The daily union. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1845-1857, 1851-09-27

MOI euizsns and they reversed in this respect the sol
emn decision OF the Supreme Court The eolofed popu
idton would 10 be clearly embraced within the
principle OF the decision Chief Justice Daggett. OF the
supreme court OF Connecticut decided in Terms 70 The
proceedings against Prudence Crande that free blacks
were MOI citizens within the meaning OF The Term as It
as used IN The constitution In Virginia The same de
Ssoh was made; and in Tennessee, IN the case OF the
o'ale against Claiborne, il distinctly held that iee
negroes are not IN ANY OF the States entitled TO all the pns
reyes and mmunlties OF citizens, and that state may
cohstuionay prohibit free persons OF color iron
moving into the Slate 10 reside therein" 10 ls4I the
Attorney General OF the United States gave his official
opinion that free blacks not citizens within the in
'eneoh OF The act relating 10 the coasting trade
these decisions correct, the question is at an end
ol an admit that The rgh, South Carolina 10 exclude
Tree negroes is perfect if they do not within The
designation OF citizens, on whom the privileges and i'm
mhhi'les OF that provision conferred That they
correct must be assumed against the speculative
opinions oil the Albany Regsle and until they
'hfown by courts OF higher authority That they will be
uVefhfo"n cannot be expected, while the Supreme
eoan OF the United States is constituted as al present
but what are the privileges and mmunities OF the Tree
"egtoes IN The several States that make il imperative
on oouih Carolina to open her doors 10 them Connec
ucut passed statute in 1885, authorizing any coored
person who shou come there to be instructed TO be
moved " under the act for The admission and settlement
OF inhabitants" In 1907 Ohio passed act bidding
ne settlement OF negro within her limits, unless he
give pond IN The penalty OF $500. with two
es, conditioned that he will behave and support himself
Indiana in 1898, Michigan in 1927, and Illinois long pre-.
Wously adopted the same policy
New York in 1916 refused, by large majority OF yo-
ers to confer on negroes the elective franchise Massa-
chusels IN 1905 IN 1855, and IN 1885, declared that
White person should marry negro, Indian mulao.
Illinois declared all such marriages void and that the
persons married should be liable be whipped fined
and imprisoned The supreme OF Pennsy lvania, in
1897 decided that negroes and muattoes not entitled
10 vote, although the privilege conferred citizens
In many Of the States they not allowed to be witnesses
against whites and the disabilities some of them are
more severe than those have mentioned.
lhese disabilities, put upon The coloed in most Of
me Staes OF this Union, show clearly that they gene
rally estimated as not being cilzensa designation thai
belongs to our republican eemen. The laws which thus
indicate the State view OF the civil position and rights o.
the colored race are many of them based the san
prime pie which hes at The foundation OF the law OF South
Carolina whose constullonality is questioned They
constitute an important legislative Interpretation of tn,
constitution, in fall harmony with the decisions have
referred TO- Together heir weight OF authority viii bt
deemed conclusive by al those who pay respect TO decs
ions made by competent tribunals TIE Albany Reg'ste
regrets that what IL calls respectable paper d. t
journal 0! Commerce should dispute the citizenship 0
The coored race, and Their right to into South Caro!n
among the combusb.e materials of her slave population
We erteain not only regret bn! surprise that the Aban
Register should contend that yuih Carolina is poerles
To p.even such ncursions and hal her population
not exercise vigilance necessary of their own ptesefya
/ ton.