to the legislature of Maryland, during last
winter, by the Hon. Mr. Blair, postmaster
general of the United States. I believe he
was sincere in the propositions which he sub-
mitted. He bad been invited to address the
legislature of the State, in company with
some other distinguished gentlemen of the
State; he, however, being the most promi-
nent orator on the occasion. The object of
his speech seemed to be mainly to impress
upon the legislature of the State the necessity
for the call of a convention for the purpose
of abolishing slavery in the State. That was
the burden of his speech, that it was neces-
sary for the purpose of preserving, strength-
ening and perpetuating the Union sentiment,
or what he conceived to be the Union sentiment
in the State. And he urged it by all the rea-
sons he could assign in favor of it, which I
must confess, I failed to appreciate as being
strong or potent. I do not know whether
they were sufficiently convincing to the mem-
bers of the legislature to induce them to pass
an act to call the convention or not. I think
it very likely that was predetermined upon.
But in that speech, it will be remembered,
my friend from Prince George's (Mr. Clarke)
I expect will recall it, he reviewed the pledge
given by the President of the United States
to the State of Maryland, or promised to use
his influence in .favor of compensating the
owners of slave property in the State. He,
Mr. Blair, from that stand renewed the
pledge which had been given by the Presi-
dent of the United States, and he spoke as if
by authority, and yet, here are the adherents
Of Mr. Lincoln, who look upon him as the
great man of the country, none equal to him,
and none perhaps ever have been or ever will
be his equal in their estimation—they are
here repudiating the very sentiments which
he sought, through his cabinet minister, to
inculcate and impress upon the people of the
State of Maryland, And I have no doubt
they had their effect upon many of them,
and that many were influenced to favor
emancipation by the hope that they would
realize some compensation. He took the
ground also that it was necessary for the pre-
servation of the Union, and he appealed,
whether earnestly or not I will not say, but
with apparent earnestness to the Union senti-
ment of the legislature to take such measures
as would lead to the consummation of that
great object—the abolition of slavery in the
State of Maryland.
So that yon see the friends of the adminis-
tration helping to kill slavery. It did not
die in the house of its friends, as suggested
by the gentleman from Howard (Mr. Sands, )
nor do I believe it ever received a blow from
its own friends. The first fell blow it received
was from abolition New England. If there
had never been any abolition, there never
would have been any rebellion. And it may
be said if there was no slavery there would

have been no abolition. That is true. But
slavery was established by the fathers of our
government; it was recognized under the
Constitution of the United States. They
were willing even to prolong the period of
the slave trade, so as to increase the number
of slaves; and it was extended to the year
1808. instead of the year 1800, and from
that day to the present slavery has been
recognized in every deliberative nnd legisla-
tive body, and by every practical statesman
in the land. Itis only of late that we have
had this great new light sprung upon us. I
am either impervious to the rays of such
brilliant luminaries as have attempted, to
illuminate this body with their new ideas, or
the rays have not been so forcible as it was
expected they would be. I have been' unable
to appreciate any force in any argument that
has been used upon this floor in favor ol
the emancipation of slaves in the State ol
Maryland at the present time, on any ground
whatever, either that it would favor the re-
establishment of the Union, or the perpetua-
tion of the Union, or the interests of the
State, or the interests of the United States in
any way whatever.
I hope, then, that the convention will
again adopt the section which was reconsid-
ered by the vote just taken, and that they
will afford us that little opportunity to per-
petuate the evidence of our rights upon which
to base our claim for compensation hereafter.
As for compensation to those who have
suffered losses by the public enemy in any
way, by invasion, by robbery, by purloining
in any way, they have a claim for it. I ad-
mit their claim. But I contend that the
slave owners of the State have a greater claim
than they can possibly set up, because if they
are deprived of their property,it will be by the
people of the State and the general govern-
ment. Indeed we have already to a great
extent been deprived of it by the action of
agents of the general government, and for
losses sustained in that manner we already
have claims against the general government.
I trust that this little section, which I have
characterized as a small crumb of comfort,
may be retained, that it will not be voted
down, blitth.it we may have an opportunity
to register the property contemplnted by the
provisions proposed in this section.
Mr. NKQLBY. I cannot see the difference
of which the gentleman from St. Mary's (Mr.
Dent) speaks in regard to the obligations
and duties of the government. If his theory
be true, then the State of Maryland is under
obligations not to protect a single solitary
individual of its citizens. If his theory be
true, then we have never to look for the pro-
tection of our property in any case by the
State of Maryland. He entirely ignores the
reciprocal duties of protection and allegiance,
so far as the State of Maryland and its citi-
zens are concerned.