exist as a question of properly, if not as a
very valuable species of property. The
slaveholders have rights, rights of property
recognized by the Constitution of the United
States, by the Constitution and laws of the
State, awl rights which, while they may be
torn from them, I hope they will never by
their assent yield except upon terms honor-
able to themselves and consistent with
their dignity as free American citizens.
They cannot be deprived of these rights of
property without compensation, except in
violation of all those principles which are
the basis or foundation of right of property
in lands, merchandise and securities, public
and private.
The first and fundamental principle
therefore, Mr. president, in dealing with
this question, is the recognition of the fact
that the master has a property not in tile
soul of his slave, for this is immortal and
spiritual—not as property in man, but in
the right too the labor of his slave—
just as the northern man who holds
an apprentice has property in the labor of
his apprentice fur so many years, five) ten,
twenty, or all the days of his life, the prin-
ciple ill both cases being the same. I will
not insult the intelligence of this Conven-
tion by arguing a question so universally
admitted until now. This right was recog-
nized by the common law of England to
which the citizens of this State are entitled,
by the Constitution of the United States,
by the laws of Congress, by decisions of the
Supreme Court, by treaties, (one of which
secured from Great Britain compensation
to our citizens for the loss of their slaves
during the war of 1812,) and by the ex-
ecutive branch of the Government even
as administered by Mr. Lincoln. In con-
firmation of this I refer to his messages of
December 1, 1862, of March 6, 1862, and of
December, 1863. In his annual message of
December 1, 1862, Mr. Lincoln says: " In
a certain sense the liberation of slaves is the
destruction of property—property acquired
by descent, or by purchase, the same as any
other property. It is no less true for having
been often said, that the people of the
South are not mure responsible for the orig
inal introduction of this property than are
the people of the North; and when it is
remembered how unhesitatingly we all use
cotton and sugar, and share the profits of
dealing ill them. it may not be quite safe
to say that the South has been more re-
sponsible than the North for its continu-
ance. If, then, for a common object this |
property is to be sacrificed, is it not just
that it be done at a common charge ?"
This is the language of the standard-
bearer of the Republican party, of a man
indorsed by the party, and although gen-
tlemen may stand up here and claim to be
his supporters and deny that the slave-
holder can have property in his slave, the
people by re-nominating him have expressed
a different verdict. I take the opinions of the
fathers of the Republic, and of the Presi-
dent indorsed by the people, and put them
against such opinions as have been an-
nounced upon this floor by mere fledgelings
in the knowledge of constitutional princi-
ples and legal propositions., This right is
further recognized as inviolable by the
present Constitution, and is maintained by
the legislative, executive, and judicial de-partments
of the State Government in every
possible form—in the adjudication of the
rights of widows, minors, and creditors,
and the division of estates and settlement
of legal controversies. This property was
worth, in 1860, over $36,000,000, as shown
toy the accompanying table, which is an
under estimate of its value.
VALUE OF SLAVE PROPERTY IN MARYLAND
IN 1860.
The compendium of the census for 1860
does not give the ages of the slave popula-
tion, but merely the aggregate number and
sex, viz:
Males ....... .....................44,313
Females .............................42,876
87.189
The aggregate for 1860 gives the number
at 90,368, and classifies the ages as well as
the sex; the returns for 1860 show a de-
crease ill ten years of 3 1/2 per cent.
In order, therefore, to arrive at the value
of the slaves fur 1860, it is only necessary
to take the classification of ages in 1850,
with a reduction of 3 1/2 per cent. The esti-
mate of value is based on what if: was gen-
erally recognized to have been five years
ago:
Male. Female. No. Estimate. Total.
Under 1 year, 1,243 1,203 2,446 126 $61,150
1 to 6 ' 5,961 5,931 11,892 60 694,600
5 to 10 ' 6.902 6,71213,614 150 '1,042,100
10 to 16 ' 6,963 6,400 13,363 300 4,008,900
1510 20 ' 5,643 5,446 11,109 600 6,865,400
201080 ' 8092 7.44311,535 800 12,428,300
30 to 40 ' 4,269 4,500 8,796 800 7,1 5,200
40 to 50 ' 2,958 2,931 6,884 600 2,942,000
60 to 60 ' 1,926 1,850 3,776 200 766,200
Over 60 ' 1,992 1,988 3,980 ... ..........
36,812,850
Deduct 3 1/2 per cent.................. l,281,439
$35,331,11 |
