one; but I do not think It is absolutely ne-
cessary to protect their rights; for although
there are free negroes in this State, have been
and will continue to be, whether the general
system of emancipation is adopted or not)
those ) negroes are bound by the laws of the
State, and those that become free, will neces-
sarily come under the same regulations and
laws that bind those already free. Therefore
I shall oppose any amendment or alteration
in the report of the committee on the bill of
rights, as it is. now before the Convention, in
this respect. I will vote against the amend-
ment.
Mr. CLARKE. A word merely in reference
to the provisions in the bill of Mr. Jacobs'. My
own construction was that the Legislature pos-
sessed no constitutional power to enslave the
free colored population; that the word "dis-
position" did not give the Legislature the pow-
er to enslave them but to dispose of them,
preserving them as free colored population.
I thought it was an unconstitutional exercise
of power for the Legislature to do any such
thing; and when the law which would have
enslaved them was voted on in our county,
I believe it got scarcely any votes. I never
heard, in our section of the country, of any
one's advocating either the constitutionality
or the expediency of the bill. Therefore I do
not suppose, so far as I am concerned, that
this clause which I offer as an amendment,
is open to that construction. It is very plain
that as Mr. Lincoln used the term " dispose"
in relation to this class of people, he does not
regard it in that light at all.
Mr. STIRLING. I do not recollect whether
Mr. Lincoln ever used the word "dispose"
in that connection; but if he did, he evident-
ly meant to dispose of them consistently with
such and such provisions. But the language
of the amendment gives to the Legislature
the power to dispose of them according to
their judgment and discretion.
Mr. CLARKE, it is "as they may deem
necessary." I regard the " disposition" as
qualified by the fact that they must remain
"tree colored population." The Legislature
can only exercise power over them as free
colored population.
One word more with reference to this pro-
viso, It did not exist in the old Constitution
of 1776, because there were very few free ne-
groes at that time. That population increased,
and it became necessary when the Constitu-
tion of 1850 was adopted, ;to put that class
in. A still greater necessity will exist when
you largely augment the number of the free
colored population by emancipating the ne-
groes, if it should be done. So much for the
necessity of a provision.
With respect to the power of the Legisla-
ture to reduce them to slavery, it is proposed
to incorporate into the bill of rights, this
article:
Art. 23. That hereafter, in this State, there |
shall be neither slavery, nor involuntary serv-
itude except in punishment of crime whereof
the party shall have been duly convicted;
and all persons held to service or labor as
slaves are hereby declared free,
If that is adopted, no lawyer in the world
will say that with such an article in the Con-
stitution, the Legislature would still have
power to reduce the free colored population
to a state of slavery.
Mr. STIRLING. I do not pretend to say
that. I only say that under the Constitution
of 1850 the Legislature would have that
power; and, after we have wiped out the
thing, it is inconsistent to put it back into
the Constitution.
Mr. CLARKE, I understand the gentleman
to argue that the adoption of this clause into
the Constitution would enable the Legislature
to enslave the free colored population under
this Constitution. I did not think it would;
and, if the gentleman admits that, the whole
force of his argument is destroyed. But it
does give the Legislature the power of colo-
nization, which the gentleman says, if you
do not put this in, would be denied to the
Legislature—compulsory colonization. Now
I desire that the Legislature should have such
a power at any rate. I do not pretend to say
that I would be in favor of compulsory colo-
nization now; but contingencies may arise;
and I do not wish to tie up the Legislature in
that respect. I wish this clause inserted with
that very view. If you do not put it in,
you declare to-day that no free negro shall
be colonized from the State of Maryland un-
less he chooses to go away voluntarily.
Mr. JONES, of Somerset. I would like to
inquire of the gentleman of Baltimore city,
(Mr. Stirling,) whether, if this provision is
not added to the article as proposed, the Leg-
islature of Maryland will have the same
power and authority over the free colored pop-
ulation of this State that General Banks exer-
cises in Louisiana over the free colored popu-
lation there, under the present proclamation
of emancipation. If it will be construed
that the Legislature will have the same power,
I should not object to the phraseology that
is used. But I believe it would not impair
the force of the article to add this to it, be-
cause it would only make it more clear. In-
stead of the 80,000 free negroes we now have
in the State to regulate, there will be under
the emancipation policy 180,000 or 190,000. If
the experience which Genera] Banks found in
Louisiana after a few months trial, should
be found to apply to Maryland, upon an ex-.
periment with that class of population exist-
ing in large numbers, without any constraint
or regulation, that they would not work,
that they would be employed by nobody ex-
cept in fitful and occasional periods, a day or
two perhaps in the week, or a few hours in
the day, so that they become an intolerable
nuisance and burden upon the community, |
