Maryland State Archives

"State Constitutional Convention." The Weekly American, 1 June 1867. "An animated and interesting discussion took place [on Tuesday, May 28] on Article 24, which declares that 'Slavery shall not be permitted in this state.' Mr. [Albert] Ritchie [of Baltimore City] moved to strike out the article, and advocated it in a speech bristling with hard words against those who had 'wantonly plundered the State for nearly thirty millions of property,' meaning thereby the right of owning human flesh, and blood and muscle. Mr. [Thomas J.] McKaig, of Allegany, supported the notion and advanced the curious argument that the negro was a pre-Adamite race, that Africa was not submerged by the flood, and the negro not destroyed, because he was not worth destroying! The debate was continued by a number of gentlemen, all the speeches being characterized by a bitter spirit towards the fanatics who destroyed slavery, and the Convention finally adjourned without coming to a vote. A caucus was called for Tuesday evening, at which it was understood the subject would be decided upon. The general feeling on Tuesday appeared to be in favor of striking out the article. In all the speeches made the idea of compensation for the slaves emancipated, was more or less distinctly announced... [Wednesday, May 29]: ...The Declaration of Rights was again discussed. During the debate some of the members admitted their ignorance of the fact that Slavery was not in existence in Maryland, and the article reported by the Committee on the Bill of Rights, declaring that 'Slavery shall not be permitted in this State,' was rejected. As a compromise between those who do not believe that 'the institution' has been yet abolished, a section was adopted reciting 'that Slavery shall not be re-established in this State, but having been abolished under the policy and authority of the United States, compensation therefor is due from the United States.' There were twenty-four votes cast against this proposition. There are powers other than the gathering at Annapolis who have declared that Slavery shall not be re-established, and they have and will maintain their assertion, whether the Democracy of Maryland wish it or no, and that, too, without compensating the late slaveowner. The thirty-sixth article, relating to the competency of witnesses, caused another wrangle, objection being expressed by many members to the provision declaring that no person should be deemed incompetent as a witness on account of race or color. We have no doubt but that this provision will be voted down, the fossils of Maryland not being equal to the awarding of this matter of justice to their fellow man. South Carolina, and other of the late Rebel States, have long since 'accepted the situation,' and have passed laws giving to colored persons the rights to testify in the courts, but the Democratic party of Maryland in 1867 refuses to do so. Without coming to a vote, the body adjourned." Thursday. [May 30]: "In the Democratic Convention Thursday the committee to whom had been referred the 36th articlewith the pending amendments, submitted a majority and a minority report. The majority, composed of fifteen members of the committee, propose the following as an amendment to the article: 'Nor shall any person otherwise competent be deemed incompetent as a witness or juror on account of his religious belief, provided he believes in the existence of God, and that under His dispensation such person will be held morally accountable for his acts, and be rewarded or punished therfor, either in this world or in the world to come. No person shall be deemed incompetent as a witness on account of race or color, but the General Assembly may, at any time hereafter, change or modify this clauses if they shall deem it expendient.' Nine of the committee signed the minority report, which propses, as the concluding portion of the article, the following: 'Nor shall any white person be deemed incompetent as a witness or juror on account of religious belief, profession or practice, who believes in the esistence of God, and that under His dispensation such person will be held morally accountable for his acts, and be rewarded or punished therfor, either in this world or in the world to come.' A flood of talk followed on the amendments reported, the great question at issue being whether the negro should or should not be made a competent witness. Mr. [Frederick J.] Nelson [of Frederick County], who strongly opposed the majority report, very forcibly said that if they conceded 'the right to the witness-stand, the right to the jury-box, and the ballot-box followed each other in logical sequence.' Most true! and the 'logical sequence' will follow, no matter what the Annapolis Convention will do. They are but building a dam of sand against the great waves of right, humanity, justice and progress."

"From the State Capital. The Convention of Fossils. Views of a Representative Democrat." The Baltimore Weekly American, 1 June 1867.

"State Constitutional Convention." The Weekly American, 3 August 1867. "The Convention at Annapolis Wednesday [July 31] finally adopted the Declaration of Rights--hitherto published in our columns. One of the most remarkable features of this article is the section declaring that 'Slavery shall not be established in Maryland,' and demanding compensation from the United States for its abolition. The vote on its adoption was seventy-two yeas to seventeen nays."

"State Constitutional Convention." The Weekly American, 10 August 1867: "In the Convention at Annapolis Monday [Aug 5], the article in the elective franchise was finally adopted. One of the distinguishing features of this article is the fact that thousands of the soldiers of the late Rebel army, who are disfranchised (sic) by the laws of Congress in the States lately in rebellion, are allowed to vote in Maryland, while gallant men who fought in defence of the Government, and responded to the nation's call for help in its hour of need, are deprived of the ballot on account of the color of their skin. The thousands of paroled ex-Rebel soldiers now in Maryland are, of course, made voters here on the adoption of the proposed Constitution."

"State Constitutional Convention." The Weekly American, 17 August 1867: "In the Annapolis Convention Friday [Aug. 9]...During the debate on the Legislative Department Mr. [Fendall] Marbury, of Prince George's, moved to strike out the section which prohibits the Legislature making any appropriation as compensation for emancipated slaves. He said that he would not have renewed this subject except that he truly believed that this proposition struck down the rights of the people to the extent of sixty millions of dollars, and it would embarrass those who honestly wished to support the Constitution. The Convention refused to grant his request, which, however, had thirty-three votes in its favor.--Mr. [Walter] Mitchell, of Charles, moved that the section declaring that 'no person shall be incompetent as a witness on account of race or color, unless hereafter so declared by act of the General Assembly,' be submitted to the people as a separate question at the election held for the adoption or rejection of the Constitution. Mr. Mitchell's amendment was also rejected--yeas 54, nays 48--it requiring a vote of 60 to amend an article on its third reading."