Port Tobacco times, and Charles County advertiser. (Port Tobacco, Md.) 1845-1898, 1870-10-21
From the Maryland Republican Of the Sth inst
ssNOT TRUE

Under the above caption, the Annapolis
Gazehe of Tuesday last, editoria,ly, and with
the assertion of having carefully examined the
proceedings of the Convention ventures the
following
NOT TRUE.
''The Maryland Republican, and other Loco
foco papers Of the Fifth Congressional Dlstrlct,
ever since the nomination of Merrick for Con-
gress, have been publishing the following par
agraph:
Judge Merrick, Democratic candidate for
Congress in the Fifth District, bids fair to carry
the negro vote away from the Republican cam
didate, from the fact of his having procured the
insertion into the present State Constitution OF
that provision admitting negro testimony in
the Courts
''Always believing that Judge Merrick was no
friend to the colored man, and that any person
who sympathized as he did with the rebellion
could ever lend his aid to anything looking to
giving the colored people their rights we have
| carefully examined the proceedings of the Con-
vention that framed the present Constitution,
and find that Mr.. Merrick's name is not only
not recorded among those who voted for the
proposition, but that he had not at that time,
qualified and taken his seat in the Convention,
being detained at home by sickness.
Con Friday, May 31st, 1867, an order was of
fered looking to the removal of the disability
| heretofore imposed on. the negros to testify in
Courts. That order was adopted, but Merrick
did not, of course, vote.
"On the following day the clause was passed,
| thus allowing the colored people to testify in
our Courts, but we do not find Mr.. Merrick vot-
ing in favor Of the proposition. In fact Mr..
Merrck was not member Of the Convention
until some time after the right to testify in
Court was given the colored people, as he never
qualified until Monday, June 10th, thus prov
ing that he was not instrumental in having in
serted into the Constitution that provision ad-
hitting negro testimony in our Courts"
The above not only misrepresents Judge
Merrick position, but is gross perversion Of
the whole record of the Convention upon this
subject.
So far from any final action being taken ON the
"3lst Nay, 1861 or on the 'Jollo'cing day, u
the vote on that day simply declared the sense
of the Convention that such a provision was
proper to be thereafter incorporated into the
Constitution. A majority of the Convention be,
lieving it to be more legitimately subject fol
Legislative action.
Sec. So, of Art of the Constitution, (by the
adoption of which, persons of color now testify
in Courts of Justice, was not adopted for taco
months after that date, and on the 23rd July,
1867, this section coming up for debate, Judge
Merrick not only aoas present, but delivered the
following speech, which we have before us from
the files of the Baltimore Gazette, and which we
believe was also published in the Sun and
american.
Mr.. Merrick said "when the laws was passed
excluding the negro from the witness box il
was in l7l3, and the condition of the negro
was very different then from what it is now. =
He was an imported savage, and was then in
ferior in intelligence to the white child. His
moral nature was of the lowest ORDER and hi!
state of antagonism to the white man made i
then necessary to exclude him. But the negro
was now very different from what he was. H'
did not hesitate to say, and without any fea
- 6lnia6f accused in sympathy with that aboli
| full that 1Kland was IN
Il