Indiana State sentinel. [volume] (Indianapolis) 1841-1853, 1850-11-28
INDIANAPOLIS THURSDAY, NOVEMBER 28, 1850.

notification; but, so help him God, he would take the
greatest pleasure giving up his property under that
law, before he would be compelled to. become slave
catcher, under its provisions The question of prohb
tng negroesfrom coming the State agitated
amongst bis constituents but the question Of allowing
negroes the right of suffrage agitated.
Mr.. NEWMAN made a Constitutional argument, and
took the ground that under the Constitution of the Uni
ted States, negroes citizens, and consequently
prohibitory laws could not be enacted He said, as
of policy and Justice should provide means of
sending the negro back Africa making other
provision, before we should think of prohibory laws
and in conclusion, he sad that instead of prohbtory
laws, if measure were brought forward, making an
annual appropriation of $4,000 for Transporting the
black population Africa he would take the response
blity of voting for it.
Mr. TAevE opposed to referring the subject to
committee as he believed time enough had already been
occupied. If amendments were necessary, they could
as well be made in Convention. as by acommittee.
Mr. STEELE was in favor of committing. He believ-
ed with the gentleman from Marion, (Mr. Morrison,)
that the people of Indiana demanded prohibition of the
people of color from coming the State, and he
willing to for it but he could not vote for the other
oTaucu pfOnlDltn2 tneln rum nOuing property. ne
therefore hoped that would be REFERRED and he prefer
red that it should be referred without Instructions
At late hour the Convention adjourned.
WEDNESDAY, November 20, 1S5O.-The Convention
was opened by prayer by the Rev. Mr.. Steele.
The Convention resumed the consideration of the Sec
ton prohibiting negroes from coming nto and settling
in this State and prohibiting them from holding PROPERTY
Mr.. BLYTHE having the floor, proceeded with Consti-
tuonal argument in defence Of the prohibition contend
ed for in the section He read decision of the Supreme
Court of the United States which he said fully sustained
the right to excludethe Supreme Court having taken
the position many words, that State has the right
in selrdeferce exclude paupers insane persons and
free negroes This prncple-the principle Of self
delencc-he said, which all men every day. He
said there were decisions in Connecticut Tennessee,
Arkansas, Kentucky and other States the point All
the authorities went to sustain the position that the
gro, far citizenship is concerned is only in
sricted Anegro in New York Massachusetts
has certain rights that are denied here In New York
negro vote; but when he here that right is
denied. If we can deny him that right, why may we
not deny him othersl The white man from New York
be denied this privilege except under the decision
OF the Supreme Court of the United States which gives
the right, in sefdefence, exclude paupers. And, il
we can exclude white paupers who have all the priv
leges of frcemen, why may exclude negroes who
are far greater evil to the body polite. he called
gentlemen, in leaving the Constitutional question: either
to elevate the negro the position of equal by per-
hitting him to vote and hold Office or 90 with him fol
his exclusion from the State That humanity and phi
anthropy. which would cndeavor elevate the negro
door &c,
solemn mockery He believed that Providence never
designed amalgamaton of the two races, and there
fore he for their exclusion. The half hour occupied
by Mr. Blythe, exhibited great legal research and ab
ty as logician.
i MIR. BAscoaI in favor of committing and he warn
ed gentlemen not to adopt the section, as it is for il
would endanger the Constitution when it comes before
the people for confirmation.
Mr.. MuRRAY could not relinquish great principle o
human rights for matter of expediency. Thou
sands of foreign paupers many Of them stained witt
crimes, landing shores, and yet did not
send them back. Then why exclude the negro! HI
was denied many privileges and would continue to be
denied them, and even if portion of worst popula
tion should amalgamae with the blacks, the evil would
be to them He could go for exclusion under
the great principles of human freedom.
Mr. NILES denied the Constitutional argument of til,
gentleman from yanderburgh (NIr Bythe). He contend
de that the decision brought forward alluded to foreign
paupers. He contended that the Constitution of Uni
ted States mperatvey prohibited the adoption Of the
ton He said there kinds of citizens-one
having all rights and the other those of limited
character He alluded to the fact that large portion
of citizens. having all other rights exclude,
from the Office Of President Of tho United States in con
sequence of having been born in foreign countries
There restrictions with regard to age, Sc. Their
was nothing in the Constitution of the United State
that would exclude man from any rights on o
color. In Massachusetts negroes may hold any o1ic
but Governor; but in coming here may restrict then
from voting, for any number of years. but
cude them from coming to the State. We might just
well endeavor exclude Mllard Fillmore from comm.
the State by name to adopt the section under
sderaton, FAR as Constitutional right is concerned
The issue was excluding citizen of Massachu
! setts, whether he be not7 not whether he b.
? black or white.
Mr.. HENDRICKS, before proceeding to Constitutions
argument of the question: stated that he would oppos
the last branch OF the section which prohibited
here, from holding property But the Constitution
al objections urged against prohibiting negroes from
ing to the State made it necessary to investigate tn
question in this point of view For if unconstitutional
the matter once end He believed the doctrine
here contended for would at destroy State Sover
eighty and would give Massachusetts and other State
control laws. This very State sovereignty ha
enabled Massachusetts give to the negro the right
suffrage, denied to him in other States. 1t was ques
hon between the free and the slave States The slav
States were adopting provisions, whereby they wshe
to cast upon the free States all their manumtted an