He is rigidly held to pay his quota of taxes; but you will not allow him to ask for their reduction. And still further, under all your pension laws for Revolutionary services, and for services in other wars, whether on land or sea, he is entitled to a pension precisely as if he were white; but you will not allow him to solicit aid under these laws. Such is a simple statement of the injustice you are about to do. On this statement alone, without one word of argument or illustration, you will surely recoil. But this proposition proceeds on two assumptions, each of which is radically false: _first_, that a free person of African descent is not a citizen of the United States; and, _secondly_, that none other than a citizen is entitled to petition Congress. In support of the first assumption is the recent decision of the Supreme Court in the case of Dred Scott. But against that decision--so unfortunate for the character of the tribunal from which it proceeded,--which has degraded that tribunal hardly less than it sought to degrade the African race--I oppose the actual fact in at least _six_ of the original thirteen States at the adoption of the Constitution. _First_, in Massachusetts, where the present petitioners reside, all persons, without distinction of color, are treated as citizens by its Constitution adopted in 1780. _Secondly_, in Virginia, the State represented by the Senator [Mr. MASON] who brings forward this decree of disfranchisement, the same principle prevailed at the same time. And here I call attention to the 11th volume of Hening’s Virginia Statutes, where, on page 322, may be found the law of October, 1783, which repeals that of 1779, limiting citizenship to whites, and enacts, “that _all free persons_ born within the territory of this Commonwealth … shall be deemed citizens of this Commonwealth,” without one word referring to descent or color. _Thirdly_, in New Hampshire, whose Constitution conferred the elective franchise upon “every inhabitant of the State having the proper qualifications,”--of which descent or color was not one. _Fourthly_, in New York, where the Constitution conferred the elective franchise upon “every male inhabitant of full age who shall have personally resided,” &c., “if during the time aforesaid he shall have been a freeholder,” &c.,--without any discrimination of descent or color. _Fifthly_, in New Jersey, by whose Constitution the elective franchise was conferred upon “_all inhabitants_ of this colony, of full age, who are worth fifty pounds, proclamation money, clear estate,”--also without any discrimination of descent or color.