I was a member of the House of Delegates, I
had to contemplate the possibility that these
things might come, I came across a piece of
paper the other day which contained a part
of my notes at that time, for I spoke from
very full notes. I find it to contain these
words:
"The time may come when the free States
may acquire the power of the General Gov-
ernment, and under some wild construction
of the Constitution undertake to interfere
with the institution of slavery in the South
ern States."
The CHAIRMAN, (Mr. Berry, of Baltimore
county, in the chair.) The Chair must re-
mind the gentleman from Somerset (Mr. Jones)
that his time has expired.
Mr. JONES, of Somerset. I did want to say
a word or two in reply to my friend from
Baltimore city (Mr. Stirling) who referred to
a resolution which I offered in the Legislature
in 1833.
Mr. BERRY, of Prince George's. I hope
time will be given the gentleman.
Mr. JONES, of Somerset. It is entirely per-
sonal.
The CHAIRMAN. As the gentleman desires
to make a personal explanation be can proceed.
No motion to extend the time is necessary.
Mr. JONES, of Somerset. I desire that the
position I occupied in 1833, upon the ques-
tions which were then forced upon my con-
sideration, should be fully understood. And
I desire it to be understood that I was then a
very young man, and very inexperienced. It
was my first entrance upon public life, and I
was left in a very small minority, and had
very few to sustain me in my views. My
learned friend (Mr. Stirling) the other day,
in the very able and eloquent speech which
he addressed to this Convention, and to which
I listened with a great deal of pleasure, al-
though differing very widely with him in his
conclusions—read, I think, only part of one of
the resolutions that I presented to the con-
sideration of the House of Delegates at that
time. I desire to read the entire resolution,
with a view of putting myself right before
the Convention in regard to the views I then
entertained. I take it from the original,
which I suppose is correct, though I have not
compared it with the journal. The resolution
I submitted was this :
"Resolved, That the General Government
has no shadow of right, under the Constitu-
tion, to employ the military or naval power
of the government against the sovereignty of
a State; that the idea of preserving a Union
of sovereign Republics by military force, is
the most preposterous of all absurdities; that
the General Government of these United
States is preserved, not by the fear of military
force, but by the concurring free-will and
choice of the people of the several States, and
that the contrary doctrine would convert the
government into a MILITARY DESPOTISM." |
That was the sixth of a series of resolutions
setting forth what in my judgment was the
true theory of our Federal Union.
Those resolutions expressed the views and
the opinions which, in my conscience, and
under the solemn obligations which were
placed upon me, I felt it my duty to present.
I did so, and endeavored in a four hours
speech to maintain them by argument and
reference to authorities. Among others, I
quoted the opinion of John Quincy Adams,
in his message to Congress in December, 1828,
as follows:
"The United States of America, and the
people of every State of which they are com-
posed, are each of them sovereign powers.
The legislative authority of the whole is ex-
ercised by Congress, under authority granted
them in the common Constitution. The leg-
islative power of each State is exercised by
assemblies deriving their authority from the
Constitution of the State. Each is sovereign
within its own province. The distribution of
power between them presupposes that these
authorities will move in harmony with each
other. The members of the State and Gen-
eral Governments are all under oath to sup-
port both, and allegiance is due to the one and
to the other. The ease of a conflict between
these two powers has not been supposed;
nor has any provision teen made far it in our
institutions—as a virtuous, nation of ancient
times existed more than five centuries with-
out a law for the punishment of parricide."
Mr. Adams, in his inaugural, had called the
Constitution "a great national covenant,"
and the Federal Government " a confederated
representative democracy." I quoted also
from a special message of President Jackson
in 1831.
In reply to the call of the Senate made
concerning the execution of the Indian inter-
course law, in his message of 23d February,
1831, the President says ''he has no power,
under the Constitution, to prevent the State
of Georgia from extending her jurisdiction
over the Indian lands within her limits."
" To maintain the contrary doctrine, and to
require the President to enforce it by em-
ployment of military force, would be to
place in his hands a power to make war upon
the rights of the States, and the liberties of
the country—apower which should be placed
in the hands of no individual."
I quoted also Mr. Jefferson in support of
another resolution urging a call of a conven-
tion of all the States, if no peaceable adjust-
ment could otherwise be effected. Mr. Jef-
ferson in his letter to Judge Johnson, in
answer to the argument "that there must be
an arbiter somewhere," says: "True; but
this does not prove that it must be in either
parly. The ultimate arbiter is the people
assembled by their deputies in Convention.
Let them decide to which they mean to give an
authority claimed by two of their agencies." |
