The pilot and transcript. [volume] (Baltimore, Md.) 1840-1841, 1840-07-23
-.
COMMUNICATIONS.
NEGRO EVIDENCE AGAINST
WHITE MEM.

The wisdom ana poitcy that PiomPteu ue
General Assembly of Maryland to enact law,
in the year seventeen hundred and seventeen,
prohibiting the admission OF negroes as evidence
II any case in this State, where christian white
person is concerned, have received the sanction
of every succeeding Legislature. The statute
has even been upheld and enforced by the Counts.
The we'll being and good order of society require
this wholesome restriction, for once admit the
contrary doctrine, and our lives, and all that we
hold dear and sacred upon earth, would be at the
mercy of our slaves, or at the will and caprice
of the perfdiottS and worthless free negro The
Court of Appeals Of this State had decided that
ga negro pettioning for his freedom in this State,
is not competent to make the oath necessary to
remove his cause TO an adjoining County Court
for trial, his oath being excluded by the above
act" These are the words Of the act;"No negro
or mulatto slave, or free negro shall be admitted
as evidence in any ease wherein any christian
white person is concerned" In constituting this
act in one of the Judicial Districts of this State,
the County Court decided, that a free negro,
party to an action at law, was not competent to
make the oath required for the continuance OF
his cause, if a christian white person was either
a plaintiff or defendant in the suit-And not
only have our state courts rigidly enforced this
statute, but the Circuit Court of the U. States,
for the Dist riot of Maryland, at the April term
1910, gave the following construction to the law.
An individual from the Island of Manila, called
Lorenzo Dow, had been sent by an American
Consul to the port of Baltimore, charged with
crime of numbering on the high seas, Capt. VIM.
c. Langsdon, a citizen of Boston. There was
no white person on board the brig at the time of
the murder, save the murdered Captain. The
District Attorney for the United States, propos-
ed to the Court to send the grand jury three ne
gro hands on board the brig, as witnesses, to
prove the offence alleged against the Malay, but
the counsel for the prisoner objecting, very in
teresting and learned arguments were made by
the respective counsel as to the legal competen-
cy of such evidence.
At the close of the arguments, MIR. Chief JUS
tice fancy delivered the opinion of the Court,
reviewing with much learning, the statutes and
policy of the State of Maryland, in regard to the
admission of negro testimony, and the reason of
its exclusion. He admitted that the law of evil
dence in the Federal Courts was the same as
that of the State Courts, where the Circuit and
District Courts of the United States were held.
sNevertheless, as the person did not stand in the
condition of a christian white person of the Eu-
ropean race, the evidence offered by the United
States was admissible against him." The ne
groes were admitted in accordance with this de-
cisisn, the prisoner convicted and sentenced to
be hung. 1t follows, then, conclusively, from
the above opinion, that if the prisoner had been
christian white person, the negro evidence must
have been excluded
Ought not then the same law and rules of ev-
idence, in regard to great fundamental questions,
adopted by Circuit Court ofthe United States,
to be equally obligatory upon Conrt Of Enqui-
ry or Court Martial ? Is not the analogy the
same, the reason the same and ought not the
same sound policy to prevail'
Suppose Court of Enquiry sitting
in this city, investigating the conduct of officers
of the Army or Navy, whether their acts as such
had done FFgreat injury to the Democratic party"
and negroes, the SerUants of the prosecutors,
were offered to testify against the accused, would
the Court permit it And ought not Court
Martial reject, instantly, proposition so revolt
ing, to tarnish the character of gallant Of
fceis by permitting negro spies to testify against
them?
But suppose, in the face of the adjudications,
Court of Enquiry, Court Martial within the
jurisdiction of Maryland, did permit the intro
duction of negro evidence, was the case at
Pensacola, against Lieut. George M. Hooe,
Virginian, by birth, and an officer of the Navy;
and when an application was made to the PIE
sident of the United States, complaining of this
outrage and violation of all law and Justice, the
reply should be, ''the President finds nothing in
the proceedings of the case which requires his
would not the voice of indignant
freemen be heard throughout the whole orders
of this, one of the thirt, en- States? And would
not this Northern man with Southern principles,
be taught, through the public press, and the bal
lot box, how deep had been the wound inflicted,
upon her laws, in the violated rights of one of
her citizens. 1t is high time for Maryland, Vir-
ginia, and the entire South, to be wide awake to
this subject; it is one common cause. Can there
be any difference Of opinion on the subject? Can
there be citizen of Maryland so debased, so
destitute of all Snanly, noble and generous feel
ings, to sent that the reputation, character
and standing of his fellow-citizen, however hum
bic in life, should be destroyed by the evidence
Of negroes.
For the dignity and reputation of the State,
hope not The trainers of our constitution and
laws, wisely excluded negroes from the right of
suffrage, andto give evidence in anycause where
a christian white person is concerned.
STAKEHOLDER.
Mr.. EDITORIAL ward meeting last week,
Mr.. J. M. Buchanan, as have been informed,
stated upon the public stand, that committee OF