 |
|
|
 |
|
 |
|
|||
|
||||
|
||||
|
Maryland State Archives Maryland Colonization Journal Collection MSA SC 4303 msa_sc4303_scm11070-0102 Enlarge and print image (5M) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|||
|
||||
|
||||
|
Maryland State Archives Maryland Colonization Journal Collection MSA SC 4303 msa_sc4303_scm11070-0102 Enlarge and print image (5M) |
| 106 MARYLAND COLONIZATION JOURNAL. on the water side is Cuba, a slave island. This simple statement of its geographical position should of itself decide the question. When, by the treaty of 1819 with Spain, it was ceded to the United States, slavery existed within it. By the terms of that treaty, the effects and property of the in- habitants are secured to them, and they are allowed to remove and take them away, if they think pro- per to do so, without limitation as to time. If it were expedient, therefore, to abolish slavery in it, it could not be done consistently with the treaty, without granting to the ancient inhabitants a rea- sonable time to remove their slaves. But further: by the compromise which took place on the pas- sage of the act for the admission of Missouri into the Union, in the year 1820, it was agreed and understood that the line of 3fi deg. 30 min. of north latitude should mark the boundary between the free states and the slave states to he created in the territories of the United States ceded by the treaty of Louisiana; those situated south of it being slave states, and those north of it free states. But Florida is south of that line, and consequently, according to the spirit ol the understanding which prevailed at the period alluded to, should be a slave state. It may be true that the compromise does not in terms embrace Fiorina, and that it is not absolutely binding and obligatory; but all candid and impartial men must awe that it ought not to be disregarded without the most weighty considerations, and that nothing could be more to be deprecated than to open anew the bleeding wounds which were happily bound up and healed by that compromise. Florida is the only remain- ing territory to be admitted into the Union with the institution of domestic slavery, while Wiscon- sin and Iowa are now nearly ripe for admission without it. The next instance in which the exercise of the power of congress is solicited is that of prohibiting what is denominated by the petitioners, the slave trade between the states, or. as it is described in abolition petitions, the traffic in human beings between trie states. The exercise of the power of Congress is claimed under that clause of the constitution which invests it with authority to regulate commerce with foreign nations, and among the several states, and with the Indian tribes. The power to regulate commerce among the several states, like other powers in the consti- tution, has hitherto remained dormant in respect to the interior trade by land between the states. It was a power granted, like all the other powers of the general government, to secure peace and harmony among the states. Hitherto it has not been necessary to exercise it. All the cases in which, during the progress of time, it may become expedient to exert the general authority to regu- late commerce between the states, cannot be conceived. We may easily imagine, however, contingencies which, if they were to happen, might require the interposition of the common authority. If, for example, the state of Ohio were, by law, to prohibit any vessel entering the Sort of Cincinnati, from the port of Louisville, in Kentucky, if that case be not already provided for by the laws which regulate our coasting trade, it would be competent to the general government to annul the prohibition eminating from state autho- rity. Or if the state of Kentucky were to prohibit the introduction, within its limits, of any articles of trade, the production of thp industry of the inhabitants of the state of Ohio, the general government might, by its authority, supersede the state enactment. But t deny that the general government has any authority, whatever, from the constitution, to abolish what is called the slave trade, or, in other words, to prohibit the removal of slaves from one slave state to another slave state. The grant in the constitution is of a power of regulation, and not prohibition. It is conservative, not destructive. Regulation ex vi termini implies the continued existence or prosecution of the thing regulated. Prohibition implies total disconti- nuance or annihilation. The regulation intended was designed to facilitate arid accommodate, not to obstruct and incommode the commerce to be regulated. Can it be pretended that, under this power to regulate commerce among the states, congress has the power to prohibit the transporta- tion of live stock which, in countless numbers, are daily passing from the western and interior states to the southern, south-western, and Atlantic states? The moment the incontestable fact js admitted, that negro slaves are property, the law of moveable property irresistibly attaches itself to them, and secures the right of carrying them from one to another state, where they arc recognized as property, without any hindrance whatever from congress. But, Mr. President, I will not detain the Senate longer on the subjects of slavery within the District and in Florida, and of the right of congress to prohibit the removal of slaves from one state to another. These, as I have already intimated, with ultra-abolitionists arc but so many masked batteries, concealing the real and ultimate point of attack. That point of attack is the institution of domestic slavery as it exists in these states. It is to liberate three millions of slaves held in bondage within them. And now allow me, sir, to glance at the insurmountable obstacles which lie in the way of the accomplishment of this end. and at some of the consequences which would ensue if it were possible to attain it. The first impediment is the utter and absolute want of all power on the part of the general government to effect the purpo-e. The constitu- tion of the United States creates a limited govern- ment, comprising comparatively few powi rs. an I leaving the residuary mass of political power in the possession of the several states. It is well known that the subject of slavery interposed one of the greatest difficulties in the formation of the constitution. It was happily compromised and adjusted in a spirit of harmony and patriotism. According to that compromise, no power what- ever was granted to the general government in respect to domestic slavery, hut that which relates to taxation and representation, and the power to restore fugitive slaves to their lawful owners. All other power in regard to the institution of slavery was retained exclusively by the states, to be exercised by them severally, according to their respective views of their own peculiar interest. The constitution of the United States never could have been formed upon the principal of investing the general government with authority to abolish the institution at its pleasure. It never can be continued for a single day if the exercise of such a power be assumed or usurped. But it may be contended by thpse ultra-aholi- tionists that their object is not to stimulate the action of the general government, hut to operate upon the states themselves in which the institu- tion of domestic slavery exists. If that ha their object, why are these abolition societies and movements all confined to the free states ? Why are the slave states wantonly and cruelly assailed ? Why do the abolition presses teem with publica- tions tending to excite hatred and animosity on the part of the inhabitants of the free states against those of the slave states? Why is Con- gress petitioned ? The free states have no more power or right to interfere with institutions in the slave states, confided to the exclusive jurisdiction of those states, than they would have to interfere with institutions existing in any foreign country. What would be thought of the formation of societies in Great Britain, the issue of numerous inflammatory publications, and the sending out of lecturers throughout the kingdom, denouncing and aiming at the destruction of any of the insti- tutions of France? Would they be regarded M proceedings warranted by good neighbourhood? Or what would be thought of the formation of societies in the slave states, the issue of violent and inflammatory tracts, and the deputation of missionaries, pouring out impassioned denuncia- tions against institutions under the exclusive con- trol of the free states ? Is their purpose to appeal lo our understandings, and to actuate our huma- nity ? And do they expect t3 arcompish that purpose by holding us up to the scorn, am! con- tempt, anil detestation of the people of the free states and the whole civilized world ? The slavery which exists amongst M is our affair, not theirs; and they have no more just concern with it than they have with slavery as it exists throughout the world. Why not leave it to us, as the common constitution of our country has left it, fo be dealt with, under the guidance of Providence, as best we may or can ? The next obstacle in the way of abolition arises out of the fact of the presence in the slave states of three millions of slaves. They are there, dis- persed throughout the land, part and parcel of our population. They were brought into the country Originally under the authority of the parent go- vernment whilst we werp colonies, and their importation was continued in spite of all the remonstrances of our ancestors. If the question were an original question, whether, there being no slaves within the country, we should introduce them, and incorporate them into our society, that would be a totally different question. Few, if any, of the citizens of the United States would be found to favour their introduction. No man in it would oppose, upon that supposition, their admis- sion with more determined resolution and con- scientious repugnance than I should. But thai is not the question. The slaves are here ; no prac- tical scheme for their removal or separation from us has been yet devised or proposed ; and the true inquiry is. what is best to be done wifh thorn. In human affairs we are often constrained, hy the force of circumstances and the actual state of things, to do what we would not do if that state of things did not exist. The slaves are here, and here must remain, in some condition ; and. I repeat, how are they to be best governed ? What is best to be done for their happiness and our own ? In the slave states the alternative is, that the white man must govern the black, or the black govern the white. In several of those states the number of the slaves is greater than that of the white population. An immediate abolition of slaver}' in them, as these ultra-abolitionists propose, would be followed hy a desperate struggle for immediate ascendancy of the black race over the white race, or rather it would be followed by instantaneous collisions between the two races, which would break out into a civil war that would end in the extermination or subjugation of the one race or the other. In such an alternative, who can hesitate? Is it not better for both parties that the existing state of things should be pre- served, instead of exposing tin m to the horrible strifes and contests which would inevitably attend an immediate abolition ? This is our true ground of defence for the continued existence of slavery in our country. It is that which our revolution- ary ancestors assumed. It is that which, in my opinion, forms our justification in the eyes of ail c/iristendom. A third impediment to immediate abolition is to be found in the immense amount of capital which is invested in slave property. The total number of slaves in the United States, according to the last enumeration of the population, was a little upwards of two millions. Assuming their increase at a ratio, which it probably is, of five per cent, per annum, their present number would be three millions. The average value of slaves at this time is stated by persons well informed to be as high as five hundred dollars each. To be cer- tainly within the mark, let us suppose that it is only four hundred dollars. The total value, then, by that estimate, of the slave property, in the United States, is twelve hundred millions of dol- lars. This property is dilfuscd throughout all classes and conditions of society. It is owned by widows and orphans, bv the aged and infirm, as well as the sound and vigorous. It is the subject of mortgages, deeds of trust, and familv settle- ments. It has been made the basis of numerous debts contracted upon its faith, and is the sole reliance, in many instances, of creditors within and without the slave states, for the payment of the debts due to them. And now it is rashlv proposed, by a single fiat of legislation, to anni- hilate this 'immense amount of property ! To annihilate it without indemnity ami without com- pensation to its owners'. Does any considerate man believe it to be possible fo effect such an object without convulsion, revolution and blood- shed ? I know that there is a visionary dogma which holds that negro slaves cannot be the subject of property. I shall not thrall long with this specu- lative abstraction. That is property which the law declares lo be property. Two hundred years of legislation have sanctioned and sanctified hro slaves as property. Under all the forms of govern- ment which have existed upon this continent during that long space of time?under the British government?under the colonial government?un- der all the state constitutions and governments? and under the federal government itself?thev have been deliberately and solemnly recognized as the legitimate subjects of property. To thp wild speculations of theorists and Innovators stands opposed the fact, that in an uninterrupted period of two hundred years' duration, under every form of human legislation, and hy all thp departments of human government, African negro slaves have been held and respected, have descended and been transferred, as lawful and indisputable property. They were treated as properly in the very British example, which is so triumphantly appealed to as worthy of our imitation. Although the West India planters had no voice in the united parliament of the British isles, an irresistible sense of justice extorted from that legislature the grant of twenty millions of pounds sterling to compensate the colonists for their loss of property. If, therefore, these ultra abolitionists are serious- ly determined to pursue their scheme of immediate abolition, they should at once set about raising a fund of twelve hundred millions of dollars, to in- demnify the owners of slave property. And the taxes to raise that enormous amount can only be justly assessed upon themselves or upon the free states, if they can persuade them to assent to such an assessment; for it would be a mockery of all justice and an outrage against all equity to levy any portion of the tax upon the slave states to pay for their own unquestioned property. If the consideration to which I have already adverted are not sufficient to dissuade the aboli- tionists from further perseverance in their designs, the interest of the very cause which they profess to espouse ought to check their career. Instead of advancing, by their efforts, that cause, they have thrown back for half a century the prospect of any species of emancipation of the African race, gradual or immediate, in any of the states. They have done more; they have increased the rigours of legislation against "laves in most, if hot all. of the slave states. Forty years ago the question was agitated in the state of Kentucky of a gradual emancipation of the slaves within its limits. By gradual emancipation, I mean that slow but sale and cautious liberation of slaves which was fust adopted in Pennsylvania at the instance of Dr. Franklin, in the year 1780, and, according to which, the generation in being were to remain in slavery, but all their offspring horn after a speci- fied day were to be free at the age of twenty. cight, and, in the mean time, were to receive preparatory instruction to qualify them for the enjoyment of freedom. That was the species of emancipation which, at the epoch to which I allude, was discussed in Kentucky. No one was rash enough lo think or propose ni'throwing loose upon the community, ignorant and unprepared,the untutored slaves of the state. Many thought and I amongst them, that as each of the slave states had a right exclusively to judge for itself in respect to the institution of domestic slavery, the proportion of slaves Compared with the white population in that state, at that time, was so inconsiderable that a system of gradual emancipation might have been safely adopted without any hazard to the security and interests of the commonwealth. And I still think that the question oT such emancipa- tion in the fanning states is one whose solution depends upon the relative numbers of the two races in any given state. If I had been a citizen of the staie of Pennsylvania, when Franklin's plan was adopted, I should have voted lor it, because by no possibility could the black race ever acquire the ascendancy in that state. But if I had been then, or were now, a citizen of any of the planting states?the southern or south- western states?I should have opposed, and would continue to oppose, any scheme whatever of emancipation, gradual or immediate, because of the danger of an ultimate ascendancy of the black race, or of a civil contest which might terminate in the extinction of one race or the other. The proposition in Kentucky for a gradual emancipation did not prevail, but it was sustained by a large and respectable minority. That mino- rity had increased, and was increasing, until the abolitionists commenced their operations. The effect has been to dissipate all prospects whatever, for the present, of any scheme of gradual or other emancipation The people of that state have become shocked and alarmed by these abolition movements, and the number who would now favour a system even of gradual emancipation is probably less than it was ill the years ITM-Y. At the session of the legislature held in 1*37-'8, the question of calling a convention was submitted fo the consideration of the people by a law passed in conformity with the constitution of the state. Many motives existed for the passage of the law, and among thern that of emancipation had its influence. When the question was passed upon by the people at their last annual election, only about one-fourth of the whole voters of the state supported a call of a convention. The apprehen- sion of the danger of abolition was the leading consideration amongst the people for opposing the call. But for that, but for the agitation ol the question of abolition ill states whose population hail no right, in the opinion of the people of Kentucky, to interfere in the matter, the vote for a convention would have been much larger, if it had not been carried. I felt myself constrained to take immediate, bold, and decided ground against it. Prior to the agitation of this subject of abolition, there was a progressive melioration in the condi- tion of slaves throughout all the slave states. In some of thorn, schools of instruction wpre opened by humane and religions persons. These are all now checked; and a spirit of insubordination having shown itself in some localities, traceable, it is believed, to abolition movements and exer- tions, the legislative authority has found it expe- dient to infuse fresh vigour into the police, and laws which regulate the conduct of the slaves. And now, Mr. President, if it were patalble to overcome the insurmountable obstacles w hich lie in the way of immediate abolition, let us briefly con- template some of the consequences which would inevitably ensue. One of these has been occa- sionally alluded to in the progress of these remarks. It is the struggle which would instantaneously arise between the two races in most of the southern and south-western states. Anil what a dreadful struggle would it not be? Embittered hy all the recollections of the past, hy the unconquerable prejudices which would prevail between the two races, and stimulated by all the hopes anil fears of the future, it would be a contest in which the extermination of the blacks, or their ascendancy over the whites, would be thp sole alternative. Prior to the conclusion, or during the progress of such a contest, vast numbers, probably, of the black race would migrate into the free states ; and what effect would such a migration have upon the labouring classes in those states! Now the distribution of labour in the UnitPd States is geographical; the free labourers occu- pying one side of the line and thp slave labourers the other; each class pursuing its own avocations almost altogether unmixed with the other. But on the supposition of immediate abolition, the black class, migrating into the free states, would enter into competition with the white class, dimi- nishing the wages of their labour, and augmenting the hardships of their condition. This is not all. The abolilionists strenuously oppose all separation of the two races. I confess to you, sir. that I have seen with regret, grief, and astonishment, their resolute opposition to the ' project of colonization. No scheme was ever pre- sented to the acceptance of man, which, whether it be entirely practicable or not, is characterized by more unmixed humanity and benevolence, than that of transporting, with their own consent, the free people of colour in the United States to the land of their ancestors. It ba9 the powerful recommendation that whatever it does is good; and if it effects nothing, it inflicts no one evil or mischief upon any portion of our society. There is no necessary hostility betwepn the objects of colonization and abolition. Colonization deals only with the free man of colour, and that with his own free voluntary consent. It has nothing to do with slavery. It disturbs no man's property, seeks fo impair no power in the slave states, nor to attribute any lo the general government. All its action and all its ways and means are volun- tary, depending upon the blessing of Providence, which hitherto has graciously smiled upon it. And yet, beneficent and harmless as colonization is, no portion of the people of the United States denounces it with so much persevering zeal and such unmixed bitterness as do the abolitionists. They put themselves in direct opposition to any separation whatever between the two races. They would keep them for ever pent up together within the same limits, perpelnating their animo- sities, and constantly endangering the peace of the community. They proclaim, indeed, that colour is nothing; that (he organic and characteristic differences between the two races ought to be entirely overlooked and disregarded. And, ele- vating themselves to a sublime hut impracticable philosophy, they would teach us to eradicate all the repugnances of our nature, and lo lake to our bosoms and our boards the black man as we do the white, on the same footing of equal social condition. Do they not perceive that in thus Confounding all the distinctions which God him- self has made, they arraign the wisdom and good- ness of Providence itself? It has been Mis divine pleasure lo make fhe black man black and the white man white, and to distinguish them by other repulsive constitutional differences. |( js i,0( ne- cessary lor me to maintain, nor shall | endeavour to prove, that it was any part of Mis divine inten- tion that the one race should be held in perpelnal bondage by the other; but this I will say that those whom He has created different, ai,d has declared, by their physical structure and colour ought to be kept a?under, should not be brought together by any process whatever of unnatural amalgamation. Hut if the dangers of the civil contests which I have supposed, could be avoided, separation or amalgamation is the only peaceful alternative, if it were possible to effectuate the project of aboli- tion. The abolilionists oppose all colonization, and it irresistibly follow*, whatever they may protest or declare, they tire in favour ol amal- gamation. And who'are to biing about this amalgamation? I have heard of none of these nltia-aholitionisfs furnishing in their own families or persons examples of intermairiage. Who is to begin it ? Is it their purpose not only to create a pinching competition between black labour and white labour, but do they intend also to contami- nate the industrious and laborious classes of so- ciety at the north by a revolting admixture of the black element? It is frequently asked, what is to become of the African race among us? Are they forever to remain in bondage | That question was asked more than half a century ago. It has been an- swered by fifty yeais of prosperity but little chequered from this cause. It will be repeated filly or a hundred years hence. The tiue answer is, that the same Providence who has hitherto guided and governed us, and averted all serious evils from the existing relation between the two races, will guide and govern our poMerily. Suf- ficient to the day is the evil thereof. \Ve have hitherto, with that blessing, taken care of our- selves. Posterity will find the means of its own preservation ami prosperity. It is only in the most direful event which can befal this people thai this great interest, and all other of our greatest interests, would be put in jeopardy. Although in particular districts (he black population is gaining upon the white, it only constitutes onc-tiflh of the vboll population of the United States. And, taking the aggregates of the two races, the Euro- pean is constantly, though slowly gaining upon the African portion. This fact "is demonstrated by the periodical n turns of our population. Let us cease, then, to indulge in gloomy forebodings about the impenetrable future. But, if we may attempt to lift fhe veil, and contemplate what lies beyond it, I, too, have ventured on a speculative theory, with which I will not now trouble you, but which has been published to the world. Ac- cording to that, in the progress of time, some one hundred and filly or two hundred years hence, hut few vestiges of the black race will remain among our posterity. Mr. President, at the period of the formation of our constitution, and alteruaids, our patriotic an- cestors apprehended danger to the Union from two causes. One was. Die Alleghany mountains, dividing the waters which flow into'the Atlantic. ocean from lhi.se who found their outlet in the Gulf of Mexico. They seemed to present a natu- ral Mparatloa. That danger has vanished before the noble achievements of the spirit of internal improvement, and the immortal genius of Fulton. And now, no where is found a more loyal attach- ment to the Union than among those very western people, who, it was apprehended, would be the first to burst its ties. The other cause, domestic slavery, happily the sole remaining cause which is likely to disturb our harmony, continues to exist. It was this which created the greatest obstacle and the most anxious solicitude in the deliberations of the con- vention that adopted the general constitution. And it is this subject that has ever been regarded with the deepest anxiety by all who are sincerely desi- rous of the permanency of our Union. The father of his country, in his last affecting and solemn appeal to his fellow citizens, deprecated, as a most calamitous event, the geographical divisions which it might produce. The convention wisely left to the several slates the power over the institution of slavery, as a power not necessary to the plan of union which it devised, and as one with which the general government could not be invested without planting the seeds of certain destruction. There let it remain undisturbed by any unhallowed hand. Sir, I am not in the habit of speaking lightly of the possibility of dissolving this happy union. The senate knows that I have deprecated allu- sions, on ordinary occasions, to that direful event. The country will testify that, if there be nny thing in the history of my public career worthy of recol- lection, it is the truth and sincerity of my ardent devotion to its lasting preservation. But we should |