Nashville union and American. [volume] (Nashville, Tenn.) 1853-1862, 1860-04-05


African race, and the very foundation Of Abolition
ism as 3 political question fais- Bat 70 c0nfne il
to this class, arc all men equal, Sc The Declare
ton Of Independence vas declaring mems political
rights-ali men Of this class have equal political
rights sHch as are enumerated and hence the doc.
trines set forth in the Declaration Of Independence
arc true, however men may be unequal in size, in
mental and moral capacities, sc. SC.
Having, Mr. Speaker, examined the status of the
negro race under and ia relation to our Declaration
Of independence, IpT0Pose noWto examine this ques-
ton under the Constitution OF the United States
The preamble Of the Constitution Of the United
States shows by whom, and for whom, ard for what
purpose this Constitution was made, s.Wo the peo
pie Of the United States, in order to form a more
perfect union, establish justice, insure domestic
tranquility provide for the common defence, pro-
mote the general welfare and secure the blessings
Of liberty, to ourselves and posterity, do Ordain
and establish tails Constitution for the United States
Of America"
Now who was 'fhe people Of the United States."
upon the very same reasoning that asserts that
freeman" in our STATE Constitution, 9Th section,
lat art, Bill Of Rights embraces free negroes
"the people Of the United States" would embrace
all Who IN the general acceptation, included Ia
the general term, people free negroes and slaves,
are both people, Ia the general and common acceE-
tation Of the term-and therefore, upon this srgu-
nert are portion Of that people by whom and /
for whom and their pOsterlty THIS constitution was
the times the position occupied by the African 4
race the manner IN which this was regarded |
ard treated by not only the people Of the Uoited
States but by the civilized world, 10 see, eOnolu-
sively tins race did constitute part of the eOple
making or for whom snd for whose posteriiy it was
made at the formation the Constitution OF the Uni
ted States many Of the States loW free we're slave
States a large number Of the delegates we're own
ers Of slaves; and, already shown, the whole
civilized world regarded the African race in
fsrior race unfit for social or political relations
with the white race aud thst the negro might just
~ and lawfully be reduced 70 slavery by and for
the benefit Of the white raoe-the very CoDstilu-
ton itself regarding slaves as property-then sir
what can be more prep0ster0us than 10 suppose
these slaves ihis thus degraded, constituted
say portion Of the people making the Constitution,
&c.; and if not constituting any portion Of the SOW
ereign people, then, u necessary consequence,
they are not embraced in the provisions OF that
Constitution. But this direct point has been re-
Gently before the Supreme Court Of the United
States most elrGbOrately discussed, and carefully
and thoroughly examined by the Court and 50 far
a question of his character can be seLtled by the
courts it has been c1nclusivey settled that the AZ
ricau race whether free or slave, are lot " eiti-
zens" in the meaning Of our Constitution are not
q portion of the political body, Constitute portion
Of I'VE, the people" or "lhe sovereign people"
and that people Of the United States," and 'oiti
/ Gems" are synonymous terms. This was in the
celebrated case OF bred Scott. This case orignat-
ed in the Circuit Court of the United States for the
] district Of Missouri This declaration, amongst
other things alleged that the plaintiff, bred Scott
was citizen Of the State Of Missouri-the defend
I ant pleaded 10 abatement in substance, that the
plaintiff bred Scott was net q citizen of the State
/ of Missouri as alleged in his declaration, because
he is q negro of African descent, sc. To this plea
! there was a demurrer. And the question directly
presented was as the rights Of free negroes uuder
Art. 4 section 2, Of the Constitution Of the Unit
/ ed States, and which is as follows:
''The citizens Of each Slate shall be entitled
ell privileges and mmunites Of citizens 10 The ses-
eral States" No case before the Court ever excited
more interest or was carefully and deliberately
/ considered Chief Justice fancy delivered the
/ opinion Of the Court, which Wss oOncurred in by
I the others Except Justices Curtis and Mclean
who gave dissenting opiniOns) the judges ALL | be-
lieve, delivering written opinions G. j. fancy in
/ delivering the opinion of the Count, says, L" The
words people Of the United States and citizens
are synonymous terms and mean the same thing.
They both describe the political body, WIN sccOr-
ding to Republican institutions, form the Sow
! reigny. and who hold the power and conduct the
Government through their representatives.. They
are what we Familiarity call the Sovereign people
and every citizen 10 Of this people, aud
stiJuent member Of this Sovereignty. The question
before u.s. Is whether the class Of persons described
in the plea in abatement compose portion cf tks
people, End are constituent members Of the SoyeT-
eiguty. We think they are not, that they were not
! included. and were not intended to be included,
under the word citizens in the Constitution, and
can therefore claim Of the rights and privileges
which that instrument provides for and secures to
citizens Of the United States" In support Of this
opinion, this learned Judge refers to case in Ken
lucky in 1922, 10 The case Of Claiborne VS.. The
State Of Tennessee, Megs Reports 33l to The opin-
iOi Of the Attorney General Of the United States
Of the Secretary Of State, and some other cases in
the Supreme Court OF the United States. In this
lido ~
maintains that free negroes citizens Of the Uni.
ted States under the Constitution and relies great.
ly on the case Of " the State Manuel 4 Dew aud
Bat. y C. Reports" Senators will bear 10 mind
this is the very ndsntical authority 50 much relied
on by Senators to show the bill now under consider
alton IS unconstitutional and if Senators will take
the trouble examine this opinion of Judge Curtis
they will hud 10 say the least Of il, great SINH
iarity between the reasons and arguments Of Judge
Curtis, and the arguments Of Senators OF this floor
Bat without taking up the time Of the Senate 10
pursue this branch Of the subject further, when
look to the history Of the times, the condition
of the African race; to the action Of the colonies
to the Declaration Of independence, the articles
Of Confederation, the legislation of the various
States to the formation Of the Constitution of
the United States, the various actions and opinions
of the various officers and departments Of the Gov
erHnent and sdjudicstions Of the Courts; it is in
controveriibly true that the african race are not
included in the ERIN 81 men in the Declaration Of
Independence not nc uded in the terms people
&c, g.. in the Federal Constitution, constitute no
part Of the Sovereign people, no part Of the body
polite; and are not entitled TO the various pTOvis-
ions in The Constitution Of the United States made
for the protection Of the Sovereign people citizens
New, having, &c 7 think, cOnclusively shown the
status Of the African race under the Government, l
come TO consider it under the Constitution of the
State Of Tennessee. 1t is argued thai the bill for
eKpe.ling the free negroes from the State is q viola
ton os Arl. !, Sec. 8, Of the Constitution of Ten
nessee, which is follows: THAT no free man
shall be taken or imprisoned, or djsseized Of his
freehold, liberties or privileges or oUtlawcd,
lied, or in any manner destroyed, or deprived #
his life, liberty property, but by the judgment Of
his peers, or the law Of the land" Also Art /.
Sec Il, which provides, d" that freeman shall
he pat TO answer any criminal charge, out by pre-
sentiment, indictment or Impeachment" Also Art.
/, Sec II, which declares, that laws made for
the punishment Of acts committed previous to the
existence Of such laws, and by them declared crimi
nal, are contrary to the principles of free govern
meut wherefore posi- tOcO laws shall be pass
ed Also, the Goth sec Of the Declaration Of
Rights, which declares that retrosp e9tive law,
OF law imParing the obligation Of contracts, shall
be passed"
and now, doany Of these provisions embrace free
negroes Most clearly they DO rot, and in the ar
gumeBt Of this question: ! shall mere particularly
ocn6ue myself to The first, as the same argument
will pretty much apply to all.
Inc uIcl bOusblluLlOu OF IL QuesStG was made IN
1896 and was made by " We the people" &C, sc.
Now by what people. portion Of verysovereign
people who macs the COnstitutiOn Of the United
States portion Of hat very people who declared
their independence from Great Britain who MAIN
tanned that independence; who formed an inIe-
Tondent government and OF whom Chief Justice
fancy in the cuSe already referred TO, says
the African race constituted no portion, and there
fore, not protected by the provisions of The Federal
Constitution; then does IL not follow beyond g1es
sion. that here being in the old consti uon DO ex
press provisions for the protection Of free negroes.
that they not entitled ID the protection of its
provisions. IL is argued, thai under the Old consti
tuition Of North Carolina which l nave not before |
me, and deem unnecessary 10 notice, aud under /
the old constitution of Tennessee, free negroes we're
allowed to vote, 10 muster and 10 exercise many |
other privileges. and therefore the argument seems
10 be made, they wers under these constitutions Sc
cured in these rights. 10 is true, 81 an early day /
IN North Carolina sad in Tennessee, the proportion
OF free negroes being very small, being principally
those who had been emsucipStId for meritorious
services, they by mere permission enjoyed many
privileges that belonged TO citizens but it will not
he pretended they we're citizens, or entitled 20 the