
yards ahead of his antagonist. Neither of the
horses appeared to be the least distressed. The
backers of Post Boy still retained confidence
in their favorite, and offered trifling odds that he
would win the succeeding heat. Their oppo
nents were not slow in accepting their offers,
and bets to a considerable amount were again
made on the event.
The time of running the first heat was seven
minutes, forty-nine seconds, in the following
proportions—
-Ist mile, 2 minutes, 2 seconds.
2d do 1 do 56 do
3d do 1 do 54 do
4th do 1 do 57 do
7 49
At the end of thirty' minutes, the horses were
again summoned by the bugle to the starting
post. Bascombe made a false start and ran
nearly a quarter of a mile before he was stop
ped, and being again placed, at the usual signal
both started in beautiful style—Bascombe tak
ing the inner track and leading. Never on any
occasion was a more beautiful race than this
seen. Throughout the whole 4 miles the hors
es were close on each other. Occasionally Bas
combe would increase his speed and leave his
rival a few lengths behind, but bythe appli
cation of the whip and spur, Post Boy was ur
ged to his former position, and although repeat
ed attempts were made to push him ahead of
Bascombe, they were always defeated by the
consummated skill of the latter’s rider.
The last mile was gloriously contested. Bas
combe still continued the even, easy, fox-like
pace with which he set out, and Post boy close
at his side, straining every nerve to outstrip his
adversary, but in vain ; they reached the win
ning post almost neck and neck, but Bascombe
still being ahead, was declared the winner.
The period in which this heat was run was
seven minutes, fifty-one and a half seconds, and
the time of doing each mile was as follow’s:
Miles Minutes, Seconds.
Ist 2 00
2d 1 56
3d 1 56
4th 159 i
751 J
The age of the horses is rising five years;
both are beautifully’ formed, but Post Boy ajv
pears most powerful. Bascombe was rode by
Willis, the groom of Col. Johnson; and Post
Boy by Kirkpatrick, of great celebrity on the
Northern courses. It is generttlly admitted that
a more beautiful race was never run on the Un
ion course, and every body, except the losers,
and they bore their reverses with great philoso
phy, left the ground perfectly satisfied with the
day’s sport.
[From the New York, Evening iS/ai;.]
The llaccs.— A dear, cold day—wind high,
ground damp and heavy, we would have bet tht>’
long odds against the Southerli horse, fully pefr
suaded that he would have had chills and fever,
and could not stand the thermometer, at 60 tjeg.
2 minutes, 2 seconds.
1 do 56 do
1 do 54 do
1 do> 57 do
7 514
