eminent this morning; and said that it had
left its footprints of desolation in St. Mary's
county. He had reference I suppose to the
carrying away of their slaves; perhaps some
other descriptions of private property. But
unless St. Mary's is an exception to the gen-
eral rule of counties in Maryland, the foot-
prints of desolation were there long before
this war broke out. And that is the reason
why I, as a Marylander, want to get rid of
this desolating institution of slavery, because
it is the cause of so many of our misfortunes
It has carried the footprints of desolation
into every county in the State, even into my
own county, though there are comparatively
few slaves there. But even there you can find
the footprints of desolation, and from the
very same cause.
He also charged the people of Baltimore
city with ingratitude, and talked as if the
public works were made solely for the benefit
of Baltimore, and paid for by the counties of
Charles and St. Mary's. But I will not hold
the gentleman responsible for that literally,
though you would have thought, by the la-
mentations he made over it, that those two
counties had actually constructed the Balti-
more and Ohio railroad out of their own
means.
Mr. BILLINGSLEY. I said that but for the
members from those counties, naming them,
who were the most prominent men from my
own section of country in regard to works of
internal improvement—but for their influence
you never would have consummated that great
work of internal improvement. I state it as a
matter of history, that but for the votes and
support of those men you never would have
consummated those works of internal im-
provement. I said that we had paid the taxes
growing out of those works, and had never
complained of it, though we had never con-
sidered ourselves benefited at all by those
works of internal improvement.
Mr. SCOTT. Well, sir, I take rather a
broader view of the subject. I think that any
work of improvement that benefits one part
of the State of Maryland benefits in some
proportion all parts of it. Though the city
of Baltimore, at first sight at least, has had
the greater benefit from these works, yet they
benefit the most remote county of the State
by furnishing a market for their produce. We
are all bound together, and we must sink or
swim together. Anything that benefits the
city of Baltimore benefits the counties; and
anything that benefits the counties benefits the
city of Baltimore. There is no need of this
narrow jealously of one part of the State
against another part of it.
I now come to the gentleman from Somer-
set (Mr. Jones.) I am sorry he is not now in
his seat, for I want to say some kind things
of him. But I perhaps can say them with a
better grace in his absence. He starts off
with the declaration that private property |
cannot be taken for public use without com-
pensation. That is true enough. But we do
not propose to do that. We do not intend to
take this property for use; but to take from
slaveholders the property they wrongfully
hold and set these slaves tree for themselves.
We do not take this property for public use.
These gentlemen say they hold their right
to slaves just as they hold their right to every
other kind of property. Now, I intend to
look into that title a little. How do you ac-
quire title to property? If a man buys a
stolen horse, is his title reckoned a good one?
One gentleman from Prince George's, (Mr.
Marbury,) who I believe is not now in his
seat, said that the title to slave property dated
back beyond the records; by his argument
there never was a time when there were no
slaves. Now, I want to trace back the title
and see where it originated. Do yon remem-
ber anything about the treaties between the
United States and every civilized power on
earth in regard to the slave-trade? And do
you remember what character they give to
that traffic? Do they not designate it as
piracy, and do not they denounce the punish-
ment of death upon those taken in that traf-
fic? Can an institution be good that has no
other foundation than that? Trace it back
to its origin, and it is piracy. It is not so
with other property.
Mr. MARBURY. I would ask the gentleman
if the Constitution of the United States does
not say it is a good title, and if be has not
sworn to support that Constitution?
Mr. SCOTT. I have so sworn, and I shall
keep my oath. But I say that the title to
slaves in this country, if you trace it back to
its origin, is in piracy. Slavery had its ori-
gin first in captives taken in war, who were
sold fur slaves. But the system was so repul-
sive, so repugnant to every principle of com-
mon sense, and of right, and of justice, that
the civilized nations of the world have joined
together by treaties to prohibit that traffic,
and they call it piracy, and inflict the punish-
ment of death on all those caught in the
traffic,
Mr. BELT. I would like to ask the gentle-
man a question. I do not ask it with any
desire to interrupt the thread of his argument.
I am quite sure he is as satisfied of that as any
gentleman in this house, and I know it does
not inconvenience him at all.
Mr. SCOTT. O ! of course not.
Mr. BELT. I would like the gentleman,
just at this point of his argument, to explain
how it was that the Constitution of the Uni-
ted States provided that the slave-trade should
cease in the year 1808, twenty years after the
adoption of the Constitution? Because I will
tell him in advance my theory about it, if he
will suffer me to do so. It is this: that the
men from Virginia and the men from the
South in the Convention of 1787, which
framed the Constitution of the United States, |
