Richmond enquirer. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1815-1867, 1835-07-21
VoTES or FREE NEGROES

"
INC i"iiowlng dlsingcnuous article appeared in the
last Raleigh Star " '"'
salisbury Resolution, T. Barren S.c.-An article an.
peared in the last Standard under the editorial b,d r.
which an attempt is made TO cxcnpate MIR Van Rn,,.n
from the charge preferred against him by the S,l;shr
meenng, oil having cndeavorcd III the New Yo:k Con
veh" To place Tree negroes, regards the right of
fragc, on an equal footing with ,rhitc ne and TO
wet Gov Swain and Messrs Fisher and Giles of neon
cd Constitution of New York which ren,ires SLI
qualification to ente free negroes vote in that State
Is Paraded as the measure for which (t assers) Mr.
van buren, voted; and all amendment submitted bv Mr.
FtSheT few days agoin the Convention PROPOSING 81;
mar provision in the Constitution of This STATE f
winch Mr.. GILES (who was Chairman of the Rowan
mecung) and Gov. S'cain voted, is placed bv its side
win suitable comments, designed to produce the nprc
sion on the public mind that these gentlemen have been
guilty of condcmnng measure i'm MIR V Rura, MI ~; l.
they themselves advocate
The rank sophistry and misrepresentation of this ar
tice are Obvious at single glance. It's argument 10
clear MIR. Van Buren,, amounts to this The amended
Constitution of New York contains provisiop rest,
ing the suffrage OF free negroes therefore Mr. Van Bt
rem did not advocate proposition place them on an
equal iooling with whe-mcn. Admirable logicl Rn,
Will the STANDARD deny that previous to the odonon of
tins provision, niT Van Buren, not only voted fr bnt
aHc naming speech in favor of extending to this class
oil people the right OF universal suffrage If We are
correctly informed, he did. What inconsistency ,bnn
IS mere IN tie course OF those gentlemen, who while
they are willing to extend the privilege of voiing n, e.
negroes, under proper restrictions condemn Mr. Van
Burcn for attempting to give them the unI,nifed ycr
else OF this right" &c &c
Ia agcri bc
20 Mr. b-le made such speech He norer claim,
ed Tor THIS class OF people the right of Universal Saie
In TACT, he did not claim for any class i'm the Conven
ton OF New York.-The facts are these The Corne,
Constitution OF N. York placed the white and the CO.
Toured man on the footing, as to the RIGHT of voting
IL ran in these general terms Every male uLnb;Io5
81 iull age, &c &cBut the new Constitution mai a.,
distinction IN favor of the whites and rcou;rrs U,t
every man OF colour shall have been for years CHI
zen OF the State, and shall he sescG and posssscd If
freehold estate of the value of $3.50 &c ,Sc-Mr Von
burcn advocated this provision, and assigned the follow
ing reasons for it, M
MIR Van Buren, said he had voted apaipst \ total and
uhqudiihed exclusion, for he would not draw revenue
rom tnem and yetdeny to them tie right of suffrage
but TINS prOviso met his approbntion They were ex
emPed from taxation until they had qualified hcmrlvc,
TO vote. The right not denied to exclude anv nor
ton OF the Community who will not exercise the riob,
OF suffrage IN its purity This hcM mt indncem,1tS IN
tndnstJy, and ,eohd rccsire his support"
we quote from the Volume of Tie PROCEEDINGS of ,l
~ iork convention now before us-in which We md M,
such flaming Speech as the Star alludcs TO-
With what face then, the question r.cnrs c,r 60
vernon Swain aud other Wings Of North Carolina con.
sure Mr. Van Buren, for acts of which thrv have Roc,
equally guilty. EqaaiiyY Not so-Thcir case il ,nncI
stronger than hisior, the Rsciri Standard instlv
observes" II turns out in point Of fact that lies,
consistent gentlemen strovc 10 give al free black. ,f,
who might possess freehold of 800; while Mr. R,c
succeeded IN restricting the right those only WHO pos
Scsscd freehold property to the value of S2JOwtb Ibis
sun more gaFng difference 70 their prejudice t theirs
is siayc-holding State, while in Ills slavery docs NOT
exist 10y 80 "V'