whole question was fully debated; and the
public decision that sent me here to vote upon
this question was an instruction to. me that
the argument was through. Believing this
I am here to-day to vote to sustain the pre
vious question. I vote "aye."
Mr. THOMAS said: I have had no opportu-
nity to express my views either upon the sub-
ject now before the convention, or upon the
subject that has been already decided by the
convention, to wit; emancipation. I had
desired to express my views to this conven-
tion upon both subjects. So far as I am per-
sonally concerned, I do not ask to be heard.
My mind is fully made up, and I believe the.
mind of every other member of the conven-
tion is made up on the subject. I am per-
fectly ready to vote. For these reasons,
with no intention of casting a slur upon gen-
tlemen upon the other side of the convention,
who disagree with me upon this subject, by
cutting them off in the debate, because I am
cut off' as much as they are, I vote "aye'."
Mr. TODD said: For reasons very well ex-
pressed by the gentleman from Washington
(Mr. Negley,) I vote " no."
Mr. VALLIANT said: I have favored the free
and full discussion of all those subjects which
the people of the State have sent us here par-
ticularly to consider. We did fully discuss
the 4th article and 23d article of the declara-
tion of rights. Although sometimes the de-
bate became irksome to me, I would not call
the previous question, and would have voted
against any call of the previous question, for
the reason that I want the debate on all these
subjects to go before the people. It is for the
people to adopt this constitution or to reject
it. Our adoption of it here is not the final
adoption of the constitution. Believing it to
be proper that the people should be put in
possession of all the arguments, pro and con,
with reference to those existing causes which
called this convention, I shall now vote
against the previous question. I vote "no."
So the call for the previous question was
not sustained.
Mr. CHAMBERS. I rise with the leave of the
majority of this body to express my views
upon this article, which, as I have already
stated, I regard as the most offensive article
in the present constitution, and furthest from
those principles of honesty and justice which
lie at the foundation of all proper govern-
ment in all time. This convention, carried
away, as I think many of them are, by feel-
ings necessarily and naturally consequent
upon the existing state of things around them,
may well be disposed to emancipate the ne-
groes. I am not surprised at that. I came
here prepared for it. I knew the feelings of
excitement that agitated the country. I
affected those portions of the State, particu-
larly, which sent delegates here to carry out
that feeling of excitement.
But I think there are considerations that
12 |
should lead to a very different conclusion
with regard to this question. When gentle-
men tell me that the question of emancipation
covered all that is here, I can conceive of no
greater error. Emancipation is not a new
thing in the history of the world. We know
of emancipation elsewhere. Maryland is not
the first to inaugurate this change from slave-
ry to freedom in a State. We are familiar
with that. But I say this is a novelty. This
is a departure from what has everywhere on
such occasions, always been regarded as a
necessary consequence of that change or alter-
ation in condition from slavery to freedom.
From the first commencement of this change
of policy down to the present moment we find
this feeling,
To-day talking about compensation? Has
there been anything to the contrary ever
heard of? Taking properly is one thing.
The right of the government to take property
is recognized; but to refuse to pay for it is
just as widely different from the practice we
have been accustomed to, in all time, as
darkness is from light. Gentlemen make a
great mistake, therefore, when they say that
the whole question is covered by the provi-
sion already adopted.
I can hardly expect to have much attention
paid to what I say, when the majority have
expressed such decisive feeling upon the sub-
ject as they have here; but I do ask a patient
hearing of one or two suggestions that seem
lo me to be entitled to some weight at their
hands,
With regard to the great and eternal prin-
ciples of right and wrong, we need expect no
time, no circumstances, no condition of the
country to make any change or alteration in
them. With regard to the principle of eman-
cipation, freedom from slavery in a State, I
am willing to admit that there is something
like a principle involved, If gentlemen have
made up their minds to the adoption of a
principle upon this subject which leads to
emancipation, let them adopt it. If it be
right to-day, it was right yesterday, and will
for all time beright. Great principles do not
change. Truth is eternal. The great princi-
ples of honesty and integrity are just as last-
ing as the throne of the universe.
But there are other questions not involved
in those fundamental principles. Is there
any principle in this? I ask gentlemen with
candor, if they will for one moment divest
themselves of a determination not to hear
anything or to consider anything said upon
the subject, whether this is a question of
principle or of expediency? I do not see how
any man can say that there is any principle,
which is to last, involved in it. Certainly
there has been a great mistake all over the
world, if there was not a propriety under
circiimstances where emancipation has existed,
if it was not right, expedient and proper to
make compensation. This has never been |
