Year: 1865

negro race, and never having heretofore


entertained the idea of the possibility o.
permitting black man to testify in the


count is against a white man, cannot read
liz acquiesce in the policy or justice o.


departing from those views, under the


new era which has dawned upon the


country. This opposition to negro testi


mony is quite natural, and should strike


no one with surprise. But are we to be


governed by mere prejudice in the settle


ment of questions like this? Ought we


not, rather, to subdue our feelings, and


adopt course Of sound policy and
justice?


Many persons seem not to have real
lied the altered social condition of the


black race of the South. Once, servile


and abject slaves, they are now fraemen;


made free by the astounding events OF


the late war, and recognized as freemen
| oy the fundamental law of Mississippi. A


state of freedom in man, whatever may be


his color, gives birth to certain rights as


the necessary offspring of liberty.


Amongst the rights thus created, the
privilege of testifying in court is undeni-


able. And the exercise of this right, reg


ulated, of course, by the general laws of
the land, is necessary in order to give


security to the persons and property of


freedmen.


1t will not do to argue that negroes are
an inferior race; that, as a mass, they are
deficient in integrity; that their testimony
is not reliable; that, as witnesses, they
will, as a general rule, be perjurers. All
this is granted. And yet, what harm can
result to any one from the admission of
such evidence? If group of such wit
nesses conspired to establish falsehood,
how easy will it be for searching cross
examination, under the rule" to demon
strate such falsehood. Being inferior,
intellectually, and unaceustomed to judi
cial proceedings, it will be easy to prove
a conspiracy to establish a falsehood,
when such conspiracy exists. The negro
is not less intelligent than the serfs of
Russia; he is not more degraded than
they. The negro has as much moral ele
vation as certain depressed classes in
England and Ireland, all of whom are
witnesses, admitted as such in all the
courts of those countries.


The idea with many seems to be that
we are settling in Mississippi, question
as to the aoeigh of evidence, and that
negro testimony, if admitted, must be
considered, and must influence the action
of courts and iuries. The question is
one of mere missibility-nothing more.
When admitted, negro testimony is for
the consideration of court and juries. 1t
may have some weight or none, just as
the judicial tribunals may consider just
and proper For example, one reliable,
truthful white witness may give his YER
sion of transaction. Opposed to lis
single voice, are fifty negroes. Does it
follow tl4~t the bioo.= Titnreoeo nnuet pre-
vail? By no means. The fifty false wit
nesses may be disregarded, and the
cause decided by the statement of the
single white witness. The more numer-
Gus perjurious witnesses, the easier does
it become to demonstrate their falsehood


Negro testimony, if admitted, would
go before .juries and courts composed of
southern whitemen. Is there any danger
that they would give the evidence too
much weight? | apprehend the danger
would be in the opposite direction.


Now, as we are not likely to lose any
thing by admitting negro testimony,
except mere sacrifice of our prejudices,
let us enquire, what are we to gain by it ?


We secure representation in the coun-
ellis of the nation. We checkmate the
insane clamors of northern radicalism,
by giving an earnest of our disposition to
act justly and conform to the new order
of affairs. We strengthen the national
Democratic party, at the
head of which stands the Presid 4nt of
the United States. We set at rest a |
vexed question. We inspire the negro
himself with feelings of qualification, and |
make him feel that the chain of slavery |
is indeed Iemoved and that those who |
were his masters, have become his |
in the new relations existing |
between them.


AS as a sheer act of justice to freedmen, |
their evidence ought to be admitted. |
How else can they have any security of
person or property? Deny them the |
right, and what becomes of the mandate
OF the revised constitution, addressed to
the Legislature, to provide for the pro-
tection and security of the person and |
property of the freedmen of the State?"


No man is worthy of the name of states
man, who is incapable of subduing his
and boldly pursuing that liz
Of policy which seems best calculated to
promote the present and future prosperi-
" and glory of the Government. No
nan is worthy of having voice in the
councils of a State, who is so deficient in
elevated moral courage, that he trembles
With nervous dread at the apprehension
hat his 'recordS" may not be 'popuEQr"
n some isolated county of the State.
That man who has no adequate concep-
ion of the great revolution which has
ust transpired in the political, social and
Industrial status of the country, and who
las not the wisdom to conform himself
c the new era, but clings frantically to
he dead past and its dead associations,
annot participate in governmental action,
Without exerting an influence, so far as