Semi-weekly Camden journal. [volume] (Camden, South-Carolina) 1851-1852, 1851-12-19
REPORT.

from George B. Mathew, Esq; her Britain
mic Maiestys Consul for the States OF Noftn
.nd south Carolina relative to the law OF
this State, to prevent free negroes ana other
arsons Of color from entering into it. have
bod the same under consideration, and ask
leave respectfully to submit the following
Report: ..,h..ho ho.
The grounds Of complaint suggested by her
Maiesty's Consul, against the law III ques'''"'
are substantially as follows:
1st That it takes from under the protectlon
of the British flag, and imprisons III the COM
mon tails until the vessels in which they come
arc ready to depart: class OF her MaIestys
Subjects entering into the ports of South "a
rolna under the security Of the treaty OF com,
merce between her Majesty and the cnl5ea I!
States, in pursuit of lawful commerce or II, us
tress thereby violating one OF the provisions o'
the treaty, which is the supreme Ill" u '"'
land. ,l,,;, and
inequality upon her Majesty's west inola Iol. n
onies. which mainly depend for their suPPIles
otlumher. provisions and other material artleies'
mon their trade with the United States, when
;s carried on in small vessels, chiefly manned
bv colcred crews, aud fer which the ports OF
North and South Carolina are especially suit
able 1 mi,
I'd That il conflicts with the general prln'
c;nlo Of International law. that police or mum,
cipal regulations, co.existcntw with treaties s""u'u
extend to foreigners the same rcstrlctIohs' anu
no more, which are applied to natives OF SUD-
iects of the same class or calling,
The first article of the treaty declares, that
"Tbere shall be between the territories OF tn"
United States of America, and all Tue 'e'l'.o'
ries of her Britannia Majesty, in Europe re-
ciprocal liberty Of commerce. Inc 't'iaDi''".s L
of the two countries respectively sn'li n've
liberty, freely and securely, to come WIN 'nels
ships and cargoes to all such places por's anu
rivers. in the territories aforesaid, to whch
q other foreigners are permitted to come ana 10
remain and reside in any part Of the said terri
tories respectively; also to hire and occupy
qbouses and warehouses, for the purposes OF
their commerce; and generally the merchants IS
and traders of each nation respectively snail
enioy the most complete protection ana securl-
ty for their commerce, but subject always 10 Tie
laws and statutes Of the Two countries respec-
lively" e,,..
This is, no doubt, the provision OF the treaty
with which our law is supposed to DE at '"r'-
ance. l h..
Such general language as is here used mas
never been, nor can it be, justly understood to
deprive the contracting parties oil inc i's"1 ~
exclude, from their respective territories any
class of persons who might be burdensome TO
the public, or dangerous to the health or 10 INC
peace, good order and security OF the comnu,
nity. Laws to provide against the ingress OF
persons laboring under contagious or infectious
diseases, or coming from places where such
diseases prevail, and laws for the exclusion OF
foreign paupers and convicts. and persons "'
vicious character, are almost universal anu IRE
not deemed inconsistent with the most llberai
treaties of reciprocal commerce. our law
AGAINST the entrance Of free persons OF color
into the State falls strictly within the principle
Of these executions. OF the degree of neces-
s;tv for the enactment Of such laws, and their
fitness for the purposes for which they were IN
tended, each government must judge for ltseli.
Tn this as in all other matters concerning the
execution of treaties, the contracting parlles
are bound to the observance OF good ialth. H.
under the pretext of excluding dangerous
class of persons, one party should exclude
material portion of the subjects Of the other,
usually eHlpOSeu ii Oo"iai@'NS e ~
SO as seriously to obstruct or embarrass the IN
lercourse which the treaty was intended to
sanction and secure, this would be fraud up.
on the treaty, and might justly be complained
of as such. But no such objection can be made
to the law in question. 1t is certainly very tar
from being unreasonable or surprising that free
persons of color coming from abroad into this
State, should be deemed dangerous class OF
persons, and dealt with accordingly. And they
constitute so inconsderable portion OF the
subjects of the British empire, that their exclu'
sion cannot occasion any serious inconvenience
to the commerce carried on in British vessels
with the ports Of South Carolina. Nor can 1t
be said, with due regard to the proper sense
of the words, that persons of this class, coming
into our ports in British vessels, are taken from
under the protection Of the British flag. On
the high seas, which are common to all nations,
and not subject to the jurisdiction of any one,
a ship and the persons on board of her are un.
der the protection of the nation to which she
belongs, and the national flag is the emblem OF
this protecting power. But there is no prlncl-
pe of international law which carries the Al.
thority of one nation represented by its flag
within the territorial limits ofanother Foreign
ships and their crews in the ports of South Ca
rolna are, therefore, not under the protection
of their own national flag, bat subject to the