Nashville patriot. [volume] (Nashville, Tenn.) 1858-1860, 1859-12-19
Constftutionaiisy of the Proposed
Free Negro RSII


regard TO measure now before your House
affecting free persons of color in this State
OF the justice, policy or humanity of this
measure | decline 20 give any opinion. OF
its constitutionality will briefly state my
opinion. The substance of this measure is
that all the adult ''free negroes in this State
who shall not have left it permanently by the
lst day of May, 1861, shall be sold into sla-
very, with certain provisions in regard to
minors, which it is unnecessary to mention.
The free negroes" in this State who are
lawfully here taud of such alone / speak, by
long course Of legislation, partly direct and
partly in recognition have become possessed
of certain rights. These rights have been
repeatedly recognized by our highest court
These laws and decisions are so numerous
that need not refer TO Them. No one,
presume, will deny that '.frce negroes" pos
sess such rights as can be enforced in a court
of justice as the law now stands. Truly they
are not citizens. nor are they freemen in the
sense of the Constitution, nor do the prCvi-
sions in the Constitution in regard to'snch
persons apply to free negroes. Free negroes
are nowhere mentioned in the Constitution
of Tennessee, except in Article 4th, where
they are exempt, from military duty in time
of peace and poll tax, nor are any specific
guarantees given in their behalf. Are the
rights then which they possess guaranteed by
the Constitution?
Two of these rights are, 1t. A right to
freedom from the control of any individual
master; ID. A right TO hold property, real
and personal. That these are subsisting and
perfect rights has been evinced times without
number by the decisions of our court, and
that the courts would now sustain them if
infringcd by an individual no one can doubt.
They are rights without restriction or quail
Gcation as to residence or otherwise. They
are grqnts by the State without reservation.
Now is not II suhsisting, perfect right, granted
by the State without reservation, under the
protection both of the Constitution of Ten
nessce and that of the United States. Is it
not vested right. and would not a law i'm
pinging it, be in the face of the provisions in
regal to retrospective laws. and laws inn
pairing the obligation of contracts? 1t is
true, however, that by the right Of eminent
domain the State may require tire services, or
take the property, of an individual, but this
can be done only upon compensation. The
bill in your House provides no compensation
and in its very nature rcpels such an idea
The deprivation of freedom cannot be com
pensated, nor if it could, can a slave receive
or hold such compensation.
Now, though these persons are not frecmen
in the sense of the Constitution, nor citizens,
yet they are human beings. and however
otherwise they may be uamcd, whether So
journers or aliens, they are capable of having
rights and accepting grants. They do not
stand upon the platform Of the brute crea-
ton, in regard to which man may owe duties
and have obligations, but which cannot
claim rights or assert privileges.
1t may he said however. that the hill does
not propose to deprive them of either their
liberty or their property, if they will remove
from the State. / answer. the grant of free
dom was without restriction, to many of
those who aIe now here, as to residence, that
the grant was general and that it is now too
late TO attempt to impose restriction. As
to those who are here under restrictions or
contrary to law, have not now any thing TO
say.
Some members may suppose however that
though they have not the right directly to
cxpel flee negroes nor directly to deprive
them of freedom yet that the loss Of freedom
and property may lie imposed as a penalty
upon them for failure TO exile themselves
This would be in other words, to make that
a crime which is now an existing legal fact
and right. and this il Is presumed. has never
yet bccn done in any country, whether with
or without written constitution where law
and not the will OF depot prevailed. The
ostracism of Athens comes the nearest to It
and that was part Of the law of the land.
The idea that such n measure as that before
imagine, from confusion of She right Of
eminent domain by a State. with another
thing. sometimes called estate Necessity
This last has been frequently called The
Tyrant's plea do not 50 characterize it,
but certainly it is revolutionary resort, and
not constitutional one; with it as a Legis-
lnturc you have nothing to do. The powers
of a Legislature are derived from the people
under the Constitution, and are subordinate
to the latter-whatcver is done in the excr
else of the right of Eminent Domain under
the Constitution need not be defended under
the plea of State Necessity whatever is
done beyond the Consultation is revolu-
tionary. A Legislature has no more au-
thority TO dccde upon such State necessity
than Vigilance Committee. or any other
voluntary assemblage of citizens.
Again, might ask the question, have not
free persons of color. a right TO live some
where! II they have not a right to live where
they are born and where. at the time they
are born. there is no law TO prohibit them
from living. where else have they n right to
live? All will agree that any ether State
may prohibit them from coming into it, and
this we have In fact done. Ohio and New
York may refuse to receive them, Canada
NAV shut her doors, aad even the King ot
Dahomey might not consider them an-nccep-
table present Iapprchend that a man b;ra
free in land where no prohibition exi-ts at
his birth against bis residing. has an inhe- ent
right H. live there Of which he cannot lie de-
priyrd except By revolutionary measure.
have thus presented my views Of the
measure bciore yonr House above referred 10
in It's constitutional aspect; from which yon
will PERCEIVE that deem Il uneons,isuiiqnal.
| have not referred to authorities simply bc-
cause the hooks are full o. them and they all
look one way. The case of the Stale against
Jack Claiborne. 10 Meigs' Reports, has n
thing to do With this question; IL merely de-
Ii. IL :. a.. na..r., Il moi a ..iiirnt, and