The Southern Journal-Constitution

The Principles against the Tyranny of a Slave Tariff

By: Reverend Alfred Schmidt

Recently, it has become the idea of the Northerners in the United States Congress, that a tariff on the importation of slaves and indentured servants should be a way in which the United States Government raises revenue through the Revenue Act of 1789. A way in which they will raise revenue to fund a federal army, a federal navy, and a federal bank which they will use to stifle liberty and create a central power structure that will throttle away the freedom of the states. It has been mentioned on the floor of Congress, that this $10 tariff is a small percentage of the total cost of a slave and thus should not be a main topic of debate, yet have we forgotten that a tax on tea and stamps while not punitive was still worth fighting against?

It is not the amount levied that enrages me. It is the arrogance of certain members of Congress to think they can fine plantation owners in the South for their own heritage. It is the idea that Congress has the right to punish the South for its beliefs. It is the idea that because the fine on slavery is small it is okay. Forbid it, Almighty God!

The American Congress is not including a tax on the importation of cattle, ox, mule, donkey, or horse, which Northern farmers use to produce their crops. The American Congress has chosen to single out Southern sources of farm labor, because they do not believe that the South would be paying its fair share without this fine on slavery. I urge you, my Southern brethren to stand up against this fine on slavery, a fine on your heritage, write letters to your Representatives and inform them that you stand firmly against a fine on being from the South. Tell them that a fine on slavery is a fine on liberty. Tell them that if they support an act that fines you for being from the South that in 1790 you will make sure they are seen out of office.
A man can stand up!

Reverend Alfred Schmidt is a Republican Congressmen from the 3rd Congressional District of South Carolina

Benedict Arnold Part Deux
How Samuel Jay and Benedict Arnold Almost took out General Washington.
By James Smith, Raleigh Corespondent

"Samuel Jay, the Representative of New Hampshire, conspired earlier this year with none other than America's first traitor Benedict Arnold as well as British Member of Parliament Sir John Dunkirk in a plot to kill General, now President, George Washington. Jay established the "Dagger Club" with the assistance of Arnold and MP Dunkirk. Although no action was taken in the attempts to assassinate the President, Dunkirk provided large sums of money to Jay and put him in contact with Arnold. The Northern Newspaper, The New York Daily Times, was the first to break the story. Jay has since fled to Canada. Sir John Dunkirk had the following to say; "The so-called 'Dagger Club' is merely carrying out justice for Britain. Washington is a traitor to the empire and deserves death. Until such a time that the American colonies are back under British control, associations with ruffians is necessary."

The Canadians gave the following response as to the extradition of Jay back to America for trial; "As the judicial system in the United States is not operational, it would not be appropriate to seize Mr. Jay and return him to New Hampshire.", Guy Carleton, Governor General of the Canada's

William Pitt, Prime Minister of the United Kingdom: "Radicals within this government are an affront to His Majesty and to God himself."

This Paper couldn't agree more with the Prime Minster of the United Kingdom."

Revolution in France, Republicans call for Neutrality
Representatives Elijah Surratt(Virginia) and James Terrus(New York) Push Neutrality Resolution, French Revolutionaries Storm Bastille.
By Richard Johnston, Federal Hall Corespondent

"An estimated number of 4,000 out of work French men and women have stormed the armory and prison. What is known is that only seven prisoners were present. The main reason for the capture of the Bastille is mainly due in part to the vast storage of powder. Days earlier the Hôtel des Invalides was also "stormed" in order to gather another estimated 29,000 to 32,000 muskets. There was no shot or powder present at the Hôtel des Invalides. King Louis XVI combined with the Second Estate colluded to keep the French "Third Estate"(mainly common folk and business owners holding no titles of nobility) out of the dealings of the Estates General. This prompted backlash from the Third Estate who have now taken up arms against the entire French Royal System and Monarchy. It is correct to say that France is in a full blown Revolution similar to our own. France has seen failed crop and a recession wreck it's economy since entering the American War for Independence.

Republicans in the United States House of Representatives, proposed by Elijah Surratt of Virginia, and supported by James Terrus of New York, have called for a Congressional Resolution declaring Neutrality in the current ongoing conflict in France. The Resolution states the following; "Be it resolved that the newly created and God Blessed Nation of the united States remains neutral in the current conflict and hostilities taking place in France"
 
The State Gazette of North Carolina will certainly have a followup to the current events taking place in France."

Savages Run Roughshod in Georgia
Seminole Indians with the help of Creek and Chocktaw tribes are ransacking and destroying Georgian Homesteads and Farms.
By Thomas Oglethorpe, Port of Savannah Corespondent

"The breaking news out of Georgia is devastating. Interior Georgia is under assault. As I submit this column to my editor three Plantations and five farms of size have been burnt to the ground. Some have even rumored that a few North Carolinian's have been attacked. The most horrifying news might be that these Indian raiding parties have been met with little resistance. Which begs this paper to ask; Where is the Georgia Militia? Scalpings and the raping of women and young children have surely taken place. Mean while the New York Militia is currently recruiting men to march down to the Georgia and North Carolina wilderness to root out these savages and restore order.

Until such time the Seminole Raids are surely to progress in size and go unheeded."



Federalist Representative Proposes a "Federal Education Commission".
Representative Thomas Crowe (F-PA), author of a bill to establish a Federal Commission on education in America, has seen it hit the House Floor for Debate.
By Richard Johnston, Federal Hall Corespondent

"Thomas Crowe, Representative of Pennsylvania has authored the Education Improvement Act. The Act seeks to create a "commission" to be "tasked with developing a plan to help further public education in the country" on a Federal Level. The bill has been met with stiff resistance from Representatives Robert G. Hill of Georiga and Elijah Surratt of Virginia. Both men had the following to say on the House Floor;

"This bill is an unnecessary expansion of Federal powers. The matter of public education in this Union is not a federal matter and the Constitution does not grant Congress the authority to regulate or oversee the states in this area." Robert G. Hill of Georiga

"I see no reason for this bill considering most American Children are educated at home, or by local community schools. This top down approach to education with a "national" theme seems hardly relevant considering we educate our children locally, not nationally." Elijah Surratt of Virginia

Mr. Crowe responded to both Gentleman with the following;

"I understand the concerns of my two colleagues but I must say that I do not know where they derive the idea that this bill is in any way an endorsement of the idea of a federal education system. If anyone was to read the bill they will find no line discussing a federal form of education. What this bill does however is task a special congressional commission to find ways to encourage the educational growth of this nation." Thomas Crowe of Pennsylvania

Mr. Crowe was finally pegged into a corner when he suggested the following as to his reasons and Constitutionality of his Act;

"Beyond the fact that the proper education of this nation is necessary and proper to our general welfare, the congress is empowered to pass this legislation. The first line of article I section 8 says that the congress shall have the power to collect revenue for the "common defense and general welfare of the United States". I can assure the gentleman that this legislation not only is constitutional but also sound policy." Thomas Crowe of Pennsylvania

Mr. Crowe was countered by Representative Surratt who proposed the following concerning Mr. Crowe's authority concerning the Constitutionality of the Act;

"The gentleman's argument falls on deaf ears. The supposed "for the general welfare of the people" argument can mean a number of things such as abolishing the consumption and sale of alcohol throughout this God Blessed nation. Does he wish to ban Alcohol? Does he wish to fund churches? Surely religious services are beneficiary to the "general welfare". Does the gentleman wish to ban Dr. Franklin's electricity experiments? I've been told they're dangerous...Surratt once again lets out a small laugh... Does the gentleman wish to regulate the number of baths an American should take weekly? Surely hygiene falls under "general welfare of the people". Does the gentleman wish to regulate the Freedom of Press in the Country during a time of war? Surely that could fall under the "General welfare of the people"." Elijah Surratt of Virginia

The debating process is still ongoing and a motion has been made to table Mr. Crowe's bill. It seems very likely to pass, ending the debate of a Federal Commission for Education."

Bathurst Doubles Down on Killing Civilians
Claims 'Massacre on the Chattahoochee' was necessary, takes zero blame for the deaths of women and children.
By Jean Surratt, Editor

"In an open letter confirming the details previously published in this Newspaper, Colonel William Bathust Commander of the New England Militias, does not see his ordering for the attack on a defenseless Shawnee village and the killing of 300 women and children as a Massacre. In fact he goes on the attack, this time in the press, lambasting all Native American Indians as savages. All Native children as warriors and all elderly Natives as knife wielding scalp men. He characterizes their homes and their livelihoods as training grounds for the eventual attack on a white mans farm or residence. What if this new Government had done the same to all the Monarchies in Europe? Would we not be at war with 20 or so different Kingdoms and Countries based on the misguided evidence that they're all King Georges? 

The New England Blue Star had the pleasure of publishing the comments from Colonel Bathurst. We'll begin with the following excerpt; "Anyone who has ever engaged with the natives in a prolonged conflict knows full well that there is no real distinction in that culture between warrior and civilian; the oldest man and a child of ten are as much warriors, by their perception, as a man hearty and hale. The village, far from a place of peace and domesticity, is a fort, a garrison and a training ground."

There you have it folks. Any and all Indians living on the American Continent are now enemies of the States with each and every Indian village serving as a garrison which harbors savages who want to kill and scalp every American living from Georgia to New Hampshire. But soon after declaring all out war on all Native Indians the Colonel doubles down on his orders to launch an assault on a defenseless village. How do we know the Shawnee Village held no men of fighting age? The Colonels own scout tells him the following; ""Colonel, there is a village ahead that is completely unprotected. There are only women, children, and the elderly inside." Adding the following; "The men must be at war!". We all know what transpire next. Bathust with grin of a child on his face from ear to ear ordered the mass slaughter of women and children.

He admits so himself in the New England Blue Star;" I did order my soldiers...to enter into the village and displace the population...I recognized that a certain amount of death was unavoidable..." There you have it readers of The New Southern Journal-Constitution. We've been able to break the story on America's first mass-murderer. The question that now begs to be asked; Will President Washington do anything to control or discipline his Commanders in the Field?"

Bank Bill Part Deux
Federalists propose watered down Bank Bill, Republicans come out in force.
By Richard Johnston, Federal Hall Corespondent

"Federalist Andrew Beaumont of South Carolina proposed the 'National Bank System Act of 1790' breathing new life into a National Bank. This time however it seems we've got a completely different system that is being proposed. Previous Federalist proposed was a top down approach to centralized banking by setting a national interest rate and assuming the debt of the States. This bill went through the ringer when debate hit the House Floor with Federalist and Republicans at each others necks. However the bill failed by one vote. An interesting note, not a single prominent Federalist bothered to show up to vote. Most of those Federalists are now members of the 'National Democracy Party'.

Right out of the gates Representative Beaumont defended his bill, "The Constitution provides the Congress, and the central government by extension, the power to collect taxes, to pay debts and provide for the common defense, to borrow money on the credit of these united States, to regulate commerce, and to coin money and regulate the value thereof. All of these powers are explicitly granted to our national government. And Congress has the authority, again explicit in the Constitution, to enact any laws and establish any institutions to the effect of exercising those powers."

Republicans of Virginia Thomas Cole and Elijah Surratt shot right back. Cole fired first, "I continue to urge this body to consider the establishment of a National Bank unconstitutional. We have worked hard to establish a Constitution that was accepted by all. Think of the precedent this will set for future lawmakers if we ignore the very document we have worked so hard to create. Do we really want to pass this along?" In what many saw as a 'One-two punch' Surratt was there to deliver this blow; "I still fail to see how a Bank, established by the Federal Government and not authorized by the Constitution, benefits anyone. The proponents of this bill have failed time and time again to make a solid argument for a Bank in the first place. Their argument of "destabilization" and "economic crisis" falls on deaf ears to the planters, farmers, and manufacturers that are and will continue to boom without the interference of a regulated and unconstitutional National Bank."

It is worth noting that this version of the National Bank creates four Regional Banks with trustees appointed from every State. The Headquarters of all the banks would be centrally located in New York while offering local autonomy to the States with their own Regional Branch."

A Few Comments from the new Head of The Republican Party
We pressed Elijah Surratt of Virginia on a few of the current issues facing the Republican Party and the Country
By Richard Johnston, Federal Hall Corespondent

"I recently sat down for a beer with Elijah Surratt in one of New York City's finest pubs. After a few tall ones we got down to brass tacks. I opened with the departure of James Terrus from the Republican Party. Elijah Surratt had nothing but praise for Mr. Terrus Sr.; "James Terrus is the most Honorable man I've met in Government so far, perhaps besides Thomas Jefferson. I was deeply saddened to see him leave our club of Liberty and Freedom. It actually came as quite a shock. I wish him and his son the best and hope to continue our strong relationship." I wasn't done just yet. A token answer from a token politician I'm sure. I went deeper suggesting Terrus quit the party on bad terms over his new Bank proposal. Again Surratt stood strong for Terrus in the thick of hailing musket fire; "No, no. I'm sure that wasn't the reason. First and foremost James Terrus puts New York State first. While some in our party are shifting towards a set of National Policies James thought that his role in New York wouldn't be as beneficial. It makes complete sense and no one in our party faults him. He lead us through the beginning stages of this new Government. So there is no deep seeded hatred that we kicked him out, or that he left because of one issue."

A National Plank of Polices you say? Do tell more, and he did; "Yes, as you know I was elected by our members to take over after the departure of James Terrus. I believe I won over the support of my peers by proposing a policy of Nationalizing the Republican Party into an organization that can dominate at the Federal Level. We're in the process of crafting a Campaign that appeals to all Americans, not just small businesses and farmers in the South. I envision a Republican Party that represents Americans from all walks of life united around the following three key principals: Most importantly States Rights, complete support for the Constitution and it's authority granted to Government, and finally Neutrality between the waring Monarchies of Europe."

With Congressional Elections around the corner, turmoil in the Federalist Party, and finally Congressman Surratt explaining his grand idea of a Republican Party that has reach and scope in the North we touched on that subject. Point blank I asked him if any seats would be picked up by Republicans north of Maryland; "I most certainly feel that we can put the Republican Party in a position to win in Maryland, Pennsylvania, New Jersey and Delaware. To add to that we will also be competitive with the Federalist Factions in New England as well. If you can recall we had a great victory in Vermont this past year picking up 1 of the 2 House Seats and a Senate Seat.". This is confidence not seen in the Federalist or National Democratic Party. Maybe Republicans will gain a Majority in the House this cycle. The Southern Journal Constitution will wait until November."

The National Democratic Party is nowhere to be seen south of Pennsylvania.
Outside of a contest here or there the NDP is in the midst of remaining a regional party.
By Thomas Oglethorpe, Richmond Corespondent

"Failing to poll at all in Georgia, North Carolina and South Carolina while only fielding one candidate in Virginia November spells disaster for the National Democracy Party. Further more the NDP are lagging heavily behind Republicans in Pennsylvania and Maryland while fending off tough fights in New York and Connecticut. The only States that seem to show large support for the NDP are Massachusetts and New Hampshire. If the election where held today the NDP would have Multiple Representatives in the States of Massachusetts and New York.

For a party that recently had a high profile split from the Federalist, as well as multiple high profile Civil Servants and Signers of the Constitution or Declaration renounce their own parties to join with the NDP it seems as though they've hit a brick wall with the voters of the united States. In fact Gorden Battle Hughes, perhaps the most well known NDP member of the House issued a large response to both the New York Daily Times and our Newspaper going on and on about how he's supposedly smarter than any other man in the country and that the rest of us are too narrow-minded to see his grand plans for the Nation. Perhaps not the greatest approach to take when clamoring for votes.

Speaker Hughes issued the following remarks in the New York Daily Times; "The mere fact that I have been asked to write an article defending the National Democracy Party from this Federalist attack highlights one of the great problems of the Federalist Party as it currently exists: it is grasping for legitimacy and is seeking to undermine the credibility of people who happen to have dissenting opinions from its core ideology." Hughes was just reitering the fact that nothing is ever his problem, so I'll just blame others. To put it bluntly the NDP is in bad shape and Mr. Hughes attacks on both the NYDT and the SJC along with many Northerners who are faithful to the Federalist cause did him no good. Only November will tell us if his broad strokes of lines of attack will reap rewards for the NDP or marginalize them to the Northern corners of the continent."

News Around the South

Richmond, VA - Patrick Henry of Patriot Rhetoric fame during the War for Independence has thrown his hat into the ring to run for Congress in Virginia as a Republican

Savannah, GA - Christopher Bretagne, Commander of the New York Militias has landed in the Port of Savannah.

VA, NC, SC, GA - Going into the 1790 elections Republicans look to hold firm on the Southern States.

Virginia/South Carolina - Virginia's Favorite Sons Thomas Cole and Elijah Surratt have provided loud voices in the halls of congress against a National Bank. On the other side is Andrew Beaumont of South Carolina who has authored the new Bank Bill.

JOHN SEVIER SEEKS TO END THE SOUTHERN VOICE
Andrew Beaumont, honest son of South Carolina

Perhaps it seems like a small, easy choice, for the honest and hard-working men of the Fifth District of North Carolina in this most pivotal election of our young Republic to date. And true, Republican John Sevier has served his district in Congress, so what, a read might ask, is the harm in his re-election?

For North Carolina, the answer is everything. As a Republican, Sevier will join his fellows in Congress as a brain-brother of a group that has openly advocated a repeal of what has been known as the Three-Fifths Compromise. The question arose during deliberations on how to count slaves when determining representation. Those from the southern states, such as North Carolina and my own South Carolina, demanded that slaves count as full persons to ensure that our states have the voice in the Federal Government that they deserve. At the end of the day, the ratio that every five slaves should count as three free persons for the purposes of determining representation was accepted, and the states of Virginia, North Carolina, South Carolina, and Georgia were able to have the voice that we have today in the capital of New York because of it.

But with your vote, you will be sending a Representative Sevier to New York to erase all of that. His allies, his compatriots, and his brain-brothers have suggested that this should not be the case, robbing the people of North Carolina of their voice. They would rather see these great southern states, which I am glad to represent, crushed under the rule and the dictates of northern industrial states for no reason at all other than to tear apart the very fabric of this union. And THAT, dear reader, is the harm in his re-election.

There is a choice- a man named William Barry Grove, who has honorably served in the North Carolina House of Commons and who so adequately represented North Carolina when our Constitution was ratified. He is a man of honor who will support our President and our union, and most importantly he will be there in New York with men like me who wish to ensure that the South continues to have a voice in the Federal Government. He believes in the promise of North Carolina where Sevier has said, loud and proud, that he seeks to destroy the state. So when it is time to vote, remember all that North Carolina has- that is what William Barry Grove is fighting for, and that is why he is the man to represent this state in Congress.

FOR VIRGINIA, NO OTHER CHOICE THAN RICHARD BLAND LEE
Andrew Beaumont, honest son of South Carolina



To preface this article with a fact: this author is not from the Commonwealth of Virginia. While I have honest respect for the accomplishments of the great men that have hailed from Virginia, an accident of birth has left me enjoying my life and service to the people of South Carolina but wishing only the best for a state that I would want to call home. 

It is because I want the best for Virginia that I am comfortable penning this editorial on behalf of Representative Richard Bland Lee, a true patriot and America hero who has served this state so honorably in the past. Even during his young days being educated here in Virginia at the prestigious College of William and Mary (while Mr. Henry, noble though he is, was receiving an education among northern abolitionists) he picked up arms to support the cause of our independence, organizing a militia of his fellow students to fight off the supreme traitor himself, Benedict Arnold. While the British under the "Traitor-General" Arnold were preparing to march towards Richmond, the young Richard Bland Lee whipped his fellow young students into a passable defense force. Without Lee in charge, the damage to Williamsburg, and the success of the Traitor-General, would certainly have been greater.

But his desire to serve his country as a truly educated man, an independent voice, did not end there. It was he who was instrumental in helping to ratify the Constitution which has given us our country and his steadfast support for a Bill of Rights which will serve to protect the people of Virginia from the tyranny of the majority. He ran for Congress to represent the people with these successes, and was chosen handily over opponents who, like Mr. Henry, lack in experience and in ideas to make our country stronger. Even our President, the great son of Virginia and General of the Army George Washington himself saw Lee's strength and cast a vote for him in an election.

Our President could trust Lee, who fought valiantly and was willing to trade his life, his fortune, and his sacred honor for the defense of Virginia and for free united States. With his exemplary past, his sharp mind and his desire to see a strong and free Virginia, it's clear that he is the only choice in this coming election. So stand with Washington, stand with liberty, and stand with Richard Bland Lee.

1791: This newspaper is now being read by citizens in Delaware, Maryland, New Jersey, and Pennsylvania.