Newspaper Page Text
From the X. -Y. Herald.
Senator Toombs’ lecture in Boston.
jit/j ter y—lts Constitutional status and Its influence
on Society awl the African Hue.
The Honorable Robert Toombs, United States
Senator from Georgia, recently delivered a lecture
on slavery in the Treinont Temple, Boston. Our
special reporter sent us a telegraphic report yti it
and of Mr. Toombs’ reception. Since then we
have received a full report of the lecture, which
is of sufficient importance to give in extenso.
Mr. Toombs said:
1 propose to submit to you this evening some
considerations and reflections upon two points :
1. The constitutional powers and duties of the
federal government in relation to domestic sla
very.
2. The influence of slavery, as it exists in the
United States, upon the slave and society.
Under the first head I shall endeavor to show
that Congress has no power to limit, restrain, or
ill auy maimer to impair slavery; but, on the
contrary, it is bound to protect and maintain it in
the States where it exists, and wherever else the
flag floats and its jurisdiction is paramount.
On the second point, I maintain that so long as
the African and Caucassian races exist in the same
society, the subordinacy of the African is the nor
mal, necessary ami proper condition, and that
such subordination is the condition best calcula
ted to promote the highest interests and the great
est happiness of both races, and consequently of
the whole of society, and that the abolition of sla
very under these conditions is no* a remedy of any
of the evils of the system. I admit the truth of
these propositions stated under the second point
to be essentially necessary to the existence and
permanence of the system. They rest on the truth
that the white is the superior race, and the black
the inferior, and that subordination, with or with
out law, will be the status of the African in this
mixed society; and, therefore, it is the interest of
both, and especially of the black race and of the
whole of society, that this status should be fixed,
controlled and protected by law. The perfect
equality of the superior nice, and legal subordina
tion of the inferior, are the foundations on which
we have erected our republican system. Its sound
ness must be tested by its conformity to the sover
eignty of right, the law which ought to govern all
people in all countries. This sovereignty of right
is justice, commonly called 'national justice—not
tiie vague, uncertain imaginings of men, but na
tional justice as interpreted by the written oracles,
and read by the light of tl»e revelations of nature’s
God.
In this sense I recognize a “higher law,’’ and
the duty of all men, by legal and proper means, to
bring every society in conformity with it. I pro
ceed to tin; consideration of the first point. The
old thirteen States before the Revolution were de
pendent colonies of Great Britain. Each was a
separate and distinct and political community,
with different laws, and each became an indepen
dent and sovereign State by tin* Declaration of In
dependence. At the time of the Declaration, sla
very was a fact, and a fact recognized by law in
each of them, and the slave trade was lawful com
merce by the laws of nations and the practice of
mankind. This Declaration was drafted bv a
slaveholder, adopted by the representatives* of
slaveholders, and did not emancipate a single Af
rican slave; but on the contrary, one of the charges
which it submitted to the civilized world against
King George was, that he had attempted to excite
domestic insurrection among us. At the time of
this Declaration we had no common government.
The articles of confederation were submitted to
the representatives of the States eight days after
wards, and were not adopted by all the States un
til 1781. These crude and imperfect articles of
Union sufficed t<* bring us successfully through
tiie Revolution. Common danger was a stronger
bond of union tlmu these articles of confederation.
After that ceased, they were inadequate*io the pur
poses of peace. They did not emancipate a siugle
slave.
The Constitution was framed by delegates elect
ed by the State Legislatures. It was an emanation
from the sovereign States as independent, separate
communities. It was ratified by conventions of
these separate States, each acting for itself. Tin*
members of these conventions represented the
sovereignty of each State, but they ware not elect
ed by the whole people of either of the Slates. Mi
nors* women, slaves, Indians, Africans, bond and
free, were excluded from participating in this act
of sovereignty; neither were all the white male in
habitants over twenty one years allowed to partici
pate iu it. Some of them were excluded because
they had forfeited the right; others because they
had uot the requisite qualifications; others, again,
for still more objectionable reasons. None exer
cised this high privilege except those upon whom
each State, for itself, had adjudged it wise, safe
and prudent to confer it. My this Constitution
these States granted to the federal government
certain well dciiued and clearly specified powers, in
order to. “make a more perfect union, establish
justice, insure domestic tranquility, provide for
the common defence and general welfare, and to
secure the blessings of liberty to (themselves and
theiri posterity.” And with great wisdom and
forethought, itlaysdown a plain, certain and suffi
cient rule so: its own interpretation, by declaring
that “the powers herein delegated to the United
States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to
tiie States, are reserved to the States respectively,
or to the people.”
It is, therefore, a limited government. It is lim
ited expressly to the enumerated powers and such
others only, “which shall he necessary and proper
to carry into execution” the enumerated powi is.
The purposes for which these powers were granted
can neither increase nor dimmish them. If any
one or all of these powers were to fail by reason of
toe inefficiency of the granted powers to secure
them, that would be a good reason for a new grant,
but could never enlarge the granted powers. That
declaration was itself a limitation, instead of an
enlargement, of these powers. If a power expressly
granted is used for any other purpose than those de
clared, such use would be a violation of the grant,
and a fraud on the Constitution. There is nothing
within the scope of the powers or purposes of the
Constitution which gives the slightest sanction to
any anti-slavery action of Congress. The history
of the times, and the debates in the convention
which framed the Constitution, show that the
whole subject was much considered by them, and
“perplexed them in the extreme,” and* that those
provisions of the Constitution whicli related to it
were earnestly considered by the State conventions
which adopted it. Incipient legislation providing
for emancipation had already been adopted by
some of the States ; Massachusetts had declared
that slavery was extinguished by her Bill of Rights.
The African slave trade had already been legisla
ted against Ih many of the States, including Vir
ginia, Maryland and North Carolina, the largest
slaveholding States. The public mind was un
questionably tending towards emancipation. This
feeling displayed itself in the South as well as the
North. Some of the delegates from the present
alaveholding States thought that the power to
abolish, not only the African slave trade, butslave
rr m the States, ought to be given to the Federal
Government; and that the Constitution did not
take this shape, was made one of ilie most promi
nent objections to it by Luther Martin, a distin-
member of the convention from Maryland;
and Mr. Mason, of Virginia, was not far behind
him in his emancipation principles. Mr. Madison
sympathised to a great extent, to a much greater
extent, than some of the representatives of Mas
sachusetts m this anti-slavery feeling. Hence, we
find that anti-slavery feelings were extensively in
dulged by many members of the convention, both
from the slaveholding and non-slaveholding
States.
But it rather concerns us to know what was the
collective will of the whole as affirmed by the so
vereign States, not what were the opinions of in
dividual men in the convention. We wish to
know what was done by the whole, not what some
of the members thought was best to be done. The
result of the struggle was, that not a single clause
was inserted in the Constitution giving power to
toe Federal Government anywhere, either to abol
ish, limit, restrain, or in any other manner to im
pair the system of slavery in the United States;
but on the contrary, every clause which was in
serted in the Constitution on this subject, does in
fact, and was so intended, either to increase it. to
strengthen it, or to protect it. To support these
positions, I appeal to the Constitution itself, to the
ootemporaneous and all subsequent authorative
interpretations of it. The Constitution provides
for the increase of slavery by prohibiting the sus
pension of the slave trade for twenty years after
Its adoption. It says in the first clause of the ninth
section of the first article, “ that the migration or
importation of such persons as any of the States
now existing shall think proper to admit, shall not
be prohibited by the Congress prior to the year
1838, but a tax or duty may be imposed on such
importation, not exceeding ten dollars for each
person.” After that time it was left at the discre
tion of Congress to prohibit or not to prohibit the
African slave trade. The extension of this traffic
in Africans from 1800 to 1808 was voted for by the
whole of the New England States, including Mas
sachusetts, and opposed by Virginia and Delaware,
and the clause was inserted by the votes of the
New England States. It fostered an active and
profitable trade for New England capital
and enterprise for twenty years, by which a 1
large addition was made to the numbers of the
original stock of Africans in the States—thereby
it increased slavery in the United States. This ,
clause of the Constitution, which specially favored
it, was one of those clauses which was protected
against amendments by article fifth.
Slavery is strengthened by the third clause se
cond section, of first article, which fixes the basis
of representation according io the numbers, pro
vi ding that the members “shall be determined by
adding to the whole number of free persons, in
cluding those bound to service for a term of years
and excluding Indians not taxed, threedifths of
all other persons.” This provision strengthens
slavery by giving the existing slaveholding Stales
many more representatives in Congress than
they would have if slaves were counted onlv as
property. This provision was much debated,'but
finally adopted, with the full understanding of its
import, by a great majority. The Constitution
protects it impliedly by witholding all power
'() injure its duration; but it protects it expressly
by the third clause of the second section of the
fourth article, bv the fourth section of the fourth
article, and by the fifteenth clause of the eighth
section of the first article. The third section pro
vides that “no person held to service or labor in
one State, by the laws thereof, escaping into anoth
er, shall, 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.”
The fourth section of the fourth article provides
that Congress shall protect each State “on appli
cation of the Legislature, or of the Execu
tive, when the Legislature is not convened
against domestic violence.” The fifteenth clause
of the eighth section of the first article makes
it the duty of Congress to provide for calling
forth of toe militia to execute the laws of the
Union, to suppress insurrections and repel in
vasions. The first cf these three clauses last re
ferred to protects slavery bv following the escap
ing slave into non-slaveholaing States and return
ing him to bondage ; the other clauses place the
whole military pewer of the republic in the hands
of the federal government to repress “ domestic
violence” and “insurrection.”
Under this Constitution, if he flies to other lands
the supreme law follows, captures and returns him.
It he resists the law by which he is held in bon
dage, the same Constitution brings its military
power to his subjugation. There is no limit to
this protection; it must be protected as long as
any of the States tolerate domestic slavery, and
the Constitution unalitered endures. None of these
clauses admit of misconception or doubtful consruc
tion. They were not incorporated into the charter of
our libities by surprise or inattention—they were
each ami all of them introduced into that body,
debated, referred to committees, reported upon
and adopted. Our construction of them is sup
ported by one unbroken and harmonious current
of decisions and adjudications by the executive,
legislative and judicial departments of the gov
ernments, State and federal, from President Wash
ington to President Pierce. Twenty representa
tives in the Congress of the United States hold
their seats to-day by virtue of one of these clauses.
The African slave trade was caned on the whole
appointed period under another. Thousands of
slaves have been delivered up under another, and
it is a just cause of congratulation to the whole
country that no occasion has occurred to call into
action the remaining clauses which have been
quoted.
These constitutional provisions were generally
acquiesced in, even bv those who did not approve
them, until a new and less obvious question sprung
out of the acquisition of Territory. When the
Constitution was adopted, the question had been
settled in the Northwest Territory by the articles
of cession of that Territory by the State of Vir
ginia; and at that time the United States had not
an acre of land for which to legislate except a dis
puted claim over the Southwestern boundary,
which will hereafter be considered in its appropri
ate connection. The acquisition of Louisiana de
volved upon Congress the necessity of its Govern
ment. This duty was assumed and performed for
the general benefit of the whole country, without
challenge or question, for nearly seventeen years.
Equity and good faith shielded it. But in I*Blo—
years after the adoption of the Constitution
upon the application of Missouri for admission
into the Union, the extraordinary pretension was
for the first time asserted by a majority of the non
slaveholding States, that Congress had not only
the power to prohibit the extension of slavery into
ihe new Territories of the republic, but that it had
the power to compel new States seeking admission
into the Union to prohibit it in their own Consti
tutions, and mould their domestic policy in all re
spects to suit the opinions, whims or caprices of
the Federal Government. This novel ana extraor
dinary pretension subjected the whole powers of
Congress over the Territories to the severest criti
cism. AbundanUouthoiity was found iu the: Con
stitution to manage this common domain merely o •
property.
The 2d clause, 3d section of the 4th article, de
clares “that Congress shall have power to dispose
of and make all needful rules and regulations re
specting the Territory or other property belonging
to the United States ;* and nothing in this Consti
tution shall he so construed as to prejudice any
claims of the United States of any particular
State;” but this clause restricted bv its terms the
action of Congress over it. It is here considered
only as property, and gave Congress no political
power to govern it. This construction has the
sanction of the highest judicial authority of the
land. Congress was then driven to look for power
to govern it in the necessity and propriety of it as
a mode of executing the express power to make
treaties. The right to acquire Territory under the
treaty making power was itself an implication,
and an implication whose rightfulness was denied
by Mr. Jefferson, who exercised it. The right to
govern being claimed as an incident of the righ
to acquire, was then but an implication of an im
plication ; and then the power to exclude slavery
therefrom was still another implication from toe
fountain of all power (express grant). But wheth
er the power to prohibit slavery in the common
Territories be claimed from the one source or the
other, it cannot be sustained upon any sound role
of constitutional construction. The power is not
expressly granted. Then, unless it can be shown
to be both “necessary and proper” in order to the
just execution of a granted power, the constitution
al argument against it is complete. This remains
to be shown by the advocates «*f this power. Ad
mit (he power in Congress to govern the Territo
ries until they shall be admitted as States iuto the
Union—derive it either from the clause of the
Constitution last referred to, or from the treaty
making power—still this power to prohibit slavery
is not incident to it in either case, because it is
neither necessary nor proper to its execution.
That it is not necessary to execute the treaty
making power, is shown from the fact that that
power not only was never used for this purpose,
but can be wisely and well executed without it, and
has been repeatedly used to increase and protect
slavery. The acquisition of Louisiana and Flori
da are* examples of its use without the exercise of
this pretended necessity and proper incident. Nu
merous treaties and conventions with both savage
and civilized nations, from the foundation of the
government, demanding and receiving indemnities
for injuries to this species of property, is conclu
sive against this novel pretension. That it is not
necessary to the execution of the power to make
“needful rules and regulations respecting the ter
ritory and other property of the United States,” is
proven from the fact that seven territories have
been governed by Congress and trained into sover
eign States without its exercise. It is not proper,
because it seeks to use an implied power for other
and different purposes from any specified, express
ed or intended by the grantors. The puniose is
avowed to be to limit, restrain, weaken, ana finally
to crush out slavery; whereas, the grant expressly
provides for strengthening and protecting it. It is
not proper, because it violates the fundamental
conditions of the Union—the eauality of the States.
The States of the Union are all political equals—
each State has the same right as every other State
—no more, no less. The exercise of this prohibi
tion violates this equality and violates justice. By
the laws of nations, acquisitions, either by purchase
or conquest, even in despotic governments, enure
to the benefit of all the subjects of the States. The
reasou for this, given by the most approved public
ists, is that they are the fruits of the common blood
and treasure.
This prohibition destroys this equality, excludes
a part of the joint owners from an equal participa
tion and enjoyment of the common domain, and
against justice and right, appropriates it to the
greater number. Therefore, so far from being a
necessary and proper means of executing granted
powers, it is an arbitrary and despotic usurpation
against the letter, the spirit, and declared purposes ,
of the Constitution. The exercise neither “pro
motes a more perfect union, nor establishes justice,
nor insures domestic tranquillity, nor provides for (
the common defence, nor promotes the general .
welfare, nor secures the blessings of liberty to our
selves or our posteritybut, on the contrary, it .
puts in jeopardy ail these inestimable blessings, !
and does uot even emancipate a single African j
slave. Penning them up ana stowing them in the i
old States, may make them more wretched and j
misefable, but it docs not strike a chain from the j
limbs of one of them, ft is not only a great wrong
to the white race, but the refinement of cruelty to
the black. Expansion is as necessary to the in
creased comforts of the slave as to the prosperity of
the master. The constitutional construction of the
South does no wrong to any portion of the republic,
to no sound rules of construction, and promotes all
the declared purposes of the Constitution. We sim
ply propose that common territories be left open to
the common enjoyment of all tike people of the
United States that they shall be protected in their
persons and property by the Federal, until its au
thority is superseded by a .State Constitution, and
then we propose that the character of the domestic
institutions of the new State be determined by the
freemen thereof. This is justice—this is Contitu
tional equality.
Kut those who claim the power in Congress to
exclude slavery from the territories, rclv rather on
authority than principle to support it. They af
firm, with singular ignorance of or want of fideli
ty to the facts, that Congress has, from the begin
ning of the goveromeut, uniformly claimed, and
reputedly exercised, the power to discourage slave
ry, and to exclude it from the territories. My in
vestigation of the subject has satisfied my own
mind that neither position is sustained by a single
precedent. I exclude, of course, legislation pro
hibiting the African slave trade, and I hold the or
dinance of 1787 not to be within the principle as
serted. For the first thirty years of our history,
this general duty to protect this great interest,
equally with every other, was universally admitted
and fairly performed by every department of the
government. The act of 171*3 was passed to se
cure the delivery up of fugitives from labor esca
ping to the non-slaveholding States; your naviga
tion laws authorized their transportation on the
high seas. The government demanded and re
peatedly received compensation for the owners o
slaves, for injuries sustained in these lawful voy
ages by the interference of foreigu governments.
It not only protected us upon the high seas, but
followed us to foreigu lands, where we had been
driven by the dangers of the sea, and protected
slave property when thus cast even within the ju
risdiction of hostile municipal laws. The slave
property of our people was protected agaiust the
incursions of Indians by our military power and
public treaties. That clause of the treaty of Ghent
which provided compensation for property destroy
ed or taken bv the British government, placed
slavery precisely upon the same ground with other
property; and a New England man (Mr. Adams)
ably and faithfully maintained the rights of the
slaveholder under it at the Court of £>t. Janies.
The government was administered according to
the Constitution, anti not according to what is
now called the “spirit of the age.” Those legisla
tors looked for political powers and public duties
in the organic law which political communities had
laid down for their guidance and government Hu
manity mongers, atheistical socialists, who would
upturn the moral, social and political foundations
of society, who would substitute the folly of men
for the wisdom of God, were then justly consider
ed as the enemies of the human race, anil as de
serving the contempt, if not the execration of all
mankind.
Until the year 1820, our Territorial legislation
was marked'by the same general spirit of fairness
and justice. Notwithstanding the constant asser
tions to the contrary by gentlemen from the North,
up to that period no act was ever passed by consti
tutional power to prevent any citizen of the United
States owning slaves from removing with them to
our Territories, and there receiving legal protec
tion for this property. Until that time such per
sons did so remove into all the Territories owned
or acquired by the United States, except the North
west Territory, and were there adequately protect
ed. The action of Congress in reference to the or
dinance of 1787 does not contravene this principle.
That ordinance was passed on the 18th day of July,
1787, before the adoption of our present Constitu
tion. It purported mi its face to be a perpetual
compact between the State of Virginia, the people
of the Territory, and the then government of the
United States, and unalterable except by the con
sent of all the parties. When Congress met for
the first time, under the new government, on the
4th of March, 1789, it found tiio government thus
established by virtue of this ordinance in actual
operation; and on the 7th August, 178'.*, it passed
a law making the office* of Governor and Secreta
ry of the Territory conform to the Constitution of
the new government. It did nothing more. It
made no reference to the sixth and last section of
the ordinance which inhibited slavery. _ The di*
> vision of that Territory was provided for in the or
; dinunce; at each division, the whole of the ordi
i nance was assigned by Congress to each of its
■ parts. This is the whole sum and substance of the
free soil claim to legislative precedents. Congress
f did not assert the right to alter a solemn compact
■ entered into with the former government, but gay*
its consent, by its legislation, to the governments
■ established and provided for i.n tiie compact.
■ the ordinal compel was. void P.rrf.r *■*«
or i:: ff t old -overmm-nt to make it. ns Mr. 514®
son supposed, iJongrrtm may not have been bonrrfi
to accept it—it certainly had i»o power to alter ffT
From these facts and principles, it is clear that
the legislation for the Northwest Territory does
not conflict with the principles which I assert,
and does not afford precedents for hostile legisla
tion of Congress against slavery in the Territories.
That such was neither the principle nor the policy
upon which the act of the 7th of August, 1789,
was based, is further shown by the subsequent ac
tion of the same Congress. On the 2d of April,
1790, Congress, bv a formal act, accepted the ces
sion made by North Carolina, of her western lands
I now the State of Tennessee,) with this clause in
the deed of cession : “ That no regulation made,
or to he made, by Congress, shall tend to emanci
pate slaves” in the ceded Territory ; anil on the
o«>th of May, 1790, passed a territorial bill fi r the
government of all the Mon itory claimed by the
United States south of the Ohio river. The de
scription of this Territory included all the lands
ceded by North Carolina,‘but it embraced a great
deal more. Its boundaries were left indefinite, be
cause there were conflicting claims to all the rest
of the territory. But this act put the whole coun
try claimed bv the United States south of the
Ohio under the pro-slavery clause of the North
Carolina deed. The whole*action of the first Con
gress in relation to slavery in the Territories of
the United States seems to*have been this: It ac
quiesced in a government for the Northwest Ter
ritory based upon a pre-existing anti-slavery ordi
ance, created a government for the country ceded
by North Carolina in conformity with the pro-sla
very clause lo all the rest of the Territory claimed
bv the Tnited States south of the Ohio river. This
legislation vindicates the first Congress from all
imputation of having established the precedent
claimed bv the friends of legislative exclusion.
The next Territorial act which was passed was
that of the 7th of April. 1798. It was the first act
of Territorial legislation which had to rest solely
upon original primary constitutional power over
the subject. It established a government over the
Territories included within the boundaries of a
line drawn due cast from the mouth of the Yazoo
river to the Chattahoochee river, then down that
river to the thirty-first degree of North latitude,
then West on that line to the Mississippi river
then up the Mississippi river to the begin
ning. This Territory was within the boundary
of the United States as defined by the treaty
of Paris, and was not within the boundary of any
of the States. The charter of Georgia limited her
boundary on the South to the Altamalia river. In
1703, after the surrender of her charter, her limits
were extended by the crown to the St, Mary’s river,
and West on the 31st degree, of North latitude to
the Mississippi. In 1704, on the recommendation
of the Board of Trade, her boundary was again al
tered, and that portion of the Territory within the
boundaries which I have described, was annexed
to West Florida, and thus it stood at the Revolu
tion and the treaty of peace. Therefore, the United
States claimed it as common property, and in 1798
passed the act now under review for its govern
ment. In that act she neither claimed nor exerted
any power to prohibit slavery in it And the ques
tion came directly before Congress; the ordinance
of 1787 in terms was applied to this territory, ex
pressly “excepting and excluding the last article
of the ordinance, which is the article excluding
slavery from the Northwest Territory. This is a
precedent directly in point, and is agaiust the ex
ercise of the power now claimed. In 1802 Georgia
ceded her western lands. She protected slavery
in her grant, and the government complied with
her stipulations.
In 1803 the United States acquired Louisiana
from France by purchase. There is no special re
ference to slavery in the treaty; it was protected
only under the general term of property. This ac
quisition was, soon after the treaty, divided into
two territories—the Orleans and Louisiana Territo
ries—over both of which governments were estab
lished. The law of slavery obtained in the whole
country at the time we acquired it. Congress pro
hibited the foreign and domestic slave trade in
these Territories, but gave the protection of its
laws to slave owners emigrating tnither with their
slaves. Upon the admission of Louisiana into the
Union, a new government was established by Con
gress over the rest of the country, under the name
of the Missouri Territory. This act also attempted
no exclusion. Slaveholders emigrated to the coun
try with their slaves and were protected by their
government. In 1819, Florida was acquired by
purchase; its laws recognised and protected slave-
ry at the time of the acquisition. The United
States extended the same recognition and protec
tion.
Such was the history of territorial legislation
until the year 1820. Missouri had applied for ad
mission into the Union. An attempt was then
made, for the first time, to impose restrictions upon
a soveripi State, and admit it into the Union upon
an equal footing with her sister States, and to com
pel her to mould her institutions, not according to
the will of her own people, but according to the
fancy of a majority in Congress. The attempt
was strongly resisted, and resulted in an act pro
viding for her admission, but containing a clause
prohibiting slavery forever in all the territory ac
quired from France outside of Missouri, and North
of 36 degrees 30 minutes North latitude. The prin
ciple of this law was a division of the common
territory. The authority to prohibit, even to this
extent, was denied by Mr. Madison, Mr. Jefferson
and other leading and distinguished men of the
day. It was carried by most of the Southern rep
resentatives, eiunbilled with a small number »>i
Northern votes. It was a departure from principle,
but it savored of justice. Subsequently, upon the
settlement of our claim to Oregon, it lying North
of that line, the prohibition was applied. Upon
the acquisition of Texas, the same line of division
was adopted. But when we acquired Californi
and New Mexico, the South, still willing to abide
by the principle of division, again attempted to
divide by the same line. It was almost unanimous
ly resisted by the Northern States; their represen
tatives, by a large majority, insisted upon absolute
prohibition and the total exclusion of the people
of the Southern States from the whole of the com
mon territories, unless they divested themselves of
their slave property. The result of a long and un
happy conflict was the legislation of 1850. By it a
large body of the representatives of the non-slave
holding States, sustained by the approbation of
their constituents, acting upon sound principles of
constitutional construction, duty and patriotism,
aided in voting down this new and dangerous
usurpation—declared for the equality of the States,
and protected the people of the Territories from
this unwarrantable interference with their rights.
Here we wisely abandoned “the shiftiug sands of
compromise,” and put the rights of the people
again upon the “rock of the Constitution.”
The law of 1854 (commonly known as the Kan
sas-Xebraska act) was made to conform to this pol
icy, and but carried out the principles established
in 1850. Tt righted an ancient wrong, and will re
store harmony, because it restores justice, to the
country. This legislation, I have endeavored to
show, is just, fair and equal; that it is sustained
by principle, by authority, and by the practice of
our fathers. I trust, 1 believe, that when the
transient passions of the day shall have subsided
and reason shall have resumed he dominion, it
will be approved, even applauded, by the collective
body of the people in every portion of our widely
extended repuiic.
[concluded on fifth page.)
Teiinesse° Suits Against the Slate
Raiload.
REPORT OF THE SENATE COMMITTEE.
Your committee, appointed by resolution of the
Senate, in accordance with the recommendation of
his Excellency the Governor, contained in his mes
sage, in relation to suits, by c ertain citizens of the
State of Tennessee in the courts of that State,
against the State of Georgia, for alleged damages
claimed to have been sustained bv those citizens,
for failing to ship promptly, and for unseasonable
detention of produce and merchandise owned by
said citizens, and registered for shipment or trans
portation over the western and Atlantic Railroad,
have had those suits, the evidence and the proceed
ings had therein, under consideration, and beg
leave to make the following report:
To have a proper understanding of the question
under consideration, it will be necessary to exam
ine the Legislation of the State of Tennessee, con
ferring on the State of Georgia the right to con
struct a part of the Western and Atlantic Railroad
in that State.
The State of Tennessee by act of her Legislature
passed January 24th, 1838 —granted to the State
of Georgia the right to extend and construct the
Western and Atlantic railroad from the Georgia
line to the Tennessee river, with all the privileges,
' lights and immunities, anu subject to the same re
strictions, as far as thev are applicable as were
F granted bv the State of Tennessee to the Hiwassec
• railroad Company. The State ofTcnnessee, by act
• of her Legislature, passed February 3d, 1846, con
• ferred upon the State of Georgia, so far as the
4 Western and Atlantic railroad is concerned, all the
• rights, privileges and immunities, with the same
4 restrictions as were conferred by that State on
t the Nashville and Chattanooga railroad Company.
4, By virtue of the privileges conferred by these
• acts, thevStnte of Georgia constructed a portion
fcj-lfc; ?|** mestem and Atlantic railroad in the
the Terms specified in
- the '«bora reci*~d act. Your committee are ot
l the opinion, that the State of Georgia by accept
ing the terms, privileges and immunities, as well
as the restrictions specified in the acts above men
tioned, become liable to be sued in the Courts of
Tennessee, and consented to waive so much of her
sovereignty, as to authorize suits to be brought
in those Courts, for causesVf action arising in the
State of Tennesseee, for injuries, default negli
gence on the part of the Agents of the \N esteni
and Atlantic railroad. Your committee are of the
opinion that the causes of these suits originated
for the want of a sufficient equipage of locomo
tives and cars to transact the business of the road.
In the vear 1852, the amount of produce offered
for transportation over the Western and Atlantic
railroad was very large, and the facilities of the
road for doing u heavy business were very limited.
The road was mainly dependent for freight cars,
on the Georgia, Macon and Western, and Central
railroads, which roads, to some extent, claimed and
exercised the right to prescribe the quality of
freigiits transported in their respective cars. In
consequence or the exercise of this right, great
difficulty arose in transporting the freights over
the road in the order of their registry, and most of
the suits submitted to our examination were predica
ted on a claim for damages in behalf of the plaintiff s
for non-shipment of produce, registered by them
for transportation over the road, within a reasona
ble time, and in the order of their registry. An
nexed to this report is a statement of a number of
suits brought, for what brought, of the amount
claimed, and of those determined: how much re
covered, together with a brief of the evidence, in
those cases, and the proceedings had therein. The
suits have been brought not against the State of Geor
gia, as defendant, but again the Western and At
lantic road, which your committee consider irregu
lar and erroneous, inasmuch as there is no such
natural person as the Western and Atlantic rail
road, neither has there been created by the Legis
lation of the State of Georgia or Tennessee, any
such artificial person or corporation; for all the
rights, privileges and immunities conferred by the
State of Tennessee, were conferred upon the State
of Georgia, and not upon a company called the
Western and Atlantic railroad. The Western and
Atlantic railroad, is not a Company or Corporation
—but simply the name of a line of railroad, ex
tending from the city of Atlanta to the city of
Chattanooga, and is the property of the State of
Georgia; consequently, we are or the opinion, that
there is, and was, no defendant in these cases, and
the proceedings had therein, were, and are void as
against the State of Georgia, and the judgments
had thereon of no binding force or effect upon the
property of the State of Georgia, situated in Ten
nessee orelsewhere. Most of the cases decided, have
been determined by submission to arbitrators.
Your Committee would recommend, that the cases
still pending, be vigorously defended in the Courts
of Tennessee; and that no more of them be submit
ted to arbitration. Your Committee would further
recommend that the road be equipped in such a
manner as to enable the agents to transact the
business offered, with dispatch and promptness,
which, we believe, would largely increase the pro
fits of the road, and greatly benefit the citizens of
our own State residing on that line of the road.
We would further recommend, that a freight list
be established, graduated in proportion to the dis
tance, which freights are carried over that road.
Your Committee are divided in opinion on the
question, as to whether Georgia ought, or
not, to sell, or dispose of, that portion of the \Y es
tern and Atlantic railroad lying in the State of
Tennessee; and upon that subject, beg leave to
make no further report.
All of which is respectfully submitted.
F. 11. Cone, Chairman.
Thackery says he once had an idea of collecting
all the lies*the’English told about the French, and
the French about the English in the Napoleonic
period—but he shrank from the task.
Bavard Taylor will clear $3,000 during the fall
and ‘winter; John G. Saxe upwards of $2,000;
and Rev. T. Star King SI,OOO. Making due al
lowance for probable exaggeration, these figures
show conclusively that the business of lecturing
pays well.
M. Maedler, the author of the recent investiga
tion with reference to the central sun, reaches the
conclusion that Alcoyne, the principal star in the
group Pleiades, now occupies the centre of gravi
ty, and is at present the sun about which all the
universe of stars revolve.
[communicated.]
Milledgeville, 11th Feb;, 1850.
Mr. Gardner —Dear Mr: I see in the daily
ConstUutionulist of the 9th and 10th instant, which
was handed me to-day, a report purporting to be
the position taken by myself and others, for and
against the Iliwassee Railroad Bill. Your reporter
erred in stating my position, and in using language
I never used. I opposed the bill from the begin
ning. First, I moved the indefinite postponement
of the bill, and stated, as a reason for so doing,
that the passage of the bill would be injurious to
the State of Georgia. I then went on to show that
some time between 1830 and 1835, there was a con
vention of six or seven States, to wit: South Caro- j
lina, North Carolina, Georgia, Tennessee, Ken
tucky and Ohio, assembled at Knoxville, in the
State of Tennessee, for the purpose of constructing <
a railroad from some point on the Atlantic coast, j
south of the Alleghany Mountains, to Cincinnati, ,
Ohio. When the convention met, Charleston was j
the starting point insisted upon by the convention, <
and the road to cross the Blue Ridge and Alle- i
ghanv Mountains, east of the State of Georgia, }
then to Cincinnati, Ohio; then the Georgia dele- ,
gation, as I bad understood, withdrew from the <
convention, held a meeting of their own, and ad- 1
joumed to meet in the city of Macon, and State of ,
Georgia. There it was that the magnificent plan
was adopted to construct the railroads from Augusta
to Atlanta, and from Savannah to Macon, and from
Macon to Atlanta, and from Atlanta northwest
through the wilderness of the Cherokee country,
to the Tennessee State line, and that this magnifi
cent plan was carried out by the Legislators of the
State of Georgia, and by the industry of the people
of our own State, they had built their own road.
With their own labor and capital, the State of
Georgia had built the Western and Atlantic Rail
road ; and now these roads are built, and the pro
duce of the great valley of the West is running
down its natural channel to the Atlantic ports,
south of the Alleghany Mountains, in search of a
highway to foreign markets. Then it was that I
said Georgia occupies a gap between the Atlantic
and the spurs of the Alleghany Mountains; that
she bad the key to unlock the commerce of the
West, and bring down upon the Atlantic coast the
rich produce of the West. The geography of the
State was the guide that directed our patriotic an
cestors to engage s» extensively in railroad enter
prise. In the meantime. South Carolina and the
Cincinnati people got their railroad charter, with
their banking privilege, and surveyed almost every
gap across the Blue Ridge, from Georgia almost to
Virginia, but all in vain. She could not find a gap
through which she could pass until 1850. The
Legislature of Georgia granted a charter to the
county of Rabun, which connected the South Car o
lina Railroad with the North Carolina and Tennes
see Railroad, to Knoxville. South Carolina has
appropriated one million of dollars to the building
of that road, and passed a bill to loan her bonds
to the Company for one million and a half more,
making two million and a half dollars to the build
ing of the road from Anderson, through Pickens
by Rabun, and on to Knoxville. Then it was I
said, now, Mr. Speaker, if the charter is granted,
the road from Clayton to Knoxville will not bo
built. Instead of going north to Knoxville, under
the old charter, the bill now upon your table pro
poses to go west to the Copper Mines, and from
the Copper Mines, there is a c harter to Cleveland ;
this road would be west from the mines to Cleve
land, and would strike the Iliwassee Railroad in
Tennessee, eighty or one hundred miles south of
Knoxville, and near the head of the Western and
Atlantic Railroad; and a little further west, this
link of road would tap the Western and Atlantic
. Railroad at Chattanooga; by the passage of that
. bill, you give a direct line from Nashville through
» Uuion and Rabun, to Charleston. The building of
i the road would not be by the people ot Union
county, nor not for their special benefit; but it
I I would be for the benefit of a Northern State and
. Northern Yankees, who have taken stock in the
road. The granting of that charter would be dis
t criminating against the State of Georgia and
. against the people. Between the Western and At
e lantic Railroad and the Georgia Railroad, and the
c mountains, the granting of that charter would vir
o tually be a repeal of all the charters between the
a line of road, and the chain contemplated by the
bill. 1 ask, in all candor, is it right to discrimi
e nate against our own people, ami in favor of a
n Northern State and a Northern Company ? My rule
e is to legislate so as to do the greatest good to the
n greatest number. Union county has a railroad
,f charter, northeastern Georgia has a charter, my
. coonfv and the counties below, have railroad char
| tors. 'Wfiy not utf build *mr road from the main
- trunk? Why discriminate against usV Why dis
f criminate against the State of Georgia ? lam for
• free trade and equal rights. We tender to Tennes
: see and South Carolina the facility for trade und
, commerce through our State ; but we want to be
recipients of that trade. If the bill passes, all the
trade that passes down the Western and Atlantic
Railroad, for the South Carolina or Charleston
markets, would be a loss to the State; near half
of the produce from Chattanooga would be driven
off upon this road, to the injury of our own State.
Sir, lam opposed to the bill; it is wrong in prin
ciple. It never shall be said to me, or my offspring,
that I sold my birthright for a mess of pottage.
When the time comes that we witness the injury
inflicted by the passage of the bill; when you turn
to the Journals to see who done it, if my head is
beneath the turf, I want my vote to stand recorded
against the bill. If l stand alone to-day upon this
question, 1 will stand erect, conscious tliat I have
discharged my dutv as a Representative. It does
seem to me, that a large majority is against me. I
ask gentlemen to look close into this matter. I
intend to oppose the bill at every point. lam a
Georgian in principle; lam a Georgian in interest.
I am for mv people and my State first, then I am
for my neighboring State. If the bill was for the
purpose of giving only to Union county railroad
facility, there is not a man here that would oppose
it. This road, if built, would not carry off the
trade or the produce of Georgia soil, except a por
tion from Union ; but, sir, it would be the great
thoroughfare from Charleston via Rabun Gap,
through Union to Nashville and Memphis. Union
county is only used as an excuse to build this main
trunk, which would come in competition with our
section of railroads from the Atlantic through our
State to Chattanooga, then to Nashville and to
Memphis. This bill, if passed, would divide the
trade and freight at the head of vour own road
between Charleston and Savannah. I desire to
see the road built from the Rabun Gap to Knox
ville, and from Knoxville to Cincinnati, Ohio.
That would bring down into Georgia and South
Carolina, the trade from East Tennessee, Kentucky
and Ohio. Through the Rabun Gap, the North-
East Railroad and the South Carolina Railroad
would divide the trade at this Gap—and both
Georgia and South Carolina might be benefittod ,
by the building of this Road. Not so with the ;
bill now upon your table, which runs west only to ,
tap our own roads at their head; to divide the
trade which is ours by the decrees of Nature’s
God. These are rights we have according to lo
cality. Are you prepared to give them away? ,
The building of that Road would injure the West
ern and Atlantic Railroad—l mean it would take
off the freight from that Road, to the injury of the i
State,-—not less than from one hundred and fifty
to two hundred thousand dollars annually. Are
we prepared to discriminate against our own State? 1
Tne motion to postpone indefinitely, was lost.
I offered several amendments to the bill; the last
one was to prohibit the connection with the Rabun
Gap, for which an amendment was offered and ac- j
cepted, to prevent the connection of this Road 1
with any South Carolina Railroad, only by the way j
of Augusta. This amendment was lost, by one
vote. "The bill then came up, upon its passage,
and was lost. Upon the motion to reconsider—
my language has been misunderstood and misrep
resented—l hope not intentionally.
Yours, Ac.,
_ J. PICKETT.
[communicated.]
Decatur, Ga., Feb. 1856.
Mr. Editor: Much has been remarked of the se
verity of the weather of this winter.
In our village on Monday morning, 4th inst., (
the thermometer stood at 2° above zero. Tuesday ,
morning, sth inst., 4° above zero.
Few, if any, colder mornings hare been experi
enced since the memorable 7th and Sth of Febru
ary, 1835.
My thermometer, in the same location at sunset
on the 7th February, 1835, stood 5° above zero.
Nine o’clock at night,, at 5° below zero. At sun
rise Sunday morning, Bth February, 10° below
zero.
There is no mistake in the above record, either
as to time or degrees, or the year being 1885.
Respectfully, Lbti Willard.
Distressing Homicide.—The most distressing
homicide we ever heard of, occurred in this coun
ty, about seven miles northeast of Lebanon, on
last Monday morning was a week ago, between
Rufus Watson and his three sons on the one side,
and two sons of John New, on the other. The un
fortunate difficulty occurred in a school room.
Young New, aged about nineteen years, was shot
through the heart and expired immediately; and
his little brother, seme thirteen or fourteen years
of age, was almost literally cut to pieces—receiving
no less, we learn, than seven dangerous wounds,
every one of them penetrated to the hollow.
Strange as it may appear, he is stilt living, and
hopes are entertained of his recovery. Kufua
Watson received the contents of a pistol, loaded
with bird shot ; in the breast, but was not seriously
hurt. The difficulty ftv w ont of an old grudge
that has existed for rears bqfljveen the heads of the
respective families.
Wafson and his sons were tried at Taylorsville
on Friday last.JOn hearing the evidence, the Corn*
held them to bail in the sum of $4,000. One of
the boys was bailed out; but the other two and
the father, failing to give bail, were committed te
jail to await their trial at the next term of the Cir
cuit Court.
As the matter is to undergo judicial investiga
tion, we refrain, at present, from giving the partic
ulars. We may remark, however, that, in our
opinion, the evidence in the case will prove it to bo
one of the most horrible and huart-rending affairs
that ever occurred in a civilized community.
Lebanon ( Tenn .) Herald.
_ COMMERCIAL. _
CHARLESTON, Feb. 14.— Cotton. —Our quota
tions were carefully revised at the close of busi
ness, and those we offer below, it will be seen, es
tablish an advance for the week on most qualities
of The receipts since our last comprise
13,348 bales, against the sale in the same time of
12,900 bales. We quote ordinary to good ordinary
low to strict middling ; good
middling ; middling fair lU@IOX ; and
fair 10}$ cents.
Bice. —The subjoined quotations will show the
state of the market: Ordinary to fair3X@4%;
good 4)£(<|4*£; and prime and* choice 4%@ —.
Corn. —This article has been very much neglect
ed since our last, and the transactions, limited as
they have been, sho>v a languid and drooping mar
ket. Some 3,500 bushels North Carolina, held over
from the previous week, and 1,500 bushels receiv
ed since our last, have beee sold within the range
of our quotations, viz: 70@75c. The receipts or
railroad comprise 12,000 bushels, a portion of wliicn
has been sold at prices ranging from 75(&78c., sacks
included.
Pea?.—There was received from North Carolina
a small lot, 400 bushels, which were sold at 90c. Ifr
bushel.
W heat. —The market has been in a state of com
plete stagnation throughout the week just brought
to a close, and prices have a decided downward
tendency. Good Red may be quoted nominally at
$1.70@51.7f1.
Hay. —The receipts since our last comprise some
350 bales North River, which were sold at $1.40 #
10“ lbs., which shows a heavydecline on previous
transactions.
Flour. —This article has been very much neglect
ed since our last. The sales have been wOmined
solely to small lots to supply the home trade, prin
cipally at SB% U barrel, for good brand*. We
quote in barcls, extremes, sß.so(«<ss, and in bagsu
$4.25@54.37%c. The receipts this wcekby Railroad
comprise 87“ barrels.
Bacon. —The transactions have been very limit
ed for the want of a stock. As an evidence of the
scarcity of the article we may remark that the sale*
have been limited to some 17 hhds. Shouldered
which were sold at 10)-£c.
Lard.— We have no transactions to notice in
Western, which may be quoted at 11%@12c. in
kegs. Tennesse has' declined in price, and may
now'be quoted at bbls. and kegs,
and in cans nominally at 14c.
‘ Domestic Liquors.—VLe note small sales of Wes
■ tern Whisky from first hands at prices ranging
* from 43 to 45c. gallon.
1 Sugars. —The receipts since our last comprise
* some 800 hhds. Louisiana, the bulk of which has
’ been run off in small lots, at prices ranging nrin
p cipallv from 8% to as in quality, and Clari
*■ tied from 10 to 10j _c.
P Coffee. —We have no transactions to report. .
Molasses. —The receipts since our last comprise
c 1500 bbls. New Orleans, and 128 hhds. and 20 tea.
’* Cuba. About the half of the former has been
e sold at prices ranging from to 44c. The lat
.e ter had been sold to arrive on terms not made pub
l* lie, but was subsequently re-sold at prices ranging
;l from 39} j to 41c.
e Exchange*. —Sterling continues to show nn im
® provement. The market, which opened at 8(«78}&
d closed yesterday at &‘*4<&B}4c. Francs are quoted
y at 5.27 k.
Freight*. —The rate, which in the early part of
1 the week was at 7-lGths. for Cotton ia s»puuv bag*
■ to Liverpool, subsequently declined to 13-32 d. A
vessel was engaged to load for Havre at %c„ w hich
is also a decline on previous rates. We quote to
New York, Cotton %c.; Rice $1.25 tierce and
to Boston y x e. for the former and $1.50 tierce for
the latter.
SAVANNAH, Feb. B.— Cotton. —Arrived since
the 7th ult., 10,440 bales Upland. The exports
for the same period amount, to 14,919 bales Upland
—leaving on hand and on shipboard not cleared, a
stock of 50,164 bales, against 51,242 bales Uplaud
at the same time last year.
The total sales of the week 6,780 bales, at the
following particulars :3 at 7j.1, 17 at 7% y 207 at 8,
I S at S}£ 313 at BK, 29 at 8%, 425 at
BX, 1029 at 9, 257 at »}<, 1045 at 9#, 48" at 9%,
326 at 9 7-16, 901 at
370 at 10c. y lb.
QUOTATIONS:
Low Middling 8
Middling
Strict Middling
Good Middling •/*'gf
Middling Fair. 10 (<u
Bice. —The market continues dull; the only sale*
since our last have been 508 tierces at 4V@4%c.
id lt>., principally at V{c.
Corn— Is dull and depressed. The sales made
were at 70c. bushel, it is retailing by the single
sack at 90c., though a good article commands a
higher figure. There is a very heavy stock of
mixed Corn on hand, and but very little white un
mixed.
Molasses. —Several parcels have arrived from
Cuba this week, (the first of the season,) a portion
of which was disposed of at 43 cents# gallon.
It is selling from stores at 46 to 47c. We quote
for New Orleans 45 to 50 cents y gallon.
Sugar—A few packages of Cuba, the first of
the crop, arrived this week on private account.
There is no stock on sale. Os New Orleans the
stock is too light to establish quotations. Clarified
is held at 10}£(g;12 cts. y tb.
Exchange.— Sterling is quoted at 8 a W ct. pre
mium. The Banks are selling sight cfiecKs on all
Northern cities at % per cent, prem., and purcha
sing New York sight bills at M dis.; 5 days at }£;
3o days at %@1 per cent.; 60 days at \% • 90 days
4 J Boston, Philadelphia and Baltimore, 60
day bills at y cent, discount.
Freights.— We quote to Liverpool 15-32d(frV£<L
in English, and >£d. in American vessels; to Havre
1 cent for square, and cent for round. The
coastwise rates are, to Boston 9-16 c.; to New
York by steamships }4c. y and in sailing vessels
7-16 c.; to Philadelphia 9-16, and Baltimore Me. for
Cotton.
GRIFFIN, Feb. 13. — Cotton. —Since the receipt of
the Persia’s accounts, our market is very active,
with an advance of )i(&% c. We quote 7to 9cts.
SUMTER, February 13.—Cotton Statement.—
Amount of Cotton shipped on the Southwestern
Railroad, from this place, from October to the
present date:
To Savannah 25,375 bales.
Macon 2,486 u
Total 27,861 “
RECEIVED AT THE WAREHOUSES:
At Furlow, Price & Furlow’s 20,000 “
At Carmichael’s 13,000 “
Total 33,000 “
AMERICUS, Feb. 13.— Cotton. —Our market ha*
been quite animated for several days past, owing
to the racent favorable news from Europe. We now
quote 7k@B%c., while a very fine article would
command 9 cents.
NEW YORK, Feb. 12— Floor —The market is
quiet. Sales 0f6,000 bbls. straight State at $7.62W.
and good Ohio at $8.37^.
Wheat —The market is firm. Sales of 20,000
bushels at 194 cents for Southern red.
Cbm—The market is lower. Sales of 20,000
bushels at 82 cents for Western mixed.
Pork— The market ia languid, with sales of 600
bbls. at sl6 for mess.
Beef— The market is dull, with sales of 300 bbls.
at $14.50 for repacked Chicago.
Whisky —The market is declining. Sales of 200
bbls. at 80 cent* for Ohio.