of the slave who drowned herself in the canal, he had it from the best authorityone of the purest and best of men, whose word was universally believed. As regarded the franking story, he declared, before God, that the infamous falsehood originated in this hall, and was repeated here. It never was heard of before it was repeated on that floor. As regarded the wagon story, he contradicted that infamous falsehood last year, when it was put forth in that House. He challenged all creation to show that he ever had any knowledge of that falsehood till he was charged with it by a gentleman on that floor.

"He had no more to say in reply to the assaults of the gentleman from Georgia. They were worthy of the source from whence they came. It was a new era in the history of legislation, when assaults such as this were permitted on that floor. He blushed, and felt humbled for his country and the character of her statesmen, when such scenes were permitted to occur. Did any man pretend to say that the facts he had stated, and every word he had put forth, was not dictated by sincerity of heart, and could not be proved by the records of the government? When he saw the manner in which the money drawn from the pockets of his constituents was expended, he felt it to be his duty to speak out, and expose it to the indignation of the world.

"Mr. Levy obtained the floor, but yielded it to

"Mr. Black, who said he regretted very much that the slang and obloquy that fell on his ears from the member from Ohio, not long ago, should so far have operated on him as to have put his feelings beyond his own control. He would only now say, that whenever a gentleman should think proper to use such language in reference to him, he should be found to conduct himself in a manner that would redound to his own credit, and meet the approbation of his constituents. Those who heard him could understand him, and those who did not appreciate his motives could try him."

Let us take some further examples. Many of our readers are aware that much excitement prevailed lately in the City of Washington, in consequence of an attempt made to convey out of the district, in the schooner "Pearl," some seventy slaves, men, women, and children. The subject became matter of discussion in both houses. On the 20th of April, the following debate is reported in the Congressional Globe:

"Mr. Venable obtained the floor. It was with extreme and deep reluctance, he said, that he felt himself compelled to approach the discussion of the question which had been thrown before them to-day. He had taken his seat, at the opening of this session, cherishing the fondest hopes that the mere party questions and policies which divided us as Whigs and Democrats would be the subjects which would come before them; that they might meet, quietly meet, on the same platform, as citizens of the country they all dearly loved, and protected by the ægis of the Constitution they all venerated. He had come here with these fond hopes, but he had been here but a few days before he felt that those hopes were to be blighted; he saw, amid the forbearance of the South, that spirit of fanaticism which would walk with lighted torch in a magazine; he saw that fanaticism which would authorize men to right what they considered a wrong, without ever thinking of the wrong they would inflict; that spirit of fanaticism which would never stop short of heaven or hell; which knew no middle ground, and which, when once fastened on a man's heart, led him to trample on all that was sacred and holy, He saw that hope blighted; that no subject could be introduced into this House

—even a resolution of congratulation of a people throwing off the yoke of a tyrant, and establishing freedom for themselves-without having this firebrand thrown into this House. He saw the South persecuted, taunted, harassed, held up to odium to the world-continually held up-until he had received from his own district and section of country urgent appeals. Were they to be made odious -were their institutions continually to be dragged before the public by the fanatic and hypocrite, to taunt and sneer at, and were their dearest rights to be abandoned by those who represented them? Was there no man from the South who would stand up and say to them what should be said? Yes; in his humble way, he would vindicate the rights and maintain the cause of those who had sent him here; and he would never fail to rebuke fanaticism and denounce hypocrisy in the man, and in those who acted with him, who said he wanted to keep the knife of the slave near his master's throat; and that when the slave fled to Ohio and there slew his master in attempting to reclaim him, he would call him a clever fellow; and that there was no law there to punish him. It was a libel upon the institutions of that state. He had examined the laws of Ohio, and he found that if a man did a lawful act, and another killed him when engaged in it, they called him a murderer. The Constitution of the United States provided for the reclaiming of fugitive slaves, and the Supreme Court of the United States had decided that that clause of the Constitution so far executed itself as that the master or his agent had the right to pursue his slave and retake him. If, then, the slave killed him, he killed him doing a lawful act.

When he heard such declarations made on this floor by the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Giddings); when their slaves were invited to run away, and were told, it' you kill your master in attempting to retake you, you are clever fellows; when the gentleman from Massachusetts (Mr. Palfrey) declared that there were thousands of slaves in New Bedford who had paid for themselves by their heels; and when, in the face of these declarations, a ship from a Northern state came to this district and took off a ship-load of slaves, to pay for themselves by their heels also, it was time to meet this matter as became a representative from the South. He loved the Union. It had cost him and his much. There was not a battle-field, from Saratoga to Camden, but had drank the life-blood of some of his family and relatives; but, love it as he did, he hailed dissolution with pleasure and joy, if they were continually to be taunted by fanatics and hypocrites-if their wives and little ones were to be assassinated and destroyed by intermeddling men with hearts black as hell. This was the feeling of his heart. He could say nothing less. The South asked no favors; and if gentlemen supposed that because they had said nothing until driven to it by their unhallowed machinations and intrigues. that they were afraid to investigate the question, they had mistaken the South altogether.

He felt, and he would here express, most profound obligations to his Northern and Western Democratic friends, who had stood by them in defense of the rights of the South to the number of twenty-five or thirty, in a vote which had recently been taken; while, on the other side, not a Northern or Western man had stood by Southern rights. He classified the Abolitionists of the North in two divisions: one, a set of fanatics, who, though possessing no genuine social feelings, were honest men; and the other, men who made use of them to secure seats in Congress, and power and elevation for themselves, who stirred up the strife-vile hypocrites, who went around to the factories and Sunday-schools, getting children and women to sign petitions on matters with which they had no concern, to bring them to Congress. Such miserable subterfuges, such vile and wicked resorts, disgraced humanity.

"He denied that slavery was either a moral, social, or political evil. They had

nothing to do with it. It was a matter which belonged to the South. He asked gentlemen if the agonizing, heart-rending cry of the slave in the middle passage, kidnapped from Africa, had ever arisen from ships from North Carolina? No; Massachusetts and Rhode Island could tell us about it. It had rung from their vessels, and that inhuman traffic had been a source of their wealth; almost every thing in the town of Newport, Rhode Island, had been made out of it; and Rhode Island had been represented in the other end of the Capitol by one of these slave-dealers, for it had so been charged upon that floor. The North had brought this institution upon them. The descendants of those who landed at Plymouth, and of Roger Williams, had sold them their slaves and pocketed the money. And now they were enlisted in a crusade against their property; and they had recently undertaken to kidnap and decoy away seventy-five in one vessel from this district; and gentlemen came here, and with long faces complained that the people of this city had risen to defend their rights! Mr. Venable had heard of a member of Congress who had gone yesterday to the jail for the purpose of giving counsel to these felons, who were caught flagrante delicto! He had heard that a member of this House had volunteered his services, had gone to the jail for the purpose of throwing the weight of his character, and influence, and talents in defense of men who had plundered the owners in the district of their slaves, and were caught with the negroes in their possession.

"Mr. Giddings asked to be permitted to explain, and, the floor being yielded, said, if the gentleman alluded to him, he would say unhesitatingly, it was due to the gentleman from North Carolina that he should say to him, and the House, and the country, most distinctly, that he did visit the prison yesterday. He did so in the character of a man, as well as a member of this House; he said to the keeper of the prison, who, so far as he knew, behaved entirely gentlemanly, that he came there to say to those men who were incarcerated under this charge that they should have counsel provided for them. The keeper of the prison heard every word he uttered: that he had brought with him a gentleman who would serve as their counsel; that he did it for the purpose of protecting their legal rights, so that upon their trial they might have the laws of the land dealt out to them as they were to other people; that he was persuaded no illegal violence would be used. For that purpose, and from his own promptings of humanity, he had visited them to give them this information. Now, let gentlemen say what they pleased.

"Mr. Gayle. Was the gentleman's object to reward these men and approve their course? Or was it mere benevolence to defend men who could not defend themselves?'

"Mr. Giddings was glad the gentleman from Alabama had put to him that question. He had gone there to say to those men that no mob violence should take their lives; that his influence, and the aid of counsel, and the law, should save them from a barbarous mob. He had gone there from the promptings of humanity; he had never seen or heard of them, or known any thing of them

before.

"Mr. Gayle. Did not the gentleman go there for the purpose of encouraging these people?'

"Mr. Johnson, of Arkansas, rose simultaneously with Mr. Gayle, and desired to ask the gentleman from Ohio one question.

"Mr. Giddings expressed a willingness to answer questions which might be propounded.

"Mr. Venable, however, resumed the floor, as his time was so rapidly running away. He would ask the gentleman from Ohio why it was so necessary to go to these men in jail, and assure them they should be safe from the mob? Did not

every man know that they were in no danger when safely lodged there? It was a work of supererogation. The gentleman was careful to visit those who had been caught in stealing and carrying away slaves; had he gone to see the poor burglar, the felon who was confined in jail for other crimes? No! The sympa. thies of his heart were drawn out to nothing there but these seventy-five negroes, and the men who had stolen them.

"Mr. Giddings. Does the gentleman want me to answer that question?"

"Mr. Venable declined to give way, and, after further remarks, moved an amendment to the resolution to make the committee consist of nine members instead of five, and that they be elected by ballot instead of being appointed by the speaker.

"Mr. Haskell (the floor being yielded) desired to ask the gentleman from Ohio two questions, and that the gentleman would give him, as far as he should find it convenient, a categorical answer: the first was, whether he justified those slaves who had lately made an attempt to escape from their owners in the District of Columbia in that attempt?

'Mr. Giddings (addressing the speaker). 'Have I the floor to reply?' "The Speaker. Does the gentleman from North Carolina yield the floor to the gentleman from Ohio?'

"Mr. Venable assented.

"Mr. Giddings said, to the question which had been put to him, whether he justified the slaves who had left their masters in the District of Columbia in parsuit of their liberty, he could have no hesitation in answering before an assembled universe. He held, as did our fathers in 1776, that all men were born equal, and that to protect their rights to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness, govern ments were framed among men. Now, believing that mankind, as they came from God, were equal, he had ever been taught by his fathers-and here he would say to the gentleman from North Carloina (Mr. Venable) that he (Mr. Giddings) boasted not that his fathers fought for liberty. Why did not the gentleman himself fight for it? Before he assailed him (Mr. Giddings), let him put himself

rectus in curia

"Mr. Houston, of Delaware, rose to a point of order.

'Mr. Giddings begged not to be interrupted until he had finished the answe to the gentleman's question.

64

The Speaker. The gentleman from Ohio will give way; the gentleman from Delaware rises to a point of order.'

"Mr, Houston stated his point to be, whether, upon a preamble and resolution stating that a member of this House had been menaced by persons out of this House for his participation, or alleged participation, in certain civil and criminal transactions, it was competent for his friend from Tennessee to put the question to the gentleman from Ohio whether he justified this act?

"Mr. Giddings. 'I take no exception to the question.'

"The speaker replied to Mr. Houston that the gentleman from Ohio was not obliged to answer any question, but that, in the wide range allowed to the debate, it was certainly competent for the gentleman from Tennessee to put the question, and for the gentleman from Ohio to answer it, if he pleased.

"Mr. Giddings (resuming) remarked, that he saw gentlemen from the South were excited on the subject, and he might become excited. But it was a beantiful question, and, if the dough-faces would only not interfere, they would have a fine fight.

"He was stating his views (he continued) on the rights of lumanity, and he said to the gentleman from Tennessee that he held precisely with the fathers of 1776, to whom he had alluded. He held to the principle for which the gentleman's fathers and his contended at Bunker Hill and Yorktown; he held to the

principle on which this government was based for its support, that man was free and equal, and that he who attempted to interfere between his God and himself, to interfere with his God-given rights, did it at his peril. He held that he who stepped between him and his God, and attempted either to rob him of his life or liberty, did it at his peril; and, so far as God and nature had bestowed on him the power, he should not do it. He held that every human being who came into the world and breathed the air God had created, came into it with this right, and he who attempted to interfere with it did so at his peril. He held that there never was a more just and righteous retribution than was inflicted upon the Africaus in 1804, when Decatur and Somers went there, and when these men who enslaved their fellow-men were themselves made to bite the dust. There never was a more glorious cause to fight for, nor would he ask for a more glorious death than to die in just such a cause. He held that it was right; and he held that any man, when he enslaved his fellow-man-when the hand of power was brought to bear on his God-given rights-his 'inalienable rights' (to use the words of our fathers), had the right to defend that liberty, and, to come down to the gentleman's specific question

"Mr. Haskell. I am very glad to hear you reach it.'

"Mr. Giddings (continuing his sentence). 'I say that the slaves of this district, when they felt the hand of oppression bearing on them, possessed, before the universal world and before God himself, the right to free themselves by any means God has put into the power-'

6

"Mr. Haskell. The gentleman has answered that question. I am satisfied.' "Mr. Giddings (retaining the floor). 'I am not. I want to finish my answer.' "Mr. Haskell. Inasmuch as the gentleman has justified this attempt of these slaves to escape from their rightful owners, I call on him to know whether he justifies the thieves who stole them?'

"Mr. Giddings. 'I do not know that there were any thieves.'

"Mr. Haskell. The men, then-the individuals-the parties who were engaged in this kidnapping?'

“Mr. Giddings. 'I say, unhesitatingly, where laws are in force, where legal constitutional laws of the land enforce penalties on such actions, they are to be obeyed. I am not permitted to interfere with the rights of the people of this district, because I owe allegiance to my government, and he who interferes does it at his peril. There can be no difference between the gentleman and myself on that subject.'

Mr. Haskell. Then do I understand the gentleman to justify these men?'

"Mr. Giddings. 'I say that those who did it, did it at their peril.'

"Mr. Haskell. 'Does the gentleman condemn these individuals?'.

Mr. Giddings. 'I say, unquestionably, if they did it, they violated the law.'

“Mr. Haskell. ‘Does the gentleman consider it a violation of law?' "Mr Giddings. 'Unquestionably, if they aided slaves in escaping. I am not very conversant with the laws of this district, though I have had occasion to look into them some: I understand it is a penal act in this district. Now it is wrong to violate this law, because, in entering society, we bind ourselves to keep the laws which are constitutionally enacted. There is a legal crime-'

Mr. Haskell. Was there any moral crime?'

"Mr. Giddings. I do not believe there is the least moral crime on earth in maintaining the rights God has given me.'

"Mr. Venable interfered, and claimed the floor.

"The speaker stated that the gentleman from North Carolina was entitled to the floor.

"Mr. Giddings declined to yield, as the floor had been given to him for explanation, until he had concluded.