The Exiles of Florida / or, The crimes committed by our government against the Maroons, who fled from South Carolina and other slave states, seeking protection under Spanish laws.

by Joshua R. Giddings

1848.

Having examined the case, he presented it to the consideration of the committee, and a majority at once agreed to sustain a bill giving to the owner a fair compensation for the loss of his slave. The Chairman agreed to draw up a report sustaining the bill, and present it to the committee the next morning.

Hon. John Dickey, of Beaver County, Pennsylvania, now deceased, was also a member of the committee. He boarded at the same house with the author of this narrative. While at tea that evening, Mr. Dickey remarked, that his committee were about to report a bill to pay for this slave, and said, if he were familiar with the subject, he would draw up a minority report against the bill. A gentleman sitting at the table remarked, that other gentlemen, who were familiar with the subject, would doubtless feel willing to lend him any aid in their power. All however agreed, that an evening was too short a time to draw up a suitable report on so important a question; yet it was known that slaveholders controlled the action of the House, and they showed no courtesy to those opposed to the “peculiar institution,” and would of course grant no time to draw up a minority report. After tea, Mr. Dickey and another gentleman retired to a room by themselves, and before sunrise the next morning, had completed the report, which now appears among the House Documents, Thirtieth Congress, first session, numbered 187, filling sixteen heavy octavo pages of printed matter. At ten o’clock the committee met, and, having listened to the report of their Chairman, they were called on to hear that of Mr. Dickey, which took distinct and unmistakable grounds against the right of men to hold their fellow-beings as property, under the Federal Constitution. This case furnishes the first instance in which the records of the nation show a minority report from any committee against slavery. Mr. Dickey, having taken his position, stood firmly upon the doctrines he had avowed in his report; and the other members of the committee took their choice between the report of Mr. Burt and that of Mr. Dickey.

General Dudley Marvin, of New York, General James Wilson, of New Hampshire, and Hon. David Fisher, of Ohio, signed the report of Mr. Dickey; while the four Democratic members, all of whom resided in the slave States, signed that of Mr. Burt. So far as the committee were concerned, the five Democratic members assumed the position now occupied by that party, to wit, that under our Federal Constitution, man may hold, sell and transfer human beings as property; while the four Whig members based their action upon the doctrine now occupied by the Republican party—that, under our Federal Constitution, men cannot be transformed into brutes; nor can one man hold property in another.

The reports of the majority and minority were printed, and attracted attention among the members; but the bill did not come up for discussion until the next session. On the twenty-third of the following December, the committee of the whole House, in passing through its calendar of private claims, reached this case. Mr. Dickey led off in a short, but well-arranged argument, sustaining his report. His remarks were so well directed and so pertinent, that, near the close of his speech, Mr. Burt called him to order, for discussing the subject of slavery. Upon the conclusion of Mr. Dickey’s remarks, General Wilson of New Hampshire obtained the floor, and the House adjourned.

The bill did not come up again for discussion until the twenty-ninth. Before going into committee on that day, Mr. Rockwell, of Connecticut, Chairman of the committee on Claims, offered a resolution closing debate on this bill at half-past one o’clock, allowing but one hour and a quarter for the discussion of this important question, which now agitates the whole Union; but it was regarded at that time as meritorious in any member to prevent agitation of the subject of slavery, and the resolution passed with little opposition. When the House resolved itself into committee of the whole, Mr. Wilson, of New Hampshire, delivered his views, sustaining the report of the minority of the committee; making the question distinctly to depend upon the right of men to hold property in men, under the Federal Constitution.

Mr. Brown, of Mississippi, followed in a few remarks, taking strong ground in favor of the principle, that slaves are property, to the same extent that horses and cattle are property. Mr. Cabel, of Florida, followed in a few words to the same point. Here the time for closing the debate arrived; but Mr. Burt, having reported the bill, held the right to speak one hour, under the rules, in reply to those who opposed its passage. He had evidently expected the bill would pass without serious opposition, and had become somewhat excited by the difficulties with which he had to contend; confident however of final success, he at once declared the only question to be, that of property in human flesh. Many Northern men were unwilling to meet this bald question. Mr. Collamer, of Vermont, interrupted Mr. Burt, inquiring, if there were not other questions of law involved? Burt replied, with some degree of arrogance, that he would “leave no other loop-hole for gentlemen to escape.” This supercilious bearing of Mr. Burt greatly delighted some Northern members, while it appeared greatly to embarrass others; but his speech was the last, and, there being no opportunity for reply, every thing gave promise of a triumphant victory to the slaveholders.

After the conclusion of this speech, the vote was taken in committee, where no record was kept, and stood for the bill seventy, against it forty-four—the majority being even greater than the slaveholders expected. The bill was then reported to the House, and Mr. Crowell, of Ohio, moved to lay it on the table, and called for the yeas and nays; and the recorded vote stood, ayes sixty-six, noes eighty-five—being a majority of nineteen in favor of the claim. The bill was then ordered to a third reading without division.

Soon as this result was announced, the Author moved a reconsideration of this vote. The reconsideration being a privileged question, he held the floor, and was proceeding to deliver his views, but gave way for an adjournment.

1849.