never heard of such a thing. If former usage was to be reversed, he wanted it to stand on record to appear in all time how the House had suppressed freedom of speech. "If the reading of a paper was to be suppressed in his person, so help him God, he would only consent to it as a matter of record." And he then finished reading the petition amidst great confusion and cries of order. When the question was put, "Shall the petition be received?" Mr. Adams was amazed to see it answered in the affirmative, by 127 ayes, against 75 nays. But the paper was then forever disposed of by a vote of 150 to 50, laying it on the table. A few days after this interesting scene, the House went through the form of re-enacting the old gag resolution by resolution by a vote of 139 to 69, "That all petitions relating to slavery, without being printed or referred, shall be laid on the table, and no action shall be had thereon."

However, this matter in no way blunted Mr. Adams's sense of duty, or cooled his ardor in a cause he deemed just. Early in February, he startled the House by calling to the Speaker that he held in his hand an extraordinary petition, and wished to know of the Chair if he would be in order in presenting it. Mr. Polk, the Speaker, said the Chair could only decide on being informed of the contents of the petition.

"Sir, the petition is signed by eleven slaves of the town of Fredericksburg, in the County of Culpepper, in the State of Virginia. It is one of those petitions which, it has occurred to my mind, are not what they purport to be. It is signed partly by persons who can not write, by making their marks, and partly by persons whose handwriting would manifest that they have

received the education of slaves. The petition declares itself to be from slaves, and I am requested to present it. I will send it to the Chair."

This presented a case too novel and difficult for Mr. Polk to decide at once, and the matter was referred to the House. An indescribable hubbub at

once arose among the Southern members, and while some cried treason, and said such thing was not to be endured longer, others actually yelled at the top of their voices: "Expel the old scoundrel; put him out; do not let him disgrace the House any longer." And one member cried for a resolution to meet the case. But this was a task of some moment, and one about which even the Southern members were by no means unanimous.

Waddy Thompson, of South Carolina, presented this resolution:

"Resolved, That the Honorable John Quincy Adams, by the attempt just made by him to introduce a petition purporting on its face to be from slaves, has been guilty of a gross disrespect to this House, and that he be instantly brought to the bar, to receive the severe censure of the Speaker."

Still the unusual spectacle the whole matter would finally present met some consideration, and an easier way out of the difficulty was offered in the following, also from a Southern member:—

"Resolved, That John Quincy Adams, a Reprsentative from the State of Massachusetts, has rendered himself justly liable to the severest censure of this House, and is censured accordingly, for having attempted to present to the House the petition of slaves."

One of the resolutions offered charged Mr. Adams with the attempt to give color to the idea that slaves

could justly become petitioners.

Of this unlucky "Mr. Speaker,"

charge Mr. Adams made good use. said he, "if I understand the resolution of the honorable gentleman from Virginia, it charges me with being guilty of giving color to an idea.' Even the wrath of the Southerners could not keep back the uproarious laugh which carried the House to the brave old man's side at this cool hit. Amidst great excitement the House adjourned without reaching a conclusion in the momentous affair. After several days passed in heated discussion, the case having assumed a ludicrous aspect at the expense of the friends of slavery, the whole matter was disposed of in the following harmless way:

"An inquiry having been made by an honorable gentleman from Massachusetts, whether a paper which he held in his hand, purporting to be a petition from certain slaves, and declaring themselves to be slaves, came within the order of the House of the 18th of January, and the said paper not having been received by the Speaker, he stated that in a case so extraordinary and novel, he would take the advice and counsel of the House.

"Resolved, That this House can not receive said petition without disregarding its own dignity, the rights of a large class of citizens of the South and West, and the Constitution of the United States.

"Resolved, That slaves do not possess the right of petition secured to the citizens of the United States by the Constitution."

The paper which had caused all this commotion and made a "laughing-stock" of the inflammable Southerners was, no doubt, a counterfeit gotten up by some incautious members from the South, who meant to test Mr. Adams's promise to present petitions from whatever source they came, and with the hope of catching the wary old man in some hurtful snare.

A few extracts from Mr. Adams's speech in

defense of his course in this matter will be of interest here, and aid in further illustrating the character of the extraordinary old man :

"In regard to the resolutions now before the House, as they all concur in naming me, and charging me with high crimes and misdemeanors, and in calling me to the bar of the House to answer for my crimes, I have thought it my duty to remain silent until it should be the pleasure of the House to act on one or the other of those resolutions. I suppose that, if I shall be brought to the bar of the House, I shall not be struck mute by the previous question, before I have an opportunity to say a word or two in my own defense. But, sir, to prevent further consumption of the time of the House, I deem it my duty to ask them to modify their resolution. It may be as severe as they propose, but I ask them to change the matter of fact a little, so that when I come to the bar of the House, I may not, by a single word, put an end to it. I did not present the petition, and I appeal to the Speaker to say that I did not. I said I had a paper purporting to be a petition from slaves. I did not say what the prayer of the petition was. I asked the Speaker whether he considered such a paper as included within the general order of the House, that all petitions, memorials, resolutions, and papers, relating in any way to the subject of slavery, should be laid upon the table. I intended to take the decision of the Speaker before I went one step towards presenting, or offering to present, that petition. I stated distinctly to the Speaker that I should not send the paper to the table until the question was decided whether a paper from persons declaring themselves slaves was included within the order of the House. This is the fact.

'Now as to the fact what the petition was for, I simply state to the gentleman from Alabama, who has sent to the table a resolution assuming that this petition was for the abolition of slavery, I state to him that he is mistaken. He must amend his resolution; for if the House should choose to read this petition, I can state to them they would find it something very much the reverse of that which the resolution states it to be. And if the gentleman from Alabama still chooses to bring me to the bar of the House, he must amend his resolution in a very important particular; for he may probably have to put into it,

that my crime has been for attempting to introduce the petition. of slaves that slavery should not be abolished.

.

.

"Sir, it is well known, that from the time I entered this House, down to the present day, I have felt it a sacred duty to present any petition, couched in respectful language, from any citizen of the United States, be its object what it may; be the prayer of it that in which I could concur, or that to which I was utterly opposed. It is for the sacred right of petition that I have adopted this course. Where is your law which says that the mean, and the low, and the degraded, shall be deprived of the right of petition, if their moral character is not good? Where, in the land of freemen, was the right of petition ever placed on the exclusive basis of morality and virtue? Petition is supplication, it is entreaty, it is prayer! And where is the degree of vice or immorality which shall deprive the citizen of the right to supplicate for a boon, or to pray for mercy? Where is such a law to be found? It does not belong to the most abject despotism? There is no absolute monarch on earth, who is not compelled, by the constitution of his country, to receive the petitions of his people, whosoever they may be. The Sultan of Constantinople can not walk the streets and refuse to receive petitions from the meanest and vilest of the land. This is the law even of despotism. And what does your law say? Does it say that, before presenting a petition, you shall look into it, and see whether it comes from the virtuous, and the great, and the mighty? No, sir; it says no such thing. The right of petition belongs to all. And so far from refusing to present a petition. because it might come from those low in the estimation of the world, it would be an additional incentive, if such incentive were wanting.

‘But I must admit, that when color comes into the question, there may be other considerations. It is possible that this House, which seems to consider it so great a crime to attempt to offer a petition from slaves, may, for aught I know, say that freemen, if not of the carnation, shall be deprived of the right of petition, in the sense of the House."

In the course of this debate Mr. Waddy Thompson took occasion to say that the conduct of Mr. Adams deserved attention from the Grand Jury of the