denunciation have here been poured. If I were capable of the craven and recreant spirit of shrinking from expressing, not probably so much my own sentiments as those of my constituents, I should go home to their scorn, and they would send here a man who would represent them more faithfully.

Well, sir, what becomes of these incendiary pamphlets, the speeches in this House, if they go to the public? What will be done with them by the public press? The newspapers report these speeches; every speech is circulated through your whole country; and how can you arrest it? Will you introduce a resolution that members of this House shall not speak a word in derogation of the sublime merits of slavery? You must have a resolution of this kind, to follow the one laid upon your table this morning-a resolution that no member of this House shall dare to utter an incendiary sentiment? And what is that incendiary sentiment? Why, it is, in substance, the contents of these pamphlets. Well, sir, you begin with suppressing the right of petition; you must next suppress the right of speech in this House; for you must offer a resolution that every member who dares to express a sentiment of this kind shall be expelled, or that the speeches shall not go forth to the public-shall not be circulated. What will be the consequence then? You suppress the right of petition; you suppress the freedom of speech; the freedom of the press and the freedom of religion; for, in the minds of many worthy, honest, and honorable men-fanatics, if you please so to call them-this is a religious question, in which they act under what they believe to be a sense of duty to their God; and, however erroneous may be their conclusions, it is not for me, nor for this House, to judge them. Therefore, sir, in deference to what has been heretofore the usage of this House, in deference to the respect which is due to the right of petition, and the respect which is due to the right of freedom of speech, freedom of the press, and freedom of religion, I hope that this petition will be left where it has been placed by the House, in the possession of the Committee on the District of Columbia, and that we shall hear no more about it.

MR. THOMPSON.-As to discussing this subject before any human tribunal, I will not. I will not condescend to vindicate to this House or elsewhere this or any other of our domestic institutions. It is no affair of yours; you have no right to touch it, still less to demand a reason of us for its continuance. The gentleman from New Hampshire, Mr. Pierce—and I must say that his voice sounded in my ear as the voice of a friend—

said that we of the South could not know the state of things at the North; that in his district there was not one abolitionist in five hundred. If I did not know it before, I do now, sir, because he has said so. Let me say, in my turn, that he does not know the state of feeling at the South; and I do, with a full knowledge of all my responsibilities, declare that, in my opinion, nothing will satisfy the excited, the almost frenzied, South but an indignant rejection of these petitions; such a rejection as will, at the same time that it respects the right of petitioning, express the predetermination, the foregone conclusion, of the House on the subject—a rejection, sir, that will satisfy the South and serve as an indignant rebuke to the fanatics of the North. But we are told that such a course, while it would satisfy the South, would offend the people of the North. How so, sir? I had thought that it was the South that was interfered with, the South that was injured, that it was the South that was to be satisfied. Who is it at the North that we are to conciliate? The fanatics? Fanatics, did I say, sir? Never before was so vile a band dignified with that name. They are murderers, foul murderers, accessories before the fact, and they know it, of murder, robbery, rape, infanticide. Sir, this question must be settled; if I may so speak, it must be killed; a just regard to the rights and feelings of the South, to the peace and harmony of this great Republic, the permanency of our institutions, demand it; in short, sir, every consideration which can address itself to a patriot demands it. Yes, sir, in the presence of the armed monarchies of Europe, with all the powerful elements both on this and the other side of the Atlantic, already in incipient commotion, already rumbling in their deep crater, he is wilfully blind who does not see that the time is not distant when union, concert, all the patriotism, all the virtue, all the wisdom of our whole country will be demanded. Shall we, sir, continue to stir this most prolific source of discord, aye, of hatred, or shall we settle it, and forever?

MR. GRANGER.-Sir, who are these petitioners? They are persons who, looking to the letter of the Constitution of their country, and finding there that Congress has the right of exclusive legislation for this district, and not looking beyond that, to the grants of session by the States of Virginia and Maryland, to see under what reservations those grants were made and accepted, and without stopping to ask the still more important question whether the residents of the District of Columbia require any interference, suppose that Congress have the right to legislate upon this subject. Starting upon this abstract propo

sition, they have supposed they had a right to appear at the bar of this House, and to ask that the seat of Government of a free nation should be inhabited by those only who are free.

Such, sir, is the condition of these petitioners; and I can never consent that they should be designated as murderers, or that their names should be mingled with those of the abolitionists.

MR. PINCKNEY considered the question settled. The Government had made a solemn covenant upon this subject with the slaveholding States; Congress might violate the Constitution; it could not, would not, violate the public faith. It was bound hand and foot. The South had nothing now to fear, except from those who are determined to continue the agitation of slavery for the purpose of excitement. Abolitionism has attained its height. It has begun to go down, and will soon disappear entirely, if we do not fan the flame ourselves and will only allow our friends in the non-slaveholding States to fight the fanatics in their own way, and not trammel them in their operations by mixing up extraneous and unnecessary questions with the subject of abolition.

CENSURE OF JOHN QUINCY ADAMS

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, FEBRUARY 6-9, 1837

During the next session of Congress, on February 6, 1837, Caleb Cushing [Mass.] presented in the House various petitions from "ladies" of his State praying for the abolition of slavery in the District of Columbia. These were received and laid on the table, without debate or commitment, under the resolution of the House. John Quincy Adams [Mass.] then rose and said that he presented a petition from nine "ladies" or women (which term he used became afterwards a subject of dispute) of Fredericksburg, Va. He would not name them, he said:

"Because, from the disposition which at present prevailed in the country, he did not know what might happen to them if he did name them. It was not a petition for the abolition of slavery in the District of Columbia, but it was a petition praying Congress to put a stop to the slave trade in the District of

JOHNNY Q. [ADAMS] INTRODUCING HAYTIAN AMBASSADOR TO LADIES OF NEW ENGLAND

Columbia.

Whether it was genuine or not, it was not for him

to determine."

The petition was ordered to lie on the table, under the resolution.

MR. ADAMS said he held in his hand a paper on which, before it was presented, he desired to have the decision of the Speaker, James K. Polk [of Tennessee]. It was a petition from twentytwo persons, declaring themselves to be slaves. He wished to know whether the Speaker considered such a petition as coming within the order of the House.

The Speaker said he could not tell until he had the contents of the petition in his possession.

MR. ADAMS said that if the paper was sent to the clerk's table it would be in possession of the House, and if sent to the Speaker he would see what were its contents. He [Mr. A.] wished to do nothing except in submission to the rules of the House.

The Speaker said that it was the first time in the recollection of the Chair that persons not free had presented a petition to this House. The Chair wished to take the sense of the House, which he had a right to do.

DIXON H. LEWIS [Ala.] believed that the House should punish severely such an infraction of its decorum and its rules; and he called on the members from the slaveholding States to come forward now and demand from the House the punishment of the gentleman from Massachusetts.

SEATON GRANTLAND [Ga.] would second the motion, and go all lengths in support of it.

MR. LEWIS said that, if the House would inflict no punishment for such flagrant violations of its dignity as this, it would be better for the representatives from the slaveholding States to go home at once.

JULIUS C. ALFORD [Ga.] said that, if the gentleman from Massachusetts should present this petition, that moment he [Mr. Alford] should move, as an act of justice to the South, which he in part represented, and which he conceived had been treated with indignity, that it be taken from the House and burned; and he hoped that every man who was a friend to the Constitution would support him. There must be an end to this constant attempt to raise excitement, or the Union could not exist much longer. The moment any man should disgrace the Government under which he lived by presenting a petition from slaves praying for emancipation, he hoped that petition would, by order of the House, be committed to the flames.