Abridgment of the Debates of Congress, from 1789 to 1856.

DEBATES OF CONGRESS. 723 FEBRUARY, 1836.] Slavery Memorials. [SENATE.. principle, how are the people ever to obtain In the second place, it was contended that reform of abuses, originating in the two Houses, we should not receive the petition, because to or either House? Where would the principle grant it would be unconstitutional. Was it not lead to? He would not dwell upon the sub- apparent that this was assuming prematurely ject, but he would put a few plain cases, that that which we should arrive at by an examinawould be well understood by Senators. We tion of the subject? It had been asked-why have, said Mr. K., been in the habit of voting receive the petition, if it were afterwards to ourselves privileges. All exclusive privileges be rejected? Senators had asked-what was are justly odious to our people. They are in- the difference between the two modes of proconsistent with the American character, and ceeding? He would ask, in turn, if there was opposed to the genius of our institutions. We no difference, why did gentlemen insist on their have voted ourselves the franking privilege, not motion? There was a difference, however, during the session, as formerly, but in perpetuity. which he thought was well understood. This privilege, it was known, was sometimes To refuse to receive, denied the right of begrossly abused, which would be strong argu- ing heard. To receive, and reject the prayer ment for its total repeal. He also spoke of the of the petitioner, gave the privilege of a hearpurchase of books for the members, and refer- ing, and the judgment of the Senate upon the red to the practice of members in paying for subject. This petition, he said, had been read, their newspapers out of the public money, in and its object considered; but not necessarily support of which practice he had never been so. The motion was perfectly in order, before able to elicit any argument, except the unan- reading, on a statement of the nature of the swerable-one of the yeas and nays. The con- memorial by the Senator offering it, and the tingent expenses of the two Houses had been theory of the motion was to deny the right to also swelled in a few years to an enormous a consideration. This consideration might extent. There were other cases of more mag- change an opinion previously formed without nitude, which might be made the subject of it; and should not be denied because our first complaint by the people, but he referred to them impressions may be against the rights of the as obvious cases, that had been spoken of dur- petitioners. ing the present session. Suppose, then, the Mr. K. said that he believed, also, after some people were to petition Congress to abolish the reflection upon the subject, that Congress had franking privilege, and state, as a reason, the no constitutional power to emancipate the enormous abuses to which it is subject. Sup- slaves in the District of Columbia, in the manpose they look at the sum total of your contin- ner contemplated by the memorialists. He begent account, and, believing it impossible it lieved that Congress had precisely the same could be honestly expended for any contingen- power over the subject in the District of Cocies that the constitution will allow, pray Con- lumbia that the States had in their respective gress to look into the subject, and reform the limits, and he agreed perfectly with the Senaabuse; according to this novel doctrine, any tor from Virginia (Mr. LEIGR) that the States Senator might rise and move that " the memo- themselves had no power to take the slave from rial be not received," because it " reflected on the owner, except for public use, and for a just the Senate or some of its members." Sir, said compensation. He did not agree, however, Mr. K., I deny the whole doctrine. I deny it with the Senator fiom Virginia in his conin the general, and I deny it in the particular; struction of the proviso in the Virginia cession, I deny it in the gross, and I deny it in the de- as the plain import and intention of the proviso tail. It has not one single inch of ground in was only to negative the idea that the soil was the constitution to stand upon. We were sent transferred with the jurisdiction. But the aid here to do the business of the public, and not of this proviso was not necessary to the conto set up arbitrary codes for the protection of stitutional argument, and he did not believe the our dignity, and then be left to determine what Senator placed much stress upon it. dignity means. I consider true senatorial dig- Mr. CALHOUN said: I have heard with deep nity to consist in a straightforward, independ- mortification and regret the speech of the Senaent discharge of our constitutional duties, and tor from Georgia; not that I suppose that his not in searching into the language employed by arguments can have much impression in the our constituents, when they ask us for a re- South, but because of their tendency to divide dress of grievances, to see if we cannot find and distract the Southern delegation on this, some pretext to commit a fraud upon the con- to us, all momentous question. We are here stitution. If the people thought we had done but a handful in the midst of an overwhelming wrong, they had a right plainly to tell us so; majority. It is the duty of every member from and if we found the charge true, we should the South, on this great and vital question, set about a reformation. If untrue, we should where union is so important to those whom we reject their petitions on that account. represent, to avoid every thing calculated to Mr. K. said he had spoken of this doctrine divide or distract our ranks. I, said Mr. C., in a general point of view, and could not hon- the Senate will bear witness, have, in all that I or the abolitionists so far as to suffer them to have said on this subject, been careful to reprovoke him to a violation of the constitution spect the feelings of Southern members who as he understood it. have differed from me in the policy to be pur

Pages

About this Item

Title: Abridgment of the Debates of Congress, from 1789 to 1856.
Author: United States. Congress.
Canvas: Page 723
Publication: New York, [etc.]: D. Appleton and company [etc.]; 1857-61.
Subject terms: United States -- Politics and government

Technical Details

Collection: Making of America Books
Link to this Item: https://name.umdl.umich.edu/ahj4053.0012.001
Link to this scan: https://quod.lib.umich.edu/m/moa/ahj4053.0012.001/725

Rights and Permissions

These pages may be freely searched and displayed. Permission must be received for subsequent distribution in print or electronically. Please go to http://www.umdl.umich.edu/ for more information.

IIIF

Manifest: https://quod.lib.umich.edu/cgi/t/text/api/manifest/moa:ahj4053.0012.001

Cite this Item

Full citation: "Abridgment of the Debates of Congress, from 1789 to 1856." In the digital collection Making of America Books. https://name.umdl.umich.edu/ahj4053.0012.001. University of Michigan Library Digital Collections. Accessed June 13, 2025.

Abridgment of the Debates of Congress, from 1789 to 1856.

Annotations Tools

Actions

About this Item

Technical Details

Rights and Permissions

Related Links

IIIF

Cite this Item