a country where the slave-trade was not prac-
ticed and carried on, and brought here and
sold, such a person is not a slave according
to the laws of this State. Cites 6 vol. World
Displayed, 273, 290. The act of 1715 related
only to slaves brought in according to the
regular course of the slave-trade. Madagascar
was not a place from whence slaves were usu-
ally brought.
"Key, for the defendant. Slavery is de-
rived either from villeinage in England, or it
was thought necessary to introduce it at the
time of colonization, for political reasons, to
cultivate the land. Guthrie's Geography,
679. In Madagascar the petty princes make
war on each other for slaves and plunder.—
Abbe Raynul, vol. 2, 227 Slavery in Mada-
gascar.—Ive's Voyage, 5, They carry on the
slave-trade with Europeans.
" The Court. Madagascar being a country
where the slave-trade is practiced, and this
being a country where slavery is tolerated, it
is incumbent on the petitioner to show her
ancestor was free in her own country, to en-
title her to freedom."
Intimating that if she could go away over
to Madagascar and find out her ancestors that
were free, then she was entitled to her free-
dom. I say that according to that decision
of the Court of Appeals every negro in Mary-
land was free long ago. For, if their ances-
tors were free, then, as my friend from Howard
(Mr. Sands) announced here to-day, they are
free; and that upon the express decision of
this Court of Appeals.
Mr. MILLER. Will the gentleman allow
me to interrupt him for a moment ?
Mr. THOMAS. Not now; I have not
time. And in this connection I would ask
gentlemen what element of contract is there
in this relation of master and slave? Where
is the contract? The gentleman from Kent
(Mr. Chambers) told us to-day, in a lugu-
brious tone that was calculated to excite the
deepest sympathies of every man in this con-
vention, that he had a letter from a friend
who told him that all the property she had
on earth was in negro slaves. That is a hard
case; lam sorry she has no other property.
But I know people in my own community
who have no negro property; but who before
this war had their little all invested in some-
thing else, and now it is all gone. And how
is it gone? and where did it go? and what
made it go? Nothing but slavery and rebel-
lion was the cause. The natural effect of this
war has been not only to take away from the
old lady, referred to by the gentleman from
Kent, her little property, but last Sunday
two weeks I thought it would take away
from me my little property. As I was running
up street trying to carry a musket, a
secesh woman said to me—" They are com-
ing and yon will get it now; your house is
marked." I told her I would not give them
the trouble to mark my house, and I went
13 |
home and put out the United States flag. I
know that my house is pone, if they ever get
hold of it; and I am not the only man who
will lose everything if they ever get into Bal-
timore. I know that as well as other gentle-
men do. I have no horses for them to steal,
thank the Lord; but they can destroy my
house. I am sorry for the old lady, and for
everybody that loses their property. But do
gentlemen remember, or have they forgotten,
that it was only last winter that the men of
Washington county, who had been utterly
ruined by these raids into Maryland, had
their representatives introduce a resolution
into the senate of Maryland to indemnify
them and compensate them for the losses they
had sustained on account of this war. And
the gentlemen on the other side of the house
turned a deaf ear to their entreaties, simply
because they would not put the negro into
the resolution; they would not give these
poor Washington county and Frederick
county men a dollar. Now, are not the
horses and crops of those mm just as much
property as is the negro? And if the slave-
holder is entitled to compensation for his ne-
gro man, why should not the man in Wash-
ington county be entitled to compensation
for his property which is not negro? And
if we begin to compensate men in this way
for all the losses sustained in this war, we
can hardly know how it is to end. This
great and magnificent sale of our public
works which is advocated here, even should
it bring millions to the State of Maryland,
would not begin to compensate for the losses
sustained. We would have to go to work
and build other great public improvements,
take stock in them, and then again sell out.
I would ask gentlemen this: Has not the
State of Maryland the right to pass a law
changing the relation between parent and
child? The father is now entitled to the ser-
vices of his son until he is twenty-one years
of age. Suppose the State of Maryland
should pass a law that the son should be con-
sidered of age for himself at seventeen or
eighteen, thus depriving the father of the
services of his son for three or four years.
Has not the State of Maryland a perfect right
to do that? Still it would be passing a law
depriving a man of his property. If gentle-
men will look back to the old act of 1796,
they will find a law of Maryland by which if
a man from another State brought a slave
into this State, and did not comply with cer-
tain conditions mentioned in that act, his
slave property became free. Was not that
taking private property for public use, just as
much as this is? If I, living in another
State came here and brought my slave with
me, and did not comply with the terms of
that act of assembly, then my slave became
free, although be was my property. And if
I brought an action against the State of
Maryland, or any one else, to recover dam- |
