Mr. SCOTT, of Philadelphia, said he was desirous to explain his views, and to express his opinions, with respect to this highly important question, as they might be looked upon hereafter, by some with curiosity, and by others, perhaps, with regard.

The question was one of great interest, inasmuch as it was supposed to affect the existing rights of the white population of the common wealth of Pennsylvania, and also, deeply to involve the interests of the people of colour residing therein. The subject was one which admitted of being discussed with entire coolness; and he was happy to say, that up to the present time, at least, it had been calmly, dispassionately, and deliberately discussed.

He would be willing to vote for the amendment proposed, if modified in the manner he would shortly point out, for he believed such an alteration of the constitution, as he had in contemplation, would be regarded as both wise and judicious.

When he should have read the modification he was about to propose, gentlemen would perceive that he was willing to insert the word 'white,' but with a qualification attached to it.

The language of the first part of the section now before the convention, Ian in this way :

In all elections by the citizens, every white freeman of the age of twenty-one years," &c., "shall enjoy the rights of an elector."

Now, he would move to add the following to the section:

"Provided, also, that the legislature may, at any time after the year 1860, by law passed at two successive annual sessions, extend the right of suffrage to such other persons, of whateaer colour, and upon such con ditions as to them may seem expedient."

Mr. S. said that this was an amendment which he should like to see adopted, modified, perhaps, but still retaining the principle of confining the elective franchise to the whites, with certain guards and checks.

He would now proceed to state the reasons why he desired such an amendment as this; and those reasons would be appreciated best, probably, if we looked, first to the change proposed to be made in the section under consideration; in the second place, to the inducement which may exist, to make that change; and, in the third place, to the practical result and operation of such a change.

He proposed, then, first, to call the attention of the convention to the change which would be created in the present constitution, by the adoption of this amendment. It was necessary that each member of this body should thoroughly understand the constitution, to enable him to give an honest and conscientious vote on the amendment of the delegate from the county of Philadelphia.

If it was true that the constitution of Pennsylvania, as it now stands, confers on the coloured man the right to vote, and that he is a citizen, then no delegate could vote either for his (Mr. S's) amendment, or that of the gentleman from the county of Philadelphia. He would say that no man who entertained this opinion, if he was a freeman in heart and sentiment, could conscientiously vote for either of the propositions. And why could be not?

If society, when forming itself into the social state, had conferred upon any body of men a right, they specified the grounds upon which they hold it. If, then, under the social compact, originally adopted, men had become members of that society for life, and had brought up their children under it, he held it to be politically and morally impossible for that social body, in, or out of, convention, to disfranchise those men. It was politically and morally, but not physically, impossible. He would freely admit, that if the great majority of the people of the commonwealth were to insist on such a denunciation, they could deprive a body of men of their rights. But, they would have the political and moral right, and the right of man, to resist any such attempt, at the point of the bayonet. And this would end in a civil war. He would, therefore, say, that he who believed that coloured men have the right to vote under the constitution of 1790-that they are members of the social compact-must vote against his (Mr. S's) proposition, and also that of the delegate from the county of Philadelphia. But that was not his opinion. He did not think they had a right under the existing constitution. He, however, might be mistaken. But, he felt himself bound to frame an opinion-to come to some conclusion.

He could not satisfy his own conscience, and fulfil his duty to his God and to his country, unless he made up his opinion, one way or the other, on a question of such vital importance as the present. He would state briefly, his reasons, for entertaining the opinion he did, in relation to this subject.

The right to vote, depended upon two requisites. The man who should present himself at the polls, must be a freeman and a citizen also. It was not sufficient that he was as free as the air we breathe-more than that was required of him, before he was permitted to vote.

He must, as he (Mr. S.) had already said, be a citizen. And, it was somewhat remarkable, that though the constitution of 1790 includes the two requisites of "freeman" and "citizen" too, the constitution of 1776 contains but the single requisite, that the individual presenting himself at the polls, shall be a "freeman."

The language of the constitution of 1776, was, "every freeman," &c.; but that of the constitution of 1790 was:

66

In elections by the citizens, every freeman," &c.

Now, what had transpired between the adoption of the constitution of 1776, and that of 1790? The legislature of Pennsylvania had passed the act of 1780, in relation to freemen, and which contains this strong language:

"No man or woman, of any nation, or colour, except the negroes and mulattoes who shall be registered as aforesaid, shall, at any time hereaf ter, be deemed adjudged or holden, within the territories of this commonwealth, as slaves or servants, for life, but as free men and free women,"

&c.

No man, therefore, it would be perceived, after the passage of the act of 1780, let him be of what nation or colour he might, except the negroes and mulattoes who should be registered, would be regarded in any other point of view, than as freemen.

The language of the act of 1780, was "freeman." And, in 1790, the framers of the present constitution, did not merely use the term "freeman"-they said:

"In elections by the "citizens," every freeman," &c. "shall enjoy he rights of an elector."

They adopted both qualifications. There were, also, other qualifications.

In the year 1790, when this constitution was adopted, what, he would inquire, was the extent and character of the black population in Pennsylvania? He did not know, accurately, what the extent of it was; but, judging from the ratio of increase, and carrying back the calculation to 1790, it could not have exceeded four or five thousand. What was their condition in 1790? They were still bondsmen, notwithstanding the act of 1780. Yes! the badge and stamp of slavery was still upon them. We had, in 1790, those who were slaves before the act of 1780 was passed, besides their children, who remained in slavery until the age of twentyeight.

The black man, then, in 1790, was in a condition of slavery, but with the prospect of freedom before him. But, he apprehended that it was the intention of every one of the white population of the state of Pennsylvania, and of the framers of the constitution of 1790, to call every man belonging to, and residing in the state, a "citizen" of this free govern

ment.

What, he asked, was the language of the constitution of 1790?

"We, the people of the commonwealth of Penasylvania, do make and ordain," &c.

This followed the constitution of the United States, which had passed a few years before, and the language of which, was: "We, the people of the United States," &c. " this constitution for the United States of America."

do ordain and establish

Now, it was unquestionably true, that the people of the United States, assembled in convention, did not mean to say that the coloured population of this Union, formed a portion of that people, who were competent to frame a constitution. They did not mean to include them as having participated in framing the constitution. Neither did the framers of the constitution of Pennsylvania, in 1790, mean to say that the four or five thousand blacks, comprehended a portion of that people, who were competent to frame a government.

For these, and other reasons, (which he had not time to express, because of the oppression of the rule limiting delegates to a certain number of minutes to speak) he had become satisfied that the blacks were not enti tled by the constitution of Pennsylvania, to the right of suffrage. He had arrived at this conclusion, after deep and anxious reflection, for he must avow, that no question had ever before, pressed upon him with such deep and awful responsibility, as this had done. He would repeat, that he had come to this conclusion, after deep and anxious reflection-after days of thought, and nights of almost agony. He believed it, and must vote accordingly.

Then, according to his interpretation of the existing constitution, we have the case of a coloured population among us, who are not permitted to vote-not because they are not "freemen," but for the reason that they are not "citizens." Now, from this disposition of matters, two results followed, and to which he earnestly invited the attention of the convention. He contended that negroes cannot vote, because they are not citizens. Now, he would ask the friends of the coloured population, to observe his first result, which, if it was right, and they adopted his proposition, they would do so in a spirit of kindness to that coloured population. If, then, it was true that they have not the right, because they are not citizens, then was his amendment in entire accordance with the past glory and policy of Pennsylvania, for it looked to a prespective amelioration of the present condition of the blacks.

This was the result of his first proposition. this:

The other result was

They cannot vote, because they are not citizens. If that was true, and the ground of that opinion correct, we might, by a provision which shall look to a prospective amelioration of their condition, confer upon them the right of voting, without the right of being elected.

It had been said all round the convention, that the right to elect, gave the right to be an elector. He denied it. The constitution of Pennsyl vania prescribes, as a qualification for office, a citizenship of the state of Pennsylvania. And, to that, was to be added the qualification of an elec

tor.

The right to be an elector might be conferred, and the right to be elected, withheld. The right might be conferred, under any restriction, for it was entirely under legislative control.

The question, then, was, whether we could give, at a future period, this power to the legislature, and whether there was any thing in it, which would be to their prejudice?

He would now state what he conceived to be the inducements which presented themselves to adopt this course of action. He felt conscious that he, in common with every member of this body, had a serious duty to perform, for which he was responsible, not merely here, but hereafter. Every member lay under a deep responsibility to the great Creator of the Universe, for the manner in which he discharged his duty.

I am inclined to think, said Mr. S., from my observations of the world, and from a knowledge of history, that Heaven smiles or frowns upon nations, according to their course of conduct. I think that the nation which pursues a course of general benevolence, of general humanity-of regard for the whole human race, would be more likely to receive the smiles of the Most High, than that nation which disregards those considerations, and looks only, in its legislation, to present indulgence, present passion and prejudice.

In my opinion, we owe something to the cause of liberty, and to the cause of freedom. We owe much to that cause. We are, beyond all dispute, the only republic upon the face of the earth; the only peoplethe only nation professing to be governed by the will of the people, and

adopting that will as the corner stone of our institutions. We are trying an experiment, on the final result of which, the fate of the world, either for the permanency of republican institutions, or those of a despotic and monarchial character, depend.

As a republican people, we are bound to respect every rank-are bound to elevate to the scale of humanity, all human beings who come within the limits of the commonwealth of Pennsylvenia. The eyes of other nations are upon all your legislation in this particular; and the Republic may be more interested than we imagine, in our proceedings on this important question.

I do not ask you to give the coloured population of this commonwealth the right of suffrage, nor to confer upon them the right of citizenship; but merely to hold out, prospectively, that they may earn, by good conduct and actions, the right of suffrage hereafter.

The commonwealth of Pennsylvania should so nurse all her resources, as, at all moments of future peril and of contingency, to be prepared for the worst. And among her greatest resources, as one of the greatest nations on the face of the earth, is her population. She is so to deal

with them-so to treat them, as at all times to be able to exact from them all that their intellect can give, and all that their life's blood can bestow, if it should be necessary to ask it of them.

We should not forget that we are dealing with a class of men who have sensibilities like ourselves-who have minds like ourselves, which came from the Great Creator; who are to be judged by the same Great Being as ourselves,-and whatever may be said here, will go to mother earth, and perhaps be laid side, by side, with us.

We say the blacks are a degraded people. A degraded people! I doubt whether the term is true. They are a despised people, that is certain. So were God's own chosen people, when in a state of captivity. They are a despised people; but, are they a degraded people? What constitutes the presence or absence of degradation? Degraded is he who has no knowledge of the true God-who has no knowledge of the rights of

man.

But, look at a man who has a knowledge of the true God, of free government, and of the rights of man, and I ask you whether you can call that man a degraded man? I ask you whether the coloured population of Pennsylvania, have not sprung from the same Great Creator, as we ourselves have? I ask if the coloured population have not the same knowledge of God, and of the rights of man; he meant those who had raised themselves, by their industry and morality, to respectability? 'Their churches and creeds are the same, we know, I would appeal to their memorial which has been laid upon the table of each member of this convention, as a proof that they have a knowtedge of the rights of man, and of the laws of freedom. I say, therefore, that they may be a despised people, but as a whole, they cannot be regarded as a degraded people. If so, how? By the oppression of the white man; reduced to slavery by ourselves-trampled upon by us, and then reproaci.ed for the

result of that act.

Man will always perpetrate this species of violence, and add insult to injury. There is no flower so fair, of animated creation, that man does not