|
|
|
not see how the people of the State could so regard it.
If this section was left in, every principle of the Declara-
tion of Eights was violated. The law of the land is that
no man's private property shall be taken for public use
without compensation, and yet it is proposed to put in this
constitution a provision prohibiting at any time, no mat-
ter how remote, the Legislature from making this due
compensation. Could they know what was proper to be
done fifty years hence ? It was a policy without parallel.
Mr. M. reviewed the sections of the bill of rights, and
maintained that the section was violative of the prin-
ciples enunciated in many of them.
The following substitute was offered by Mr. Lee for the
entire section:
"The Legislature shall pass necessary and proper laws
to distribute to the claimants any fund that may arise
from the co-operation of the United States with the State,
as pledged by the joint resolution of Congress of April
10, 1862, to compensate the owners of slaves that have
been emancipated by the State. "
Mr. Jones submitted the following as a substitute:
"After 'law, ' in the first line, insert 'providing for pay-
ment by this State for slaves emancipated from servitude
in this State, but they shall adopt such measures as they
may deem expedient to obtain from the United States
compensation for such slaves, and to receive and dis-
tribute the same equitably to the persons entitled. ' "
Mr. Jones said the aspect of affairs had been changed
very much since 1864. Subsequent to that time slavery
was abolished all over the country by constitutional
amendment, and laws had been passed to suit the altered
condition. However much he regretted what had oc-
curred, and however wrongfully it had been accomplished,
he was in favor of obeying the laws. The radical party
had charged that it was their intention to do this thing
and to obstruct the laws of the United States, and he
thought it was better to act so as to avoid all cavil. He
hoped this agitation would not be reopened; it, would be
very dangerous, and he hoped the question would re-
main as it was.
Mr. McKaig had always looked upon this matter as high-
handed robbery. Men had come into this hall in 1864, and
275
|
|
|
|
 |
