OCR Text |
Show 88 We shall then rejoice in the interpretati·O n ofd t he pdraersk-mysteries of the present s t a t e, o f t.h e woes ahn od p that sions now so rife on earth. May It not be ople {I the~ instead of our present poor and b l.O ken labors ' we s blla H 1 b h vorthy of that no er ' e. render services to our rc~ .. rcn, ' . - It is enough to But the future will reveal 1ts own sec• cts. r know that this human world, of which we formh a por •ond ' . . nward under t e eye an lives, suffers, and IS movmg o ' . mni otent care of the Infinite Father. Before Hls pure, oH. p . goodness, all oppressions must fia 11 ,. a~ nd ' underr 1s frfie-1.g nc,r . ers and hopes tOr su cnno our highest aspirations, pray , . complishme nt, humanity, must, sooner or later, receiVe an ac f thought to beyond the power of prophecy to utter, or o comprehend. NOTES. Note A, page 17. As the page here referred to was passing through the press, I understood, that it was maintained by some, that the treatment, which Abolition petitions had received from Congress, was not so peculiar as I had supposed; and I state this, that the render may inquire for himself. For one, I feel little dispositiGn to inquire. It is very possible, that, in this world of tyranny and usurpation, scattered precedents may be found, whicl1, if used for interpreting and defining our rights, would reduce them all to insignificance. A man, jealous of his rights, will not yield them to this, or any other kind of logic. We have here the case of a great number of petitions, from all parts of the free States, and from citizens of intelligence and blameless character, which, before being presented, were denied, by a resolution of Congress, the usual notice and consideration. It was not the case of a single petition, coming from n. half insane man, from an eccentric schemer, bearing on its face the marks of mental aberration, or asking for something palpably absurd and unconstitutional. The petitions of the Abolitionists greatly exceeded in number all the other petitions to Congress taken together. They represented large masses of citizens, who prayed for what is pronounced constitutional by our wisest men. And Congress resolved, before these petitions were offered, that, on being presented, they should be laid on the table without debate, and that no member should have the privilege of saying a word in their behalf, or of calling them up for consideration or for any action in relation to them at a future time. Has any thing like this ever occurred before ? Or if it has, shall we go to snch precedents for an interpretation of the right of petition? Is it not plain, that, after this measure, party-spirit can never want pretexts for rejecting any and all petitions, be they what they may? To say, that because these petitions passed through the form of being laid on the table, the right was not touched, strikes me as one of those evasion.s, which |