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

DEBATES OF CONGRESS. 735 MARCH, 1836.] Abolition of Slavery in the District of Columbia. [SENATE. man is, that we are not bound to receive this " The yeas and nays being required by one-fifth petition, because to grant its prayer would be of the Senators presentunconstitutional? In this argument I shall not "Those who voted in the affirmative are, touch the question, whether Congress possess "Messrs. Adams, Massachusetts; Alcott, New the power to abolish slavery in the District of Hampshire; Bayard, Delaware; Brown, Kentucky; Columbia or not. Suppose they do not, can Condict, New Jersey; Franklin, North Carolina; the gentleman maintain the position that we Hillhouse, Connecticut; Howland, Rhode Island; are authorized by the constitution to refuse to Logan, Pennsylvania; Maclay, Pennsylvania; Mitch-.receiveapetitionfromthepeopleause w ell, New York; Pickering, Massachusetts; Plumer, receive a petition from the people, because we New Hampshire; Smith, Ohio; Smith, Vermont; may deem the object of it unconstitutional. Stone, North Carolina; Sumpter, South Carolina; Whence is any such restriction of the right of White, Delaware; Worthington, Ohio. petition derived? Who gave it to us? Is it "And those who voted in the negative are, to be found in the constitution? The people "Messrs. Anderson, Tennessee; Baldwin, Georgia; are not constitutional lawyers; but they feel Bradley, Vermont; Cocke, Tennessee; Jackson, oppression, and know when they are aggrieved. Georgia; Moore, Virginia; Smith, Maryland; Smith, They present their complaints to us in the New York; Wright, Maryland. form of a petition. I ask, by what authority "So the petition was read." can we refuse to receive it? They have a right The Senate will perceive that I have added to spread their wishes and their wants before to the names of the members of the Senate us, and to ask for redress. We are bound re- that of the States which they each represented. spectfully to consider their request; and the best The Senator from South Carolina will see that, answer which we can give them is, that they among those who, upon this occasion, sustained have not conferred upon us the power, under the right of petition, there is found the name the Constitution of-the United States, to grant of General Sumpter, his distinguished predecesthem the relief which they desire. On any sor. I wish him, also, to observe that but other principle we may first decide that we seven Senators from the slaveholding States have no power over a particular subject, and voted against receiving the petition; although then refuse to hear the petitions of the people it was of a character well calculated to excite in relation to it. We would thus place the their hostile and jealous feelings. constitutional right of our constituents to peti- The present, sir, is a real controversy between tion at the mercy of our own discretion. liberty and power. In my humble judgment, The proposition is almost too plain for argu- it is far the most important question which has ment, that if the people have a constitutional been before the Senate since I have had the right to petition, a corresponding duty is im- honor of occupying a seat in this body. It is a posed upon us to receive their petitions. From contest between those, however unintentionally, the very nature of things, rights and duties are who desire to abridge the right of the people, reciprocal. The human mind cannot conceive in asking their servants for a redress of grievof the one without the other. They are relative ances, and those who desire to leave it, as the terms. If the people have a right to command, constitution left it, free as the air. Petitions it is the duty of their servants to obey. If I ought ever to find their way into the Senate have a right to a sum of money, it is the duty without impediment; and I trust that the of my debtor to pay it to me. If the people decision upon this question will result in the have a right to petition their representatives, establisment of one of the dearest rights which it is our duty to receive their petition. a free people can enjoy. This question was solemnly determined by Now, sir, why should the Senator from South the Senate more than thirty years ago. Nei- Carolina urge the motion which he has made? ther before nor since that time, so far as I can I wish I could persuade him to withdraw it. learn, has the general right of petition ever We of the North honestly believe, and I feel been called in question, until the motion now confident he will not doubt our sincerity, that under consideration was made by the Senator we cannot vote for his motion without violatfrom South Carolina. Of course I do not ing our duty to God and to the country-withspeak of cases embraced within the exception out disregarding the oath which we have sworn which I have just stated. No Senator has ever to support the constitution. This is not the contended that this is one of them. To prove condition of those who advocate his motion. my position, I shall read an extract from our It is not pretended that the constitution imposes journals: any obligation upon them to vote for this moOn Monday, the 21st January, 1805, r. Logan tion. With them it is a question of mere expresented a petition, signed Thomas Morris, clerk in pediency; with us, one of constitutional duty. clerk, I I ask gentlemen of the South, for their own behalf of the meeting of the representatives of the people called Quakers, in Pennsylvania, New Jersey, sake as well as for that of their friends in the &c., stating that the petitioners, from a sense of North, to vote aganst this motion. It will religious duty, had again come forward to plead the place us all in a false position, where neither cause of their oppressed and degraded fellow-men their sentiments nor ours will be properly of the African race; and on the question, "Shall understood. this petition be received?" it passed in the affirma- I shall now proceed to defend my own motive: yeas 19, nays 9. tion from the attacks which have been made

Pages

About this Item

Title: Abridgment of the Debates of Congress, from 1789 to 1856.
Author: United States. Congress.
Canvas: Page 735
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/ahj4053.0012.001/737

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 17, 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