Mr. Swanwick defended their right to petition.

On the 28th of Nov., Mr. Steele of N. C., [ought to be referred to the Committee on the called the attention of the House to the above Fugitive Slave Law. He believed them to be memorial of Warner Mifflin. He was sur-free people, and contended that they had an undoubted right to petition the House and to prised to find this subject started anew by a be heard. fanatic, who, not content with keeping his own conscience, undertook to become the keeper of the consciences of other men; and, in a manner which he deemed not very decent, had intruded his opinions upon this House. Had an application been made to him to present such a petition, he would have avoided a compliance with it. Gentlemen of the North do not realize the mischievous consequences which have already resulted from measures of this kind; and, if a stop were not put to it, the Southern States would be compelled to apply to the General Government for their

interference.

He concluded by moving, "that the paper purporting to be a petition from Warner Mifflin, be returned to him by the Clerk of the House; and that the entry of said petition be expunged from the Journal."

Mr. Ames of Mass., who had presented the petition, defended his presentation of it on the ground of the general right of every citizen to petition Congress. The petitioner's representative being absent, he had not, on that account, felt at liberty to decline presenting it. He had no idea of supporting the prayer of the petition; but had made up his mind long since that it was inexpedient to interfere with the subject.

That part of the motion directing the petition to be returned, was agreed to. The remainder was withdrawn by Mr. Steele, the

mover.

On the 30th of Jan., 1797, Mr. Swanwick of Pa., presented the petition of four slaves, who had been emancipated as they allege, representing that, under some law enacted by North Carolina, they could again be reduced to slavery; that they had escaped to Pennsyl vania to avoid its effects; and petitioned Congress to look into the matter, as also to the case of a fellow black, who was once manumitted, and, under the same law of North Carolina, was again reduced to slavery; and who, escaping therefrom, was lying in the jail of Philadelphia, under the sanction of the act of the General Government called the Fugitive Slave Law, &c., &c., &c.

Mr. Swanwick hoped the petition would be referred to a select committee.

Mr. Blount from N. C., hoped it would not even be received. He said, under the law of North Carolina they were slaves, and could be seized as such.

Mr. Thatcher of Mass., thought the petition

Mr. Blount said the laws of North Carolina did not permit a man to manumit his slaves. Mr. Sitgreaves of Pa., defended the petition. Mr. Heath was clearly convinced that these people were slaves, and that the object of their fature of the state, and not the United States. petition was within the jurisdiction of the legis

Mr. Madison of Va., thought it a judicial case. If they are free by the laws of North Carolina, they ought to apply to those laws and have their privileges established. He thought they could obtain their due in a court of appeals in that state.

Messrs. Rutherford and Gilbert defended' a reference.

Mr. W. Smith thought that the petition ought to be sealed up and sent back to the petitioners.

Mr. Christie was much surprised that any gentleman would present such a petition, and hoped the gentleman from Pennsylvania would never hand in such a one again.

Mr. Holland contended that it was a judicial question, and that the House ought not to pretend to determine the point.

Mr. Macon of N. C., contended that justice would be done them in his state. He conceived it a delicate matter for the general government to act on, and hoped the petition

would not be committed.

Mr. W. Smith, alluding to a remark of Mr. Thatcher, that he wished to draw these people from a state of slavery into liberty, did not think that they were sent there to take up the subject of emancipation.

Mr. Varnum of Mass., and Mr. Kitchell, defended the right of the memorialists to petition, and hoped their petition would be re

ceived and be committed.

The motion to receive the petition was negatived. Yeas 33; Noes 50.

On the 30th of Nov., 1797, Mr. Gallatin of

Pa., presented a memorial of the annual meeting of Quakers, relative to the oppressed state of their African brethren, particularly those in North Carolina, who had been manumitted and again reduced to slavery. It also was directed against every species of extravagance and dissipation, such as gaming, horse-racing, cock fighting, shows, plays, and other expensive

diversions and entertainments.

The reception of the petition was debated at great length. Finally it was referred to a select committee, consisting of Messrs. Sitgreaves of Pa., Nicholas of Va., Dana of Conn., Scharman of N. J., and Smith of Md. On the 29th of Jan., 1798, Mr. Sitgreaves,