ard (Mr. Sands.) Those who heard the gen-
tleman's interpretation of the orphans' court
law yesterday, can very well appreciate his
remarks upon my consistency. If any gen-
tleman in this house will take the pains to
read my remarks, or shall have the curiosity
to do so, he may take them from beginning to
end, and if he will find a solitary inconsisten-
cy between the remarks upon the pages of
these debates and those which I made this
morning, I will yield that I have been incon-
sistent.
Inconsistent in what? Have I changed my
views as an unconditional emancipationists?
I say not, I occupy the same position
I did when my constituents sent me here.
They sent me here as an emancipationist; and
when I return to them I shall tell them ex-
actly what I have done; and if I cannot vin-
dicate myself before my constituents, it is for
them to censure me for not having conformed
to their will. I occupy now the same ground
precisely that I have from the time they sent
me here. In voting, as I conceive, to ameli-
orate the condition of this class by indenting
them for a limited period, which at most cannot
be more than ten or twelve years, I think I
violate no principle contained in the bill of
rights, or upon which I was elected to this
convention.
As I observed before, the question of ap-
prenticeship was not an issue in my county,
I am unprepared to point lo a single individ-
ual who ever mentioned the subject to me. I
came here perfectly untrammeled so far as
that question is concerned. The only and
the absorbing question before them was the
question of emancipation. It has been upon
our statute books from the earliest history of
our State that apprenticeship ought to exist.
White apprentices are bound out annually,
monthly, daily, in the various counties of the
State. The law limits the treatment of them
by their masters; and it is the duty of the
masters to provide for educating them in cer-
tain branches. From the negro that privilege
has been withheld. That seems to be the pol-
icy of the State; for what purpose I am not
prepared to say. Nevertheless the provisions
of law seem to indicate that that was the
policy, I feel no disposition at this time to
invade upon that policy. If the condition of
the minor negroes can be improved by this
system, I think it is our duty to do it. I
think it is a benevolent duty. As their ben-
efactors we ought to do it.
What hardship does it impose upon their
parents, their father and mother? They are
disencumbered of their board, maintenance,
clothing, and of all care and solicitude in the
matter. It is placed in other hands. The
adult can go forth in the world and improve
his own condition, and accumulate means,
and is not subject to the incumbrance which
would be otherwise imposed upon him of
rearing up his minor children to their man- |
hood. I am entirely satisfied in my own
mind that it is a benevolent duty we owe to
this class of people without in any degree
inflinging upon their rights.
Mr. RIDGELY As I shall vote for this
proposition with some modification which 1
shall propose, when an opportunity is offered,
modified so as to put it under the theory
which I understand the gentleman from Caro-
line (Mr. Todd) proposes to occupy, that is,
precisely the theory of the existing laws of
the State in relation to free negroes, I take
this opportunity to say a word in explanation
of the vote which I shall give.
A proposition which appears to me to be a
very simple one has been made to occupy a
character and position entirely different from
its purpose; and I hope it has not been made
to occupy such a position for the purpose
merely of its defeat; but that gentlemen who
have given that definition of it have come to
the honest judgment that such was the mean-
ing of the proposition. But it means anything
else in the world, according to my interpreta-
tion of it, than that which the gentleman
from Baltimore city (Mr. Stockbridge and
Mr. Stirling) have given to it.
This is no proposition to enslave a free
man; and it requires a most extraordinary
stretch of imagination, in my judgment, for
any mind to reach any such conclusion, or to
engraft any such interpretation upon the
proposition. What is the proposition? If it
bad read thus, that the jurisdiction of the or-
phans' court touching free negroes and mulat-
toes, as now exercised by law, or as hereafter
may be prescribed by law, shall be so exten-
ded as to authorize them to give the prefer-
ence in apprenticing such negroes and mulat-
toes, to their former masters, the whole prop-
osition would have been comprehended. That
is all it means. It means nothing more and
nettling less. In the exercise of the present
jurisdiction, of the power now conferred by
law, over free negroe's and mulattoes, the
orphans' court shall be required to give a pre-
ference to the masters, and so indent these
free negroes or mulattoes, if they believe them
to be competent persons to hold such rela-
tions to them. It means nothing more and
nothing less.
This ghost of slavery that has been in-
voked—1 will not say invoked for the pur-
pose of killing this proposition—has the effect
of intimidating those who from convictions of
duty are seeking to emancipate the enslaved
race in this State. The orphans' court have
the right now to bind over free negroes and
mulattoes in this State; that is vagrants,
any class of persons who are not capable of
self-support. When your constitution takes
effect, and emancipation becomes a law by the
ratification of the people of the State, these
people now slaves will all be. free negroes and
mulattoes. The laws of your State will |
