The examiner. [volume] (Louisville, Ky.) 1847-1849, 1849-10-20
KENTUCKY STATE CONVENTION.

MI. turner.
j am opposed 10 taking lhe property Of al
individual which he has acquired under The
sanction of the law and the constitution, al
ell, unless with his free will and consent
| do not believe that il is consistent with
The principles OF our government to do So
| have regarded
this principle OF the right Of property as
asserted in the declaration Of independence,
in the Constitution Of the United States,
and in that Of Kentucky, and look to il
as lying at the very foundation Of our gov
eminent and as moral principle which
ought not to be violated under any circum.
stance or in any way or shape. But still,
if you are to make compensation, it might
be said, why not leave that clause in the
constitution! Ii you take the property to
use in time Of war, OF great necessity, when
the government Of the county could not
progress and sustain our rights and liber
ties, then the principle of taking private
property without the consent OF the owner
or making him previous compensation
therefor would properly apply. But that
IS not the case IN relation TO slave property.
| believe that the slaves in
kentucky are in better condition nov
than any in which you could place them
that they are in better condition than the
laboring population Of any part of the
globe-and | do not believe il will benefit
Them 10 send them 10 foreign country or
10 sell them 10 the South or any where else.
But if il would benefit them, the question
is whether you would enslave the white
man for the purpose, for you might as we'll
DO 50 as 10 impose upon them a tax Of
si-2O0,0O0 year in addison to the taxa
lion now necessary 10 carry on the govern
ment and pay the interest on the public
debt.
believe that when you, MIR. Chairman,
and myself were associated together in the
Legislature in 1871 We voted together in
relation to this subject and advocated the
doctrine | am now advocating-that it is
not for the interest Of Kentucky TO import
more slaves. | know that the statute of
1888 has not been enforced to the extent it
ought 10 have been, and that many slaves
have been brought into the State nOtwith-
standing its PROVISIONS, and for that reason
| sn for Incorporating 1t into the constltu-
ton. When, in the Legislature, intro
duced proposition similar TO the one now
under consideration, and it passed through
the representative branch-that no persons
should be slaves in kentucky except such
as were then slaves and the descendants of
such as were brought in by their masters or
by marriage, descent, OF devise. This leaves
the prohibition one against bringing in
slaves here FOR Merchandise or for the use
Of individuals, and what Is the effect Of it!
Ii is a proposition which will work Of IL
self and render it unnecessary TO 60 to the
Commonwealth attorney or any other Off
Ger Of the government 10 order TO have il
executed. And while | am as much against
the increase Of free negroes amongst US as
any man in Kentucky, and believe it to be
a curse to both races, yet ] understand that,
under the proposition which 1 advocate,
any negro brought here in opposition to the
laws will be no slave. What will be the
effect No man in his senses will ever
run the risk OF bringing a slave here-if he
does, the negro can sue for his freedom.
There would never be slave imported in
to the State under that provision.
Ii may be said that this is occupying
emancipation ground. II do occupy such
ground, it is the same as that occupied by
the venerable Commonwealth OF Virginia,
from whom many in this house are descend
ed, and who is looked up to as one Of the
strongest in the number Of pro-slavery
States. As early as 1777, she adopted in
her statutary provisions similar inhibition
against the Importation Of slaves. The
State Of South Carolina, with Mr.. Calhoun,
the great ultra pro-slavery leader at the
head, has similar provision in her laws.
The constitution Of the slave State OF Mis-
sissippi prohibits the bringing in OF slaves
there as merchandise and gives to the
Legislature the power Of putting the same
inhibition on all importations into the State,
except in the cases Of slaves brought BY i'm
migrants after the year 1S45. | think
when a Kentuckisn only occupies the
ground taken by the venerable State Of
Virginia and the States of South Carolina
and Mississippi, be can hardly be charged
with not being PrU-slavery mun.
The resolution will show to you that
am willing tina. man shall bring slaves
with him il he comes here to reside or il his
relatives out Of the State devise them to
him that he may 90 and get them. Or. il
one Of our young men marrles in another
State, am willing that, if his wife has her
domestic slaves those with whom she is ac-
qusinied, and desires ON coming into a
foreign country 10 have around her some
person to look upon, whose face she has
seen before-l am willing that she shall
bring them. But am against the traffic
in human blood in every shape and man
Der in which it can be brought here.
think, rather than have the constitution
open on this subject, we should incorporate
this proposition in regard TO emancipation
into it. What will be the effect Of leaving
the matter openi We see it in what ha:
been the effect Of the discussions during the
last year upon the people. Every time tina
you agitste the slave question. either in thu
Legislature or during the electioneering can
vass on the stump, you weaken the bond
Of slavery, render the slave restless and in
sOlent, and eventually, by deceiving him il
bis ignorance, cause him TO suffer the los
Of life or be subjected to great cruelty
Would it not be better, then. to put To
prohibition in the constitution than to sufe
the question again 10 be agitated at th