Mr. CUSHING. This proposition covers
those of that age as well as all others.
Mr. NEGLEY. I know it does.
Mr. STIRLING. Does the gentleman sup-
pose that masters will have bound to them
children from one lo five years of age? Will
they not ask to have bound to them those
that are from fifteen to twenty, and let those
from one to five go? Is not that the princi-
ple of human nature everywhere?
Mr. NEGLEY. I think the orphans' court
will exercise a sound and humane discretion
upon this subject. The gentleman's supposi-
tion is founded upon the idea that the or-
phans' court will be predetermined to do as
much injury as possible to these emancipated
negroes. It contemplates the binding out of
these children over six years, at least. Now
a negro child at the age of twelve years, is
much more expensive to the parent or the
master than a child of one or two years.
And why? Because the child of twelve
years will eat as much as a man, and will re-
quire amost as much clothing.
I do think it is for the good of society in
these large slaveholding counties; it is for
the happiness and welfare of the negro, and
for the comfort of the master, that such a
provision as that contemplated by the sec-
tion of the gentleman from Caroline (Mr.
Todd) should be incorporated into the consti-
tution. This suddenly turning loose of im-
mense quantities of negroes, utterly unused
to, and unskilled, and uneducated in a single
means of taking care of themselves—they
will be like uncaged birds; they will not
know how to manage, they will not know
what to do. They cannot get houses to live
in during the coming winter, and they
would absolutely freeze and starve to death,
if the humanity of their masters did not pro-
vide them with food and shelter
I am decidedly in favor both of doing good
to the negro, and making some compensation
to his former owner. I am not actuated by
any ill-will or hatred towards the slaveholder ;
by no means. I have advocated the emanci-
pation of the negro upon high moral
grounds, and upon political grounds, un-
influenced by any feeling of bitterness to-
wards the slaveholder, wherever he may be,
and if I can consistently with my views of
public duty, and with what I conceive to be
for the public benefit, benefit the master also,
it will be a source of gratification to me,
rather than of disappointment and hate. I
discard any such feelings at all. And for one
I shall be very glad if they can have some
compensation for the losses to which they
will and must be necessarily subjected by the
adoption of this constitution. Is not the in-
jury they will suffer from the emancipation
of all their slaves without compensation—is
riot that sufficient? Must you add another
feather to the weight already on the camel's
back? |
Now I have pone about as far as I am in-
clined to go in that direction. And if I can,
consistently with my ideas of public duty,
do a good at the same time to the former
slaveholder,, and to the negro himself, I shall
do it with great pleasure. And therefore 1
shall vote against this amendment of the gen-
tleman from Baltimore city (Mr. Stockbridge,)
because I consider it impracticable now.
And I shall vote for the section proposed by
the gentleman from Caroline (Mr. Todd,) be-
cause I believe it will do much good. I believe
it will have a tendency to take away a little
of that bitterness that is already too prevalent
throughout this entire State. Let us try to
get back a little towards common ground.
We will have to live together in the future.
Let us attempt now to make some approxi-
mation towards living together in brother-
hood, and do each other a mutual kindness
and good when we can do so without any
sacrifice of principle.
Mr. DANIEL. I have felt very much inclined
heretofore to go for some provision of this sort;
not considering it any special system of ap-
prenticeship, but simply a binding out under
existing laws, as I believe those laws would
take hold of them, and bind them out if once
freed. And I have thought it would be
proper, where the masters were suitable per-
sons, to give them the preference. But I think
that matter is involved in a great deal of dif-
ficulty, especially if we look at the laws upon
the statute book at present, and what has been
the class of apprenticeship we have had in this
State, almost since it has been a State, And
1 am really forced to the conclusion that the
laws on the statute book are sufficient to reg-
ulate every case and matter that may arise of
this sort.
Now there are some laws upon that book
that I think we might come in conflict with,
very much to the injury of this class of peo-
ple, if we provide in the constitution in the
direct and positive terms that is now pro-
posed to be enacted here. It is proposed to
enact here that the masters in every case, if
suitable persons, shall have those children
bound to them, without consulting the moth-
er, without consulting anybody. I say that
there may be cases possibly, in which the
masters are not suitable persons, and yet it
may be such a very delicate matter for the
orphans' court to decide that, having estab-
lished in the constitution a universal law that
masters in all cases' where they are suitable
persons shall have the preference, it would
result in every case pretty much in giving
these apprentices to their masters. I shall
therefore at the proper time, offer an amend-
ment, which I think will prevent some of the
fears that have been entertained of the conse-
quences of these persons being thrown loosely
out upon society, to be supported by their
parents or others, or to get their living as
they can by improper means. I think it will |
