HeinOnline is a subscription-based resource containing thousands of academic and legal journals from inception; complete coverage of government documents such as U.S. Statutes at Large, U.S. Code, Federal Register, Code of Federal Regulations, U.S. Reports, and much more. Documents are image-based, fully searchable PDFs with the authority of print combined with the accessibility of a user-friendly and powerful database. For more information, request a quote or trial for your organization below.
![handle is hein.slavery/rmkrand0001 and id is 1 raw text is: REMARKS OF MR, RANDALL,
OF ASHTABULA COUNTY,
In the Senate, January 18th, 1851, upon Resolutions introduced by him
on the subject of Slavery.
Mr. Randall said: he desired not to speak on the
present occasion, owing to a severe cold which affected
his voice. But as he had introduced a series of resolu.
tions, and no Senator felt disposed, at present, to ocupy
the floor, in the discussion of them, he would proceed
to address the Senite.
He said : After listening to the able, interesting and
eloquent arguments of the Senator from Trumbull and
Medina, it seemed to him that the whole subject had
been thoroughly discussed, and that but little was left
for him to say.
I, (said Nir. R.,) have been highly pleased and some-
what amused, with the speeches of Senators who view
the fugitive slave law differently from what I do. The
Senator from Belmont, [Mr. Simpson,] the Senator
from Pickaway, [Mr. Geiger,] and the Senator from
Richland, [ Mr. Burns,] have boldly taken ground
against the repeal of this law-and have attempted to
show that there was a necessity for its passage-and
that it has accomplished and will accomplish great
good.
However much I may differ from those gentlemen in
their views, I will award to them honesty of purpose,
and purity of motives, and will expect the same treat-
ment from them and those who sympathise with them,
if my views do not coincide with theirs.
These are the only resolutions, involving the subject
of slavery ever introduced by me in either branch of
the Legislature, and I will now proceed, briefly to give
reasons why I think they are entitled to the serious
consideration of Senators, and ought to pass.
Before entering fully upon the discussion of the
question before the Senate, I will say that for years
there has been no question pending before the Ameri-
can people which has been so much mystified by de-
signing men, and so misunderstood generally, as the
one under consideration. It is whether the general
government is bound to sanction slavery. This is a
q uestion that must be settled-if not peaceably-in
revolution and blood. It Will not down at the bidding
of any hunker or union of hunkers.
I will now take up the resolutions i their order, and
give my views, briefly, on each.
The first resolution reads as follows: that prior to
the adoption of the federal constitution, each of the
several States comprising this Union, exercised full and
exclusive jurisdiction on the institution of domestic
slavery, within its territory, and possessed full power
to continue or abolish it at pleasure.
This resolution declares that prior to the adoption of
the federal constitution, each State possessed full and
unlimited power over the institution of slavery. This,
I believe, is not denied by but few, if any. But, Mr.
Speaker, it may be well to state for the information of
all, that after the Declation of Independence, in 1776,
each State was a sovereign, independent body. This
was especially so prior to the confederation. Each
State had the right to enact laws which no other pow-
er could repeal. Each could raise armies and main.
tain navies without consulting the other. In fine, each
Slate possessed all the powers of a sovereignity as effec-
tually and as entire as France, Spain or England.
This beingthe case, the Union was formed by taking
away from the individual States, portions of power and
vesting them in one central body, called the Union, in
the formation of which, were admitted maxims.
lst-That the Union possessed nothing by impli-
cation except what was absolutely necessary to its ex-
istence.
2nd-That powers not delegated to the Union, nor
prohibited to the States in express terms, were reserved
to the people.
As early as 1695 South Carolina legislated upon the
subject of slaves and slavery, and has continued so to
legislate down to the present time. So also Connecti-
cut in 1711, and Maryland in 1715.
These are sufficient instances of the exercise of this
power by the States, prior to the adoption of the con-
stitution, and conclusive to prove the first proposition,
viz: that the Union possessed nothing by implication, ex
cept ohat was absolutely necessary to its existence, and it
will not be controverted that this power is not expressly
granted to the Union, nor prohibited to the States.
The second resolution says: that by adopting the
constitution, no part of the aforesaid powers were del-
egated to the federal government, but were reserved
by and still pertain to the several States in which it
exists.
This resolution declares that no part of the aforesaid
powers were delegated to the federal government.
This, but few deny. It is well known, Mr. Speaker,
that when the Convention met to form the constitution,
the delegates carried with them the same diversity of
opinion that exists at the present time in the north and
south. One portion was hostile to slavery-another
portion favorable to its continuance. There was,
therefore, but one mode of disposing of the question:
that was to leave it where it then was, oith each of the
States.
Massachusetts had abolished slavery, Connecticut had
commenced a system of gradual emancipation, and all
of the northern States were determined to rid them-
selves of it as soon as possible.
This, then, being their condition, each State retained
its whole power over slavery, except the right confer-
red upon Congress to prohibit the slave trade after the
year 1808, which may be found in Art. 1, section 9, of
the constitution.
It will be seen by reference to the debates of the
framers of thec onstitution, that the question of slavery
did not occupy much of their time. One portion was
for giving Congress the immediate power to prohibit
the importation of slaves. This was objected to by
the delegates from South Carolina, Geofgia, and per-
haps North Carolina. The other States, without excep-
tion, had already prohibited the slave trade, and North
Carolina had done that which was tantamount to pro-
hibiting it. That State had passed a law imposing a
tax or duty of $500 upon any slave imported from
Africa, and $10 on every slave from any other Stta.-
except from a State granting manumission ; these are
charged $50.
The North insisted upon the right to prohibit the
slave trade, and South Carolina and Georgia objected,](ViewImageLocal?handle=hein.slavery/rmkrand0001&div=1&collection=&method=preview&ext=.png&size=3)