CONGRESS, UNITED STATES. 



199 



the history of t\vo hundred years teaches us 

 that IK- li::'l no ri-hts, nor nothing which ho 

 could call his owu. Ho h:id ( ju>t, tlio right to 

 :ic a husband or n father in the eye of the 

 law, he had no child, ho was not nt liberty to 

 indulge tho natural affections of tho human 

 for children, for wife, or even for friend, 

 lie owned no property, because tho law pro- 

 hihited him. lie could not take real or per- 

 sonal estate cither by sale, by grant, or by de- 

 scent or inheritance. Ho did not owu tho 

 l>;vad he earned and ate. Ho stood upon tho 



face of the earth completely isolated from the 

 society in which he happened to be ; he was 

 nothing hut a chattel, subject to tho will of his 

 owner, and unprotected in his rights by tho 

 law of tho State where he happened to live. 

 His rights, did I say? No, sir, I use inappro- 

 priate language. He had no rights ; ho was an 

 animal ; he was property, a chattel. Tho Al- 

 mighty, according to the ideas of tho times, had 

 made him to be property, a chattel, and not a 

 man. 



<k Now, sir, it is not denied that this relation 

 of servitude between the former negro slave 

 and his master was actually severed by this 

 amendment. But the absurd construction now 

 forced upon it leaves him without family, with- 

 out property, without the implements of hus- 

 bandry, and even without the right to acquire 

 or use any instrumentalities of carrying on tho 

 industry of which he may be capable ; it leaves 

 Lira without friend or support, and oven with- 

 out the clothes to cover his nakedness. lie is 

 a waif upon the current of time ; he has noth- 

 ing that belongs to him on the face of the earth 

 except solely his naked person. And here, in 

 this state, we are called upon to abandon the 

 poor creature whom we have emancipated. 

 We are coolly told that he has no right beyond 

 this, and wo are told that under this amend- 

 nsent the power of the State within whose 

 limits he happens to be is not at all restrained 

 in respect to him, and that the State through 

 ita Legislature may at any tune declare him to 

 bo a vagrant, and as such commit him to jail, 

 or assign him to uncompensatcd service. 



" Now, Mr. President, I ask these gentlemen 

 I appeal not only to their knowledge of the 

 true principles of construction, but I appeal to 

 their humanity to say whether it is possible 

 innocently and sincerely to ascribe to tho ad- 

 vocates of this amendment any such cruel and 

 inhuman purpose as this? No, sir; I think 

 they cannot lay their hands upon their hearts 

 and say that in advocating this amendment we 

 intended to leave the negro in so helpless and 

 destitute a condition. But if theirs bo the true 

 construction, then it is competent for tho Legis- 

 lature of each State to declare by law that no 

 negro who has once been a slave shall ever, 

 within the limits of that State, have tho right 

 or privilege of earning and purchasing prop- 

 erty ; of having a homo under which to shelter 

 him and his family, if he has one; of having a 

 wife and family, 'or of eating the bread he 



earns ; thus leaving it in tho power of these 

 interested States to expatriate him at any- mo- 

 ment and drive him beyond th-.-ir limits; to 

 deprive him of a home, to deprive him of all 

 the fruits of his toil and his industry, and finally 

 luce him to a condition infinitely worse 

 than that of actual slavery, by compelling him 

 to labor at such price as the old master may 

 sec fit to pay him, while at the same time he, 

 not being a slave, has no claim whatever upon 

 the old master for support, thus treating him as 

 a nuisance upon tho face of the earth. 



" No, sir, such was not the intention of tho 

 advocates of this amendment. Its intention 

 was to make him tho opposite of a slave, to 

 make him a freeman. And what are the at- 

 tributes of a freeman according to the universal 

 understanding of the American people ? Is a 

 freeman to be deprived of the right of acquir- 

 ing property, of the right of having a family, a 

 wife, children, home? What definition will 

 yon attach to tho word ' freeman ' that does 

 not include these ideas? The once slave is no 

 longer a slave ; he has become, by means of 

 emancipation, a free man. If such be the case, 

 then in all common sense is he not entitled to 

 those rights which we concede to a man who 

 is free ? " 



Mr. Guthrie, of Kentucky, said: "I con- 

 sider that there is no warrant in the Constitution 

 for such legislation as this, and it is impossible 

 that there should be, and besides, it will be the 

 most impolitic law that ever was passed. The 

 gentleman from Illinois says that this is simply 

 a bill providing that all persons shall have their 

 rights. I might return the compliment by say- 

 ing that it is simply a bill declaring that we 

 have established a military despotism, and tho 

 laws are to be enforced at the point of the bay- 

 onet. This bill and the one passed last week 

 invoke military power everywhere, and throw 

 the protection of the military over any thing. 

 Gentlemen, is this a proper answer to this war, 

 to the gallantry of our officers and soldiers, and 

 to the hope of the American people that we 

 should have a restored Union ? Is it a proper 

 answer to those who have lent you their money 

 and whom you yet owe, to sow this cause of 

 dissension between tho States, this pestering in- 

 terference that will lead to dissension, and God 

 knows what rise it will lead to ? I say that this 

 bill, as well as the kindred measure passed last 

 week, should not be passed on account of econ- 

 omy. It should not be passed on account of 

 your creditors. How many creditors have you 

 now knocking at your doors for money and prop- 

 erty seized and put into your Treasury, whom 

 you cannot pay, whom you are afraid to make 

 appropriations for ? And yet you are taking by 

 these bills more money from the Treasury than 

 would pay probably the principal of the debt 

 due to these men. Is it just to the creditors to 

 whom you owe this money that you should 

 leave their claims unsettled, and that you should 

 attempt to carry on this Government by such 

 legislation as this ? " 



