CHAPTER I.
CITIZENSHIP
PROSCRIPTION OF COLORED CITIZENS -
NATURALIZATION OF
GEORGE DEGRASSE AND JOHN REMOND -
PASPORTS OF COLORED MEN -
SPEECH OF JOHN MERCER LANGSTON -
VIEWS OF HOSEA EASTON -
EXTRACT FROM A SPEECH OF WM. J. WATKINS.
pg. 311
IN 1790, (says
Judge Jay,) Congress passed an act prescribing
the mode in which "any alien, being a white
person," might be naturalized, and admitted to the
rights of an America citizen. Two years after, an
act was passed for organizing the militia, which was to
consist of each and every free able-bodied white
male citizen, &c. No other government on earth
prohibits any portion of its citizens from participating
in the national defence. But, not content with
this insult to colored citizens, another, and perhaps
[Page 312] -
a still more wonton and malignant one, was offered by
the government in the act of 1810, organizing the
Post-Office Department. The fourth section enacts
that "no other than a free white person shall be
employed in carrying the mail of the United States,
either as post-rider or driver of a carriage
carrying the mail," under a penalty of fifty dollars.
Any vagabond from Europe, any fugitive from our own
prisons, may take charge of the United States mail; but
a native-born American citizen, of unimpeachable morals,
and with property acquired by honest industry, may not,
if his skin be dark, guide the horses which draw
the carriage in which a bag of newspapers is deposited!
The following letter of instructions from the
Postmaster General to one of his deputies, written in
1828, is a curious commentary on this law: -
"SIR, - The
mail may not, in any case whatever, be in the custody of
a colored person. If a colored person is
employed to lift the mail from the stage into the
post-office, it does not pass into his custody, but the
labor is performed in the presence and under the
immediate direction of the white person who has
it in custody; but if a colored person takes it
from a tavern and carries it himself to the post-office,
it comes into his custody during the time of carrying
it, which is contrary to law.
|
"I am, &c., |
JOHN McLEAN." |
In the United States Senate, July 29, 1842, the bill
regulating enlistments in the Navy was discussed.
Mr. Calhoun moved an amendment, that white men
only should be en-
[Page 313] -
listed, except for cooks, servants, and stewards, for
which offices negroes or mulattoes might be employed.
Mr. Woodbury, of New Hampshire, supported the
amendment.
Mr. Phelps, of Vermont, and Mr. Clayton,
of Delaware, objected; and each cited instances of the
colored man's valor, and enforced his claim to being
enrolled as other Americans.
The amendment was, however, adopted, by a vote of
twenty-four to sixteen; as was, also, that of Mr.
Preston, (of South Carolina,) prohibiting the
enlistment of negroes in the Army. And this,
notwithstanding the fact, that the victory upon
Champlain has been well-known to have been achieved,
in part, by the valor of colored men. That upon
Erie, so far as aided by colored men's valort has been
in doubt, and in some quarters has been denied.
Says Mr. Day, "I desire to refer you to
the proof of the position, that colored men were with
Commodore Perry on Lake Erie, and that they were as
good hands as others. Writing to Commodore
Chauncey, the senior officer, Captain
Perry, said 'The men that came by Mr.
Champlin are a motley set, blacks, soldiers, and
boys. I am, however, pleased to see any thing in
the shape of a man.' So much as to the fact that
there were 'blacks' to help man the squadron.
"To show that many of the colored men upon Lakes Erie
and Champlain were among the best, I quote the fol-
[Page 314] -
lowing from a letter of Commodore Chauncey to Captain
Perry:
|
ON BOARD THE "PIKE," OFF
BURLINGTON BAY,}
July 13th.
} |
Sir, I have been duly
honored with your letters of the 23d and 26th ultimo,
and notice your anxiety for men and officers. I am
equally anxious to furnish you, and no time shall be
lost in sending officers and men to you, as soon as the
public service will allow me to send them from this
lake. I regret that you are not pleased with the
men sent you by Messrs. Champlin and
Forrest; for, to my knowledge, a part of them are
not surpassed by any seamen we have in the fleets; and I
have yet to learn, that the color of the skin, or the
cut and trimmings of the coat, can affect a man's
qualifications or usefulness. I have nearly fifty
blacks on board of this ship, and many of them are among
my best men; and those people you call soldiers have
been to sea from two to seventeen years, and I presume
that you will find them as good and useful as any men on
board of your vessel, at least, if I can judge by
comparison, for those which we have on board this ship
are attentive and obedient, and, as far as I can judge,
many of them excellent seamen; at any rate, the men sent
to Lake Erie have been selected with a view of sending a
fair proportion of petty officers and seamen, and I
presume, upon examination, it will be found they are
equal to those upon this
lake.
"So fat as to the capacity of colored men with
Commodore Perry."
The managers of the Park Theatre, in New York city, in
testimony of the bravery of the lamented Captain
Lawrence and his crew, manifested in the
brilliant action with the British sloop-of-war
"Peacock," invited him and them to a
[Page 315] -
play in honor of the victory achieved on that occasion.
The crew marched together into the pit, and nearly one
half of them were negroes.
In March, 1855, Hon. T. D. Eliot, of
Massachusetts, succeeded in obtaining the compensation
of Peter Amey, a colored man of New
Bedford, who fought on board the "Essex," in 1812.
His motion was opposed by Mr. Chastain, of
Georgia; but as Mr. Eliot intimated that
he should then
probably oppose other private claims, Mr.
Seward, of Georgia, remarked that Georgia would lose
her claims, and Mr. Chastain withdrew his
opposition, and the bill passed to a third reading.
The Homestead Bill was adopted by Congress in March,
1854, with an amendment to limit its grant of land to
white persons only. Thomas Davis, of
Rhode Island, Joshua R. Giddings, of Ohio,
and Gerrit Smith, of New York, with
others, ably and strenuously advocated the rights of
colored Americans, but were voted down, seventy-one to
sixty-three.
Public bodies and the press have, during the past few
years, discussed several questions bearing on the right
of colored men to the privileges of citizenship.
The following facts showing the theory and practice of
this government, capricious as the latter has been, yet
furnish precedents favorable to the colored man.
Distinctions of color are not recognised in the letter
of the United States Constitution; yet that instrument
leaves it in the power of Congress and individual States
to trample on or acknowledge, as tyranny may dictate,
the rights of colored citizens.
[Page 316] -
Congress can as well
naturalize Asiatics, South Americans and Africans, as
Europeans; and yet, for reasons best known to the Slave
Power which rules this nation, the in stances are few
and far between where colored aliens have received
naturalization papers. One case, however,
occurred, as early as 1804, where a colored man received
a certificate of naturalization, of which the following
is a copy:
CITY OF NEW YORK, ss.
Be it remembered, that GEORGE
DEGRASSE,
of the city of New York, servant, who hath resided
within the limits and jurisdiction of the United States
for the term of five years, and within this State of New
York for the term of one year at least, appeared in the
Court of Common Pleas, called the Mayor's Court, and
which is a common law court of record held in and for
the city and county of New York in the State of New
York, on Thursday, the fifth day of July, in the year
one thousand eight hundred and four, and having made
proof to the satisfaction of said Court that he is a
person of good moral character, attached to the
principles of the Constitution of the United States, and
well disposed to the good order and happiness of the
same, and having in the said Court taken the oath
prescribed by law to support the Constitution of the
United States, and did in open Court absolutely and
entirely renounce and abjure all allegiance and fidelity
to every foreign prince, potentate, state or
sovereignty, and particularly to the King of the United
Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland, of whom he was
then a subject, the said George Degrasse
was thereupon, pursuant to the laws of the United States
in such case made and provided, admitted by the said
Court to be, and he is accordingly to be, considered a
citizen of the United States.
Given under the seal of the said Court, the day and
year above written.
|
Per curiam, |
T. WOODMAN, Clerk |
[Page 317] -
Mr. DeGrasse
has since resided in New York city, where, for more than
fifty years, he has regularly voted for United States
and State officers.
The following account of Dr. John V. Degrasse, a
son of the above-named, by a correspondent of the New
York Independent, will be found of interest in
this connection:
" August 24th, 1854, Mr.
DeGrasse was admitted in due form a member of the
'Massachusetts Medical Society.' It is the first
instance of such honor being conferred upon a colored
man in this State, at least, and probably in the
country; and therefore it deserves particular notice,
both because the means by which he has reached this
distinction are creditable to his own intelligence and
perseverance, and because others of his class may be
stimulated to seek an elevation which has hitherto been
supposed unattainable by men of color. The Doctor
is a native of New York city, where he was born June,
1825, and where he spent his time in private and public
schools till 1840. He then .entered the Oneida
Institute, Beriah Green, President, and
spent one year; but as Latin was not taught there, he
left and entered the Clinton Seminary, where he remained
two years, intending to enter college in the fall of
1843. He was turned from this purpose, however, by
the persuasions of a friend in France, and after
spending two years in a college in that country, he
returned to New York in November, 1845, and commenced
the study of medicine with Dr. Samuel R.
Childs, of that city. There he spent two years
in patient and diligent study, and then two more in
attend-
[Page 318] -
ing the medical lectures of Bowdoin College, Me.
Leaving that institution with honor in May, 1849, he
went again to Europe in the autumn of that year, and
spent considerable time in the hospitals of Paris,
travelling, at intervals, through parts of France,
England, Italy, and Switzerland. Returning home in
the ship 'Samuel Fox,' in the capacity of
surgeon, he was married in August, 1852, and since that
time, he has practised medicine in Boston. Earning
a good reputation here by his diligence and skill, he
was admitted a member of the Medical Society, as above
stated. Many of our most respectable physicians
visit and advise with him whenever counsel is required.
The Boston medical profession, it must be acknowledged,
has done itself honor in thus discarding the law of
caste, and generously acknowledging real merit, without
regard to the hue of the skin."
In the Doctor's study hangs
his diploma, and a beautiful painting, ("The Ship
Outward Bound,") executed by a young colored artist,
Mr. Edward Bannister, which is
enclosed in an elaborate gilt frame, the work of a young
colored mechanic, Mr. Jacob Andrews,
the whole being a joint presentation to their
professional friend. Such tributes of genius and
skill harmonize well with every worthy effort for the
elevation of those in this land with whom the donors are
identified by complexion and condition.
In 1811, JOHN
REMOND was successful in his application for
naturalization, in form as follows:
ESSEX, ss.
At the Supreme Judicial Court of the Commonwealth of
Massachusetts, begun and holden at Ipswich, within and
for the county.
[Page 319] -
of ESSE, on the fourth Tuesday of April, Anno Domini
1811, JOHN REDMOND, late of the Island of Cura<;oa
and town of Cura?oa, formerly subject to the government
of the States General, but now to George the Third,
King of the United Kingdom of Britain and Ireland, now
resident at Salem, in said county of Essex,
Hair-Dresser, took and subscribed the oath and
declaration required by law. And thereupon he, the
said JOHN REMOND, was admitted to become a
citizen of the United States, according to the laws in
such case
made and provided.
In testimony whereof, I have hereunto set my hand, and
affixed the seal of said Court, on this second day of
May, Anno Domini 1811.
|
ICHABOD TUCKER
Clerk of the Court aforesaid |
|
Several distinguished
colored Americans have succeeded in obtaining passports.
The following circumstance is related in a letter from
the Rev. A. A. Phelps, dated May 24, 1834, to
William Goodell: " On Tuesday evening, I
took tea at Mr. Forten's, (a well-known
manufacturer and merchant of Philadelphia a man of
color,) in company with Brothers Leavitt,
Pomeroy, and Dr. Lansing. It was a
very pleasant interview, and not the least pleasing
thing about it is the following: We were scarcely
seated, before in came Robert Vaux, Esq.,
with a passport for Robert Purvis and wife, under
the seal of the Secretary of State, certifying that the
said Purvis and wife were citizens of the
United States. Mr. Purvis is
son-in-law to Mr. Forten. He was
about to visit Europe for his health, and in some of the
countries on the Continent, as in France, a passport is
[Page 320] -
necessary, certifying who the person is, where from, &c.
The application was made through Robert Vaux, Esq.,
and on the representation of the case by him, it was at
once granted."
Mr. Robert Purvis, in a letter to Mr. Garrison,
dated London, July 13, 1834, says: "I had, at the
House of Commons, an introduction to the Hon. Daniel
O. Connell. On my being presented to the Irish
patriot as an American gentleman, he declined taking my
hand; but when he understood that I was not only
identified with the Abolitionists, but with the
proscribed and oppressed colored men of the United
States, he grasped my hand, and, warmly shaking it,
remarked, "Sir, I will never take the hand of an
American, nor should any honest man in this country do
so, without first knowing his principles in reference to
American slavery, and its ally, the American
Colonization Society."
REV. PETER WILLIAMS also received a passport
from John Forsyth, Secretary of State, the 17th
of March, 1836, requesting "all whom it may concern to
permit safely and freely to pass, Rev. Peter Williams,
a citizen of the United States, and in case of need, to
give him all lawful aid and protection.
REV. PETER WILLIAMS, JR., was born in Brunswick,
N. J., December, 1786. His father was proprietor
of the largest tobacco manufactory then in the city of
New York, and was the first to introduce steam power to
drive its machinery. Mr. WILLIAMS was for
twenty years (until his
[Page 321] -
death, in 1840) pastor of St. Phillips' Episcopal
Church. Aside from his pulit efforts, he
contributed many able, eloquent and practical effusions,
through pamphlets and newspapers, in aid of the colored
American's elevation. We learn, from a memoir by
Dr. James Mc' Cune Smith, that "he had mastered
Logic and Algebra, read Latin with some facility, was
extravagantly fond of Metaphysics, and, what is
remarkable with the slender advantages he enjoyed, he
had formed a style in composition so clear, concise and
elegant, that few men of twice his years and with every
advantage, have excelled it. His oration on the
Abolition of the Slave Trade, delivered January, 1808,
when he was just twenty-one years of age, was
discredited as having emanated from his pen, - and it
was deemed necessary that his certificate to that effect
should be published, confirmed by Rt. Rev. Benjamin
Morse, Bishop of the Protestant Episcopal Church,
and others.
During the reign of terror to which Anti-Slavery men
and women were subjected, in the years 1833, '4 and '5,
Mr. Williams was induced by his Bishop,
for church reasons, to abstain from taking part in the
anti-slavery agitation. His letter was published,
and created much sensation at the time, especially among
many of his former associates. It is due, however,
to his memory, to state, (which we do upon the most
reliable authority,) that the Bishop suppressed those
passages which Mr. Williams had
confidently relied upon to modify the objections of his
friends. His natural diffidence of character
deterred him from making an explanation.
[Page 322] -
From that letter the following reminiscences are
extracted:
"In the Revolutionary War,
my father was a decided advocate of American
Independence, and his life was repeatedly jeopardized in
its cause. Permit me to relate an instance, which
shows that neither the British sword nor British gold
could make him a traitor to his country. He was
living in the State of Jersey, and parson Chapman, a
champion of American liberty of great influence
throughout that part of the country, was sought after by
the British troops. My father immediately mounted
a horse and rode round among his parishioners to notify
them 6f his danger, and to call on them to help in
removing him and his goods to a place of safety. He then
carried him to a private place, and as he was returning,
a British officer rode up to him, and demanded, in a
most peremptory manner,
" 'Where is parson Chapman ? '
" 'I cannot tell,' was the reply.
"On that, the officer drew his sword, and, raising it
over
his head, said, ' Tell me where he is, or I will
instantly
cut you down.'
"Again he replied, ' I cannot tell.'
"Finding threats useless, the officer put up his sword,
and drew out a purse of gold, saying, 'If you will
tell me where he is, I will give you this.'
"The reply still was, ' I cannot tell.'
"The officer cursed him, and rode off.
"This attachment to the country of his birth was
strength-
[Page 323] -
ened and confirmed by the circumstance, that the very
day on which the British evacuated New York was the same
on which he obtained his freedom by purchase, through
the help of some republican friends of the Methodist
Church; and to the last year of his life, he always
spoke of that day as one which gave double joy to his
heart, by freeing him from domestic bondage, and his
native city from foreign enemies.
*
*
*
*
*
"Reared with these feelings,
though fond of retirement, I felt a burning desire to be
useful to my brethren and my country, and when the last
war between this country and Great Britain broke out, I
felt happy to render the humble services of my pen, my
tongue, and my hands, towards rearing fortifications to
defend our shores against invasion. I entreated my
brethren to help in the defence of the country, and went
with them to the work; and no sacrifice has been
considered too great by me for the benefit of it or
them."
WILLIAM WELLS BROWN on leaving the United States
for Europe, obtained, through the intercession of a
friend, a passport signed by Wm. B. Calhoun,
Secretary of State for Massachusetts. The
following letter from Mr. Brown, covering the
passport obtained in London, countersigned by a son of
Ex-Governor John Davis, is instructive and
interesting: -
WENDELL PHILLIPS, Esq.:
DEAR FRIEND - I observe in the American papers an
elaborate discussion upon the subject of passports for
colored men. What
[Page 324] -
must the inhabitants of other countries think of the
people of the United States, when they read, as they do,
the editorials of some of the Southern papers against
recognizing colored Americans as citizens? In looking
over some of these articles, I hare felt ashamed that I
had the misfortune to be born in such a country.
We may search history in vain to find a people who have
sunk themselves as low, and made themselves appear as
infamous by their treatment of their fellow-men, as have
the people of the United States. If colored men
make their appearance in the slave States as seamen,
they are imprisoned until the departure of the vessel.
If they make their appearance at the capital of the
country, unless provided with free papers, they are sold
for the benefit of the Government. In most of the
States we are disfranchised, our children are shut out
from the public schools, and embarrassments are thrown
in the way of every attempt to elevate ourselves.
And after they have degraded us, sold us, mobbed us, and
done every thing in their power to oppress us, then, if
we wish to leave the country, they refuse us passports,
upon the ground that we are not citizens. This is
emphatically an age of discoveries; but I will venture
the assertion, that none but an American slaveholder
could have discovered that a man born in a country was
not a citizen of it. Their chosen motto, that "all
men are created equal," when compared with their
treatment of the colored people of the country, sinks
them lower and lower in the estimation of the good and
wise of all lands. In your letter of the 15th ult.,
you ask if I succeeded in getting a passport from the
American Minister in London, previous to going to Paris
to attend the Peace Congress. Through the
magnanimity of the French Government, all delegates to
the Congress were permitted to pass freely without
passports. I did not, therefore, apply for one.
But as I intend soon to visit the Continent, and shall
then need one, I called a few days since on the American
Minister, and was furnished with a passport, of which
the following is a copy. If
[Page 325] -
it will be of any service in the discussion upon that
subject, you are at perfect liberty to use it: "
"LEGATION OF THE UNITED STATES OF
AMERICA IN ENGLAND.
PASSPORT NO. 33.
The
undersigned, Envoy Extraordinary and Minister
Plenipotentiary of the United States of America at the
Court of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and
Ireland, begs all whom it may concern to allow safely
and freely to pass, and in case of need, to give aid and
protection to
MR. WILLIAM W.
BROWN,
a citizen of the United States, going on
the Continent.
Given under my signature, and the imprint of the seal
of the legation in London, Oct. 31, 1849, the 74th year
of the independence of the United States.
For for Minister,
JOHN C. B. DAVIS,
Secretary of Legation."
So you see, my friend, that
though we are denied citizenship in America, and refused
passports at home when wishing to visit foreign
countries, they dare not refuse us a passport when we
apply for it in old England. There is a public
sentiment here, that, hard hearted as the Americans are,
they fear. When will the Americans learn, that if
they would encourage liberty in other countries, they
must practice it at home? If they would inspire
the hearts of the struggling millions in Europe, they
should not allow one human being to wear chains upon
their own soil. If they would welcome the martyrs
for freedom from the banks of the Danube, the Tiber and
the Seine, let them liberate their own slaves on the
banks of the Mississippi and the Potomac. If they
would welcome the Hungarian flying from the bloody
talons of the Austrian eagle, they must
[Page 326] -
wrest the three millions of slaves from the talons of
their own. They cannot welcome the wanderer from
the battle-fields of freedom in the old world, as long
as the new world is the battle-field of slavery.
Should the Kossuths and the Wimmers visit
America, they would be reminded of their friends they
left in chains in Austria, by the clanking chains of the
American slave.
I was asked a few days since, at a meeting, if I was
not afraid that the abolitionists would become tired,
and give up the cause as hopeless. My answer was,
that the slave's cause was in the hands of men and women
who intended to agitate and agitate, until the iron hand
of slavery should melt away, drop by drop, before a
fiery public sentiment.
At a reception meeting
tendered Mr. Brown in Boston, October
13th, 1854, WENDELL PHILLIPS, Esq., in the course
of an eloquent speech, said:
" I still more rejoice that
Mr. Brown has returned. Returned to
what ? Not to what he can call his 'country.' The
white man comes ' home.' When Milton heard, in Italy,
the sound of arms from England, he hastened back
young, enthusiastic, and bathed in beautiful art as he
was in Florence. 'I would not be away,' he said,
'when a blow was struck for liberty.' He came to a
country where his manhood was recognised, to fight on
equal footing. The black man comes home to no
liberty but the liberty of suffering to struggle in
fetters for the welfare of his race. It is a
magnanimous sympathy with his blood that brings such a
man back. I honor it. We meet to. do it
honor. Franklin's motto was, Ubi
libertas, ibi patria Where liberty is, there is my
country. Had our friend adopted that for his rule,
he would have stayed in Europe. Liberty for him is
there. The colored man who returns, like
[Page 327] -
our friend, to labor, crushed and despised, for his
race, sails under a higher flag : his motto is '
"WHERE MY COUNTRY IS, THERE WILL I BRING LIBERTY."
As recently as the first of
January, 1854, JOHN REMOND, of Salem, Mass.,
obtained a passport from the then Secretary of State,
William L. Marcy.
Although, on some occasions, the officials of the
United States government have refused to acknowledge
colored Americans as citizens, denying them passports
and the like, yet, with a strange inconsistency, they
are sometimes made recipients of honors and emoluments
not to be obtained by others than citizens of the United
States.
At a meeting of the Bar of the County of Suffolk,
Mass., held at the office of the Clerk of the Circuit
Court of the United States, on Thursday, June 27, 1850,
Ellis Gray Loring, Esq., was chosen
Chairman, and Charles Theodore Russell,
Esq., Secretary.
On motion of Charles Sumner, Esq., it was
|
(Signed,)
ELLIS GRAY LORING,
Chairman.
CHAS. THEO.
RUSSELL, Sec'y. |
Resolved, That
Robert Morris, Esq., be recommended
for admittance to practice as a Counsellor and Attorney
of the Circuit and District Courts of the United States.
[Page 328] -
color, and was duly admitted to practice in the Courts
of the United States.
MACON B. ALLEN,
another colored lawyer, was admitted in Maine, to the
Cumberland Bar, on examination, and subsequently in
Massachusetts, to the Suffolk Bar, on certificate.
Among those who congratulated him on his appointment
were Hon. John G. Palfrey, and Professor
Greenleaf, of Harvard University.
GEORGE B. VASHON was also admitted, on
examination, before the New York Bar, in 1848.
A correspondent of the Philadelphia Inquirer
alludes to his admission as Attorney, Solicitor and
Counsellor of the Supreme Court of the State, and adds,
that he evinced a perfect knowledge of the rudiments of
law, and a familiar acquaintance with Coke, Littleton,
Blackstone, and Kent.
When it is remembered that most lawyers are admitted by
certificate, great credit will be awarded Messrs.
ALLEN and VASHON, who passed the ordeal of open
court examination with signal credit.
Messrs. MORRIS and
ALLEN are now Justices of the Peace for
Massachusetts.
The Constitution of the United States declares "that
the citizens of each STate shall be entitled to all the
privileges and immunities of citizens in the several
States."
The Act of February 21, 1799, granting patents for
useful improvements, authorizes the issuing of a patent
only to a "citizen." Cannot a man of color obtain
one? Such has been done, and he would be a bold
officer who should
[Page 329] -
refuse one on the ground of color. The Act of
1831, on the subject of copyright, is one of the same
character.
So the Act of December 31, 1792, concerning the
registering and recording of ships or vessels. It
is enacted, that no vessel shall be considered or
treated as an American vessel, unless she is
owned and commanded by an "American citizen;" men
of color have owned vessels, and they have always been
considered American vessels.
So by the Act of February 18, 1793, for enrolling and
licensing vessels for the coasting trade and the
fisheries, a like oath must be taken by the owner before
she can be permitted to engage in the same a "citizen"
only can do it; but cannot and have not men of color?
So the militia law uses the words white male
citizens; implying that there are other citizens besides
white ones; for else the word citizens would not have
been used. It is true, colored men are exempt from
military duty, but so are all persons under eighteen, or
over forty-five, years of age, and all females; but yet,
Congress can call all these into the army or
navy, or militia; and none will contend that exemption
from military service proves political inferiority.
So the Act of May 15, 1820, makes it criminal for a "citizen"
to engage in the slave trade. Can people of color do it?
And yet penal laws are construed strictly.
So the Act of May 28, 1796, for the relief and
protection of American seamen, declares that any "citizen"
sailor can obtain from the custom-house officer a
certificate of his citizenship; men of color have often
done this, and can again.
[Page 330] -
So the Act of July 20, 1790, for the regulation of
seamen in the merchant's service, provides, that every
ship or vessel belonging to a "citizen or
citizens" of the United States, of a certain
burthen, on a foreign voyage, shall, under a severe
penalty, be provided with a medicine chest. Are
not men of color bound to comply with this law?
Impressed colored sailors have been claimed by the
National Government as " citizens of the United States."
If a man of color in New York or Pennsylvania should
sue a white citizen of Connecticut in the Federal Court,
would it be a good plea in abatement that one of the
parties is a man of color?
The question of colored citizenship came up as a
national question, and was settled, during the pendency
of the Missouri question, in 1820.
It will be remembered, that that State presented
herself for admission into the Union, with a clause in
her Constitution prohibiting the settlement of colored
citizens within her borders. Resistance was made
to her admission into the Union upon that very ground;
and it was not until that State receded from her
unconstitutional position, that President
Monroe declared the admission of Missouri into the
Union to be complete.
According to Niles's Register, August 18th, vol. 20,
pages 338 and 339, the refusal to admit Missouri into
the Union was not withdrawn until the General Assembly
of that State, in conformity to a fundamental condition
imposed by Congress, had, by an act passed for that
purpose, solemnly
[Page 331] -
enacted and declared, "That this State (Missouri) has
assented, and does assent, that the fourth clause of the
twenty-sixth section of the third article of their
Constitution should never be construed to authorize the
passage of any law, and that no law shall be passed in
conformity thereto, by which any citizen of either of
the United States shall be excluded from the enjoyment
of any of the privileges and immunities to which such
citizens are entitled, under the Constitution of the
United States."
A free colored citizen of the county of West Chester,
in the State of New York, named Gilbert Horton,
was employed as a sailor on board a coasting vessel,
which touched at a port in the District of Columbia.
Horton went on shore, and while peaceably walking
in one of the streets of the city of Washington, was
seized and thrown into jail as a fugitive slave.
After he had been in jail a month, the following notice
appeared in the National Intelligencer, August 1st,
1826:
"Was committed to the jail
of "Washington county, District of Columbia, on the 2d
of July last, as a runaway, a negro man by the name of
Gilbert Horton. He is live feet four
inches high, stout made, has large full eyes, and a scar
on his left arm near the elbow. Had on, when
committed, a tarpaulin hat, linen shirt, blue cloth
jacket and trousers. Says that he was born free in
the State of New York, near Peekskill. The owner
or owners of the above described negro, if any, are
requested to come and prove him and take him away, or he
will be sold for his jail fees and other expenses, as
the law directs.
|
"RICHARD BURR,
"FOR TENCH RINGOLD,
Marshal." |
[Page 332] -
This advertisement happened
to meet the eye of the Hon. Wm. Jay,
a son of the celebrated Governor John Jay,
who took immediate measures to procure a meeting of the
citizens of West Chester county. That meeting
adopted a series of resolutions, requesting his
Excellency De Witt Clinton to demand from
the proper authorities the instant liberation of
Horton, as a free citizen of the State of New York.
In reply to the Governor's letter, he was informed that
the Marshal, having become satisfied that Horton
was a free man, had liberated him. The truth
probably was, that the Marshal had notice of the
proceedings of the State of New York, and knowing (what
was generally well known) that De Witt Clinton
was not a man to be trifled with, and that he would, at
any hazard, maintain and defend the rights of his own
State, and every citizen of it, with a firmness and a
perseverance not to be evaded or eluded, preferred the
immediate liberation of Horton, by what might
seem to be a voluntary act, to a compulsory discharge,
in pursuance of a requisition from the Governor of a
free State.
The following is a copy of the letter of De Witt
Clinton to John Q. Adams, President of the
United States, in the case alluded to:
|
"ALBANY, 4th September 1826. |
"SIR, - I have the honor to
inclose copies of the proceedings of a respectable
meeting of inhabitants of West Chester county, in this
State, and of an affidavit of John Owen by which
it appears that one GILBERT HORTON a free man
of color, and a CITIZEN of this State, is unlawfully
imprisoned in the jail of the city of Washington, and
[Page 333] -
From whatever authority a law authorizing such
proceedings may have emanated, whether from the
municipality of Washington, the Legislature of Maryland,
or the Congress of the United States, it is, at least,
void and unconstitutional in its application to a
CITIZEN, and could never have intended to extend further
than to fugitive slaves. As the District of
Columbia is under the exclusive control of the national
government, I conceive it my duty to apply to you for
the liberation of Gilbert Horton, as a
freeman and a citizen, and feel persuaded that this
request will be followed by immediate relief.
|
I have the honor to be, &.,
"DE WITT CLINTON." |
SOLOMON NORTHUP, a
citizen of Washington county, State of New York, was
kidnapped in 1841, and conveyed to Louisiana, and there
held as a slave for twelve years; but, through an almost
miraculous chain of circumstances, he was enabled to
impart the fact to his friends at Saratoga. His
Excellency, Washington Hunt, demanded from
the authorities of Louisiana, the safe delivery of
Solomon Northup, a free citizen of the
State of New York. The demand was complied with,
and he was restored to his family, and friends.
HOSEA EASTON thus forcibly alludes to the claims
of colored Americans to the rights and privileges of
citizenship: -
"In this country, we behold the remnant of a once
noble, but now heathenish people. I would have my
readers lose sight of the African character. For
at this time, circumstances have established as much
difference between them and their ancestry, as exists
between them and any other
[Page 334] -
race or nation. In the first place, the colored
people who are born in this country, are Americans in
every sense of the word,Americans by birth, genius,
habits, language, &c. They are dependent on
American climate, American aliment, American government,
and American manners, to
sustain their American bodies and minds; a withholding
of the enjoyment of any American privilege from an
American man, either governmental, ecclesiastical,
civil, social or alimental, is in effect taking away his
means of subsistence; and consequently, taking away his
life. Every ecclesiastical body which denies an
American the privilege of participating in its benefits,
becomes his murderer. Every State which denies an
American a citizenship, with all its benefits, denies
him his life. The claims the colored people set
up, therefore, are the claims of Americans. Their
claims are founded in an original agreement of the
contracting parties, and there is nothing to show that
color was a consideration in the agreement. It is
well known, that when the country belonged to Great
Britain, the colored people were slaves. But when
America revolted from Britain, they were held no longer
by any legal power. There was no efficient law in
the land except martial law, and that regarded no one as
a slave. The inhabitants were governed by no other
law, except by resolutions adopted from time to time by
meetings convoked in the different colonies. Upon
the face of the warrants by which these district and
town meetings were called, there is not a word said
about the color of the attendants. In convoking
the Continental Congress of the 4th of
[Page 335] -
September, 1774, there was not a word said about color.
At a subsequent period, Congress met again, to get in
readiness twelve thousand men to act in any emergency;
at the same time, a request was forwarded to
Connecticut, New Hampshire, and Rhode Island, to
increase this army to twenty thousand men. Now, it
is well known that hundreds of the men of which this
army was composed were colored men, and recognised by
Congress as Americans. * * *
"Excuses have been made in vain to cover up the
hypocrisy of this nation. The most corrupt policy
which ever disgraced its barbarous ancestry has been
adopted by both Church and State, for the avowed purpose
of withholding the inalienable rights of one part of the
subjects of the government. Pretexts of the lowest
order, which are neither witty nor decent, and which
rank among that order of subterfuges under which the
lowest of ruffians attempt to hide when exposed to
detection, are made available. * * * I have no
language to express what I see, and hear, and feel, on
this subject. Were I capable of dipping my pen in
the deepest dye of crime, and of understanding the
science of the bottomless pit, I should then fail in
presenting to the intelligence of mortals on earth, the
true nature of American deception. There can be no
appeals made in the name of the laws of the country, or
philanthropy, or humanity, or religion, that are capable
of drawing forth any thing but the retort,you are a
negro! If we call to our aid the thunder tones of
the cannon and the arguments of fire-arms, (vigorously
managed by black and white men, side by side,)
[Page 336] -
as displayed upon Dorchester Heights, and at Lexington,
and at White Plains, and at Kingston, and at Long
Island, and elsewhere, the retort is, you are a negro!
If we present to the nation a Bunker's Hill, our
nation's altar, (upon which she offered her choicest
sacrifice,) with our fathers, and brothers, and sons,
prostrate thereon, wrapped in fire and smokethe incense
of blood borne upward upon the wings of sulphurous
vapor, to the throne of national honor, with a halo of
national glory echoing back, and spreading over and
astonishing the civilized world; and if we present the
thousands of widows and orphans, whose only earthly
protectors were thus sacrificed, weeping over the fate
of the departed; and anon, tears of blood are extorted,
on learning that the government for which their lovers
and sires had died refuses to be their protector; if we
tell that angels weep in pity, and that God, the eternal
Judge, 'will hear the desire of the humble, judge the
fatherless and the oppressed, that the man of the earth
may no more oppress,' the retort is, YOU ARE A NEGRO!
If there is a spark of honesty, patriotism, or religion,
in the heart or the source from whence such refuting
arguments emanate, the devil incarnate is the brightest
seraph in paradise.
Hon. Norton S. Townshend, in submitting to the
Senate a bill in accordance with the wish of petitioners
for equal suffrage, remarked, "That the reasons were so
ably set forth in the following memorial of J. Mercer
Langston, that nothing further seemed to be
required; and as Mr. Langston had been appointed
by a State Convention of colored peo-
[Page 337] -
pie, and therefore spoke by authority, the committee
adopt the language of the memorial, making it a part of
their report."
From the memorial thus highly complimented, I make the
following extracts. It was presented to the
General Assembly of the State of Ohio, April 19, 1854:
"What, then, are the grounds upon which we claim the
elective franchise?
"In answering this question, we have to say, in the
first place, that we are men. Nor is it necessary
to enter upon an argument in support of so self-evident
a proposition. We possess the physical, the
intellectual and the moral attributes common to
humanity. We have the same feelings, desires and
aspirations that other men have; and we are capable of
the same high intellectual and moral culture. As
men, then, we have rights, inherent rights, which civil
society is bound to respect, nay, more, which civil
society is bound to. protect and defend. Prominent among
those rights, and one which we deeply love and cherish,
is the elective franchise, is the privilege of saying
who shall be our rulers, and what shall be the character
of the laws under which we live. By none is this
right held in higher estimation than by the colored men.
And those greatly mistake who think that we are
contented without it. We are not. We know
that it is one of our dearest rights. We feel that
we ought to have it. We feel that civil society is
under obligation to secure it to us, and protect us in
its enjoyment. The first consideration that we
offer, therefore, in favor of granting our claim, is
[Page 338] -
the fact that it is a dictate of justice and fair
dealing, between civil society and men living within its
jurisdiction. *
*
*
*
*
* "We could, with propriety,
however, claim so much at your hands, if we were
foreigners. But when it is remembered that we are
native-born inhabitants, and by our birth citizens, the
consideration which has just been offered appears doubly
significant, and therefore doubly forcible. It is
needless for us, in grounding our claim to the elective
franchise upon our nativity, to remind you, that it is a
principle fully recognised by the Constitution of the
country, that natural birth gives citizenship,
otherwise, our naturalization laws are absurd and
nonsensical. Says Chancellor Kent,
in confirmation of our view, 'Citizens, under our
Constitution and laws, mean free inhabitants born within
the United States, or naturalized under the laws of
Congress. If a slave, born in the United States,
be manumitted, or otherwise lawfully discharged from
bondage, or if a black man be born within the United
States, and born free, he becomes thenceforward a
citizen.' If Chancellor Kent's
principle be correct, we may ask, with some degree of
force, where is the right to dis-franchise us where is
the right to strip us of our citizenship? Said the
Hon. Mr. Baldwin, in the United States Senate, 'When
the Constitution of the United States was framed,
colored men voted in a majority of these States; they
voted in the State of New York, in Pennsylvania, in
Massachusetts, in Connecticut, Rhode Island, New Jersey,
Delaware and North Carolina; and long after the adoption
[Page 339] -
of the Constitution, they continued to vote in North
Carolina and Tennessee also. The Constitution of
the United States makes no distinction of color.
There is no word 'white' to be found in that instrument.
All free people then stood upon the same platform in
regard to their political rights, and were so recognised
in most of the States of the Union. *
*
*
"We claim our enfranchisement also upon the ground that
tee are patriotic. It is a fact that we love this
country. We love her Constitution, and we love
those free institutions that might and ought to be built
up all over this land under its benign influence.
Indeed, at no time have we manifested for this country
any other spirit than that of deep, abiding affection.
And that, too, when we have been outraged and abused
most barbarously. *
*
*
*
*
*
" 'Their right,' (colored Americans) in the truthful
language of John G. Whittier, 'like that of their
white fellow citizens, dates back to the dread
arbitrament of war. Their bones whiten every
stricken field of the Revolution; their feet tracked
with blood the 6nows of Jersey; their toil built up
every fortification south of the Potomac; they shared
the famine and nakedness of Valley Forge, and the
pestilential horrors of the old Jersey prison ship.'
Have we, then, no claim to an equal participation in the
blessings which [Page 340] -
have 'grown out of the national independence,' which we
fought to establish? Is it right, is it just, is
it generous, is it magnanimous, to withhold from us
these blessings and 'starve our patriotism'? What
foreigner, what Irish or German emigrant, has ever given
such evidences of deep devotion to your government
And yet, you have taken pains to make a special
arrangement by which, in due time, they are to enter
upon the full enjoyment of citizenship. To this
arrangement we would not object. We simply ask that we,
who have given such strong and significant proofs of our
love of this country and its laws, be clothed in the
livery of free and independent citizenship.
"As touching this point, we would also submit the views
of Hon. William H. Seward, as presented in the
following letter:
" 'Washington, May 16, 1850.
" 'Dear Sir : Your letter of the 6th inst. has been
received. I reply to it cheerfully and with
pleasure.
'It is my deliberate opinion, founded upon careful
observation, that the right of suffrage is exercised by
no citizen of New York more conscientiously, or more
sincerely, or with more beneficial results to society,
than it is by the electors of African descent. I
sincerely hope that the franchise will before long be
extended, as it justly ought, to this race, who of all
others need it most.
'I am, very respectfully, your obedient servant,
WILLIAM H. SEWARD.
"Thus it will be seen that, in the estimation of such
men men who have bestowed some thought upon our
condition and our conduct that we are not all so
ignorant [Page 341] -
and degraded that we are incapable of exercising the
elective franchise in an intelligent and manly manner.
"Permit us to say, in conclusion, then, in view of
these considerations, we hold that it is unjust,
anti-democratic, impolitic, and ungenerous, to withhold
from us the right of suffrage."
Mr. Langston has since had satisfactory
proof that colored men are regarded as citizens by a
good portion of the Buckeyes. Here is his
announcement: "They put
upon their ticket the name of a colored man, who was
elected clerk of Brownhelm township, by a very handsome
majority, indeed. Since I am the only colored man
who lives in this township, you can easily guess the
name of the man who was so fortunate as to secure this
election. To my knowledge, the like has not been
known in Ohio before. It proves the steady march
of the anti-slavery sentiment, and augurs the inevitable
destruction and annihilation of American prejudice
against colored men. What we so much need, just at
this juncture and all along the future, is political
influence; the bridle by which we can check and guide to
our advantage the selfishness of American demagogues.
How important, then, it is, that we labor night and day
to enfranchise our selves."
WILLIAM J. WATKINS sums up the argument in behalf
of the citizenship of colored men as follows :
"It is said that the minister refused the negro a
passport, on the ground that a black man was not
considered a citizen of the United States. We
gravely ask the question, If we are not citizens, then
what are we? What constitutes citi- [Page 342] -
zenship in this country? Is color a constitutional
disqualification? If so, there are a great many
so-called white men who are not citizens, for we know
not a few who would be taken for colored men, if the
complexion were the standard. Neither does the
texture of the hair exclude any one from the privileges
of American citizens, that is, in compliance with the
edict of the Constitution. It is just as constitutional
to ostracise all the bald heads, or 'heads with sandy
hair,' as to thrust a man, in the country, with woolly
hair, outside the pale of Arnerican citizenship.
"We believe the Government recognizes the existence of
but two classes of population, natives, or citizens, and
aliens.
"Colored men, born on the soil, cannot be aliens; of
course not. They cannot, therefore, be naturalized.
Who ever heard of a colored American being naturalized
in the United States? This government naturalizes
foreigners only. We must, then, be CITIZENS. Our white
fellow-citizens may withhold our right, but they cannot
annihilate it.
"And now, with the broad, blazing sunlight of the
Revolution flashing across our path, and revealing to
the gaze of all men the prowess and patriotism of
colored Americans, in the hour that tried men's souls,
we are told we are not citizens. Shame upon this
ingrate Government! But we will continue to regard
ourselves as citizens, and as such demand our rights.
We ask no favors at the hands of the United States." |