Nashville patriot. [volume] (Nashville, Tenn.) 1858-1860, 1860-01-17


gro be no longer held in servitude, and re-
main in the State. but for how long the State
does not say; but certainly the State does not
thereby give 10 him any political rights or
make him party TO the body polite, nor do
they change his status to that of reTson-
Again Mr.. Speaker it is argned that the
2Ist section Of the Bill of Rights. secures to
the free person OF color rights which we can
not disturb; that section reads: No mans po-
litical services shall be demand, d or proper
fy taken. &c. &C.. without the consent of his
representatives, or without just compensa-
ton. &c.
Sir. this section. when taken together, dis
proves tbe position assumed. 1t implies that
bis services may be taken with the consent
of Lis representatives. Whose representa-
liver? Certainly not the negros. because
he has none; then it must be that OF the
white man. for he has representative. Now
sir, You will find in TIE constitution, the
words, Person, Freeman, People, &c, but
they all mean free white men, tree white per-
sons, and free white people. and Dotfree per.
sons OF color. (See the bred Scott ease) III
the latter were embraced. then they would
have political rights. right none claim for
them.
1t is insisted and a labored argument is
made by The able Representative from David
son. Mr.. East, TO prove tfat under our Con-
stitution and laws free persons of color have
cease, that Is 10 remain among US and ac-
quire and hold property contrary 10 our
interest. will and policy of the State, and to
establish such positions many cases of the
Supreme Court are referred to. Now, sir.
none of these decisions decide the question
of sovereign power 10 Danish inhabitants 6
cause they are nuisance. Nor do they de-
eide whether or not the freedom of a negro
is omnipotent to the sovereign power, but
do hat tnav In
among us with our will and permission they
have right to sue and be sued, and be pro-
tected in their lives. liberty and property.
This is all right. they are here as tenants
at will and as long as we permit them t. re-
main, they are entitled to all implied rights
growing out of that relation, and remedial
remedies to enforce the same. But we may
revoke that will when the public good de-
mands it. When that is doue, the whole re-
lation ceases to exist.
The arguments, Mr.. Speaker, which have
been made here by the enemies of the bill
demonstrate that their premises are wrong,
some holding we have constitutional
power, others holding we have, but that there
is no necessity for this bill: and in this CON
nection | must notice the position of the
gentleman from Sumner. (Mr Bennett). He
admits that Tree negroes among us Is public
nuisance, but We have no constitutional
power to remove them. and in the next breath
be tells us that if the Government is in immi
nent danger or peril, in consequence of their
remaining among us. or from any other class
of people. white or black, the people have
right to remove them. Now sir, one part of
the gentleman's argument neutraliZes the
other. -
Mr.. Bennett explaining said. / mean
in such case the Legislature, under the Con-
stitutiOn has no power to remove such a
class, but the people by an action of their
Own may do so. Such action has been taken
by the people of Kentucky.
Mr.. Trewhitt. Then Understand the gen.
tleman to advocate the doctrine that the peo-
pie may by revolutionary movement rise up
and trample down under foot The Constitu-
tuition of our Stale. Such doctrine have
never heard advocated in Tennessee before
and pray to Heaven never to hear 1T again.
Such course, such doctrine carried into
execution would lead TO blosdsbed anarchy
and confusion. No government has ever yet
had strength or character that was in the
habit OF rising up in revolutionary spirit
and overriding her Constitution. History is
pregnant with proof of these truths. Sir,
our government is one of peace and order,
and all power lodged in the people who act
not directly in person, but through their
representatives assembled in this capitol
and through them alone can our people speak
IN legislative character. The position as
sumed by the gentleman is almost bad as
the higher law doctrine. ] pray God in his
wisdom and mercy TO avert such an evil from
our body pUlitic.
The position is further assumed under the
9Th section OF the bill Of rights, that the
words law of the land mean law binding
on each citizen alike with the free persons of
color, and if not SO framed is demonstrations
al and void. Now, sir. 10 show the falacy
of such doctrine, look at our laws taxing
4
exercising any privilege, none OF which
laws are condemned as unconstitutional, but
would be so were his position true. The
word laws OF the land means one general
and uniform in its operations and applying
alike to all persons falling within It's pro-
visions.
Now, sir, having shown AZ think that the
free person of color has brought no Inherent
common law rights here, with him and under
our Constitution and laws he is no party to
to the body polite and is only here and pro
tceted in his person and property during the
will aud pleasure OF our State, il only re-
mains To see whether or not the sovereign
power of Tennessee can use the power of
banishment, provided the public welfare de-
mand the expulsion. The enemies OF the
bill deny the power. such position certainly
cannot be maintained, il so the free persons
CT color may increase in stregth and wealth
aud power, sufficient tc assume the reins of
government, and destroy our liberties, and
the sovereign power of Tennessee must stand
by and too weak and too timid and wanting
In sovereignty to assert her rights and be
hold silently public nuisance, eat out the
very heart af the body polite and cur gov
ernment of free " hite men be come one of a
mOngral character. Such cannot be the
character of our State sovereignty Such
position is at war with national sovereignty
and every government must use such degree
of power a. will protect itself from into rnal
revolution and thrc atcned violence abroad.
IL is asserted by The iric nds of the bill that
free persons of color are public nuisance as
Class among us and being so il is the duty
OF this assembly to exercise her sovereign
power To remove it. There are too classes of
nuisances, one public nuisance and the other
private one In the latter Case a private in
di, idual may remove il peaceabiy or resort to
the courts OF the country for redress. In the
former case il no law exists for its removal.
the legislative power must.be invoked; where
law does exist the State sovereignty
through her Judiciary, acts and removes the
nuisance. In this case a legislative enact
ment il demand Il, and propose to extend
IL. The TACT OF free persons in our midst
being public nuisance is not and cannot be
seriously contreveried, and assuming such To
be the fact, aud looking TO the Important
fact that this question has been sprung by
the ptOple themselves, and they demand of
us az their Representatives, 10 pass this bill
or one embodying its principles; We would
be deielict in our duty were we to Tail 10 do
so unless Constitutional barriers ini.rpose.
Sir am forced TO believe that free negroes
among US are public nuisance, al war with
The public good, ruinOus To our private and
social relations; they mix with our slaves.
,ontaminaie their minds, deeoy them of,
cause them TO be refractory. caGss murder,
then, abduction, ARISEN, burglary aud many
other crimes 10 be committed, that otherwise
would not, and ia many county towns and
cities, they come in competition with she
white mechanic. and young men OF the coun-
t-y-who bave to rely upon their manual la
Dor for their subsistence. aud that Of their
parents in many Cases. When free persons
of color, by thet, want OF self-resprct and