ctly different tone from that of the preceding one, and
represents another step in pro-slavery doctrine. The key-note of these
utterances was struck by Stone of Maryland, who "feared that if Congress
took any measures indicative of an intention to interfere with the kind
of property alluded to, it would sink it in value very considerably, and
might be injurious to a great number of the citizens, particularly in
the Southern States. He thought the subject was of general concern, and
that the petitioners had no more right to interfere with it than any
other members of the community. It was an unfortunate circumstance, that
it was the disposition of religious sects to imagine they understood the
rights of human nature better than all the world besides."

In vain did men like Madison disclaim all thought of unconstitutional
"interference," and express only a desire to see "If anything is within
the Federal authority to restrain such violation of the rights of
nations and of mankind, as is supposed to be practised in some parts of
the United States." A storm of disapproval from Southern members met
such sentiments. "The rights of the Southern States ought not to be
threatened," said Burke of South Carolina. "Any extraordinary attention
of Congress to this petition," averred Jackson of Georgia, would put
slave property "in jeopardy," and "evince to the people a disposition
towards a total emancipation." Smith and Tucker of South Carolina
declared that the request asked for "unconstitutional" measures. Gerry
of Massachusetts, Hartley of Pennsylvania, and Lawrence of New York
rather mildly defended the petitioners; but after considerable further
debate the matter was laid on the table.

The very next day, however, the laid ghost walked again in the shape of
another petition from the "Pennsylvania Society for promoting the
Abolition of Slavery," signed by its venerable president, Benjamin
Franklin. This petition asked Congress to "step to the very verge of the
power vested in you for discouraging every species of traffic in the
persons of our fellow-men."[25] Hartley of Pennsylvania called up the
memorial of the preceding day, and it was read a second time and a
motion for commitment made. Plain words now came from Tucker of South
Carolina. "The petition," he said, "contained an unconstitutional
request." The commitment would alarm the South. These petitions were
"mischievous" attempts to imbue the slaves with false hopes. The S