possession. And if they had inquired into
that mode, the barbarian despot would most
probably have replied that it was none of
their business. The slaves were his, and
they might buy them or let them alone, just
as they pleased. I do not see, under such
circumstances, how we could 'convict the
traders themselves as having stolen the slaves.
* * * * * * *
" For look at the title by which you, with
every other man in the community, must
hold the lands and houses in your possession.
"What is its origin? The country once be-
longed to the Indian tribes, and the claim
set up to it by England, was based upon the
right of discovery. What sort of a right is
that? Does my discovery of property which
belongs to another man make it mine? It
would be mere absurdity to pretend it. If I
cannot find the true owner, I may be autho-
rized to keep it; but as soon as be appears, I
am bound to surrender it, or I become a
transgressor. Manifestly, therefore, there is
no law of natural justice that authorized
Queen Elizabeth, or her royal successors to
confer the lands of the Indians on their sub-
jects, in the charters granted by the crown,
to the Virginia colonists, or to the Pilgrim
Fathers, as it is the fashion to call them, or
to Lord Baltimore, or to William Penn. All
this was taken for granted by the European
maxims of those days, which assumed the
right of claiming any land inhabited by sav-
age heathen tribes, and calling it their own ;
precisely in the same way that they assumed
the right of taking the natives themselves,
and reducing them to bondage."
Now, I put this question to my learned
friend from Baltimore city (Mr. Thomas,)
who says he has a house which he was very
much afraid the rebels would sack the other
day; I have nothing to do with that. But I
submit to him that under the law of this
land, he does not hold the ground upon
which his house stands, by any stronger or
higher title, than I and every other slave-
holder in this State holds his slaves. I com-
mend this book of Bishop Hopkins?, to the
consideration of the convention. There is a
great deal more upon that very subject, but I
have not time to read it all. I have con-
sumed too much time already in reading for
the few moments I have left. But I commend
the book to the attention of those gentlemen
who desire to pursue this investigation farther.
The whole subject is here reviewed, and the
deliberate and unbiased judgment of one of
the highest and most distinguished men in
the Christian church in this country is here
given, that slaves in this country are held by
as good, clear and perfect a title, as that by
which you hold any piece of real property in
this land.
It seems to me that I have now put this
point effectually at rest. I have not time to
give my own views upon it. But I will let it |
rest here before the convention upon the au-
thority of one of the most eminent jurists in
the land; one to whom the State of Maryland
will ever point with feelings of pride and of
joy; and also upon the authority of that emi-
nent churchman, Bishop Hopkins, who will
live in the recollection of the people of this
country when the present actors in these
scenes will have faded away and be remem-
bered no more; or if their names shall be re-
membered at all, they will perhaps be re-
membered to be execrated by those who
come after them.
Men talk about the iniquity of slavery ?
Who were the men who represented Balti-
more city in the convention of 1850? Every
man in that convention voted in favor of a
proposition which now stands in the present
constitution, prohibiting the legislature from
touching this question of slavery.
The PRESIDENT announced that the gentle-
man's time under the rule had expired.
Mr. CHAMBERS moved that ten minutes
further time be granted.
Mr. EDELEN. I want but two or three
minutes. I merely wish to call the attention
of the convention to one matter which I find
I have noted here. I find—and I believe I
have obtained as much information on this
subject from you, Mr. President, in another
character, in your official capacity as the
financial head of the State, as from any
other source—I find that by a law of the last
session of the legislature, the sum of one
hundred dollars is given to every owner of a
slave that enlists in the land or naval forces
of the United States. Upon glancing at the
journal of the house of delegates of the last
session, I find some names there with which
I am familiar. I recognize there the name of
the gentleman from Baltimore city, the chair-
man of our judiciary committee (Mr. Stock-
bridge,) and also some names from Allegany
and Washington counties. I do not now re-
call them more particularly. Now take my
case, for instnace. The rolls of your office
show that I have one able-bodied negro man,
who was enlisted in the naval service of the
United States by General Birney, when he
was in Charles county. By the votes of those
gentlemen, whose names stand recorded upon
that journal, they have said to me and to every
other slaveholder in the State of Maryland
similarly circumstanced: you have a rightful,
claim against the State of Maryland for one
hundred dollars. And when the proper
forms are gone through with, it is your duty,
Mr. President, as the comptroller of the State,
under that law for which those gentlemen
voted, to pay me that sum. Now, how can my
friends reconcile their votes in favor of that
law with that which I doubt not they are
prepared to cast upon this proposition? And
pursue my case further. When I last left
my home I had two female slaves, my do- |
