_Sixthly_, in North Carolina, where Mr. Justice Gaston, in delivering the opinion of the Supreme Court of the State in the case of _The State_ v. _Manuel_, declared that “the Constitution extended the elective franchise to _every freeman_ who had arrived at the age of twenty-one and paid a public tax; and it is a matter of universal notoriety, that, under it, _free persons_, without regard to color, claimed and exercised the franchise, until it was taken from free men of color a few years since by our amended Constitution.”[145] To these authoritative precedents, drawn from the very epoch of the National Constitution, I might add other illustrations. I content myself with referring to the Constitution of Missouri, which, in speaking of “every free _white_ male citizen,”[146] admits by implication that colored persons may be _citizens_, and to the Code of Alabama, which declares that certain sections “do not apply to or affect any free person of color who by the Treaty between the United States and Spain became _a citizen of the United States, or the descendants of such_.”[147] But not only in six of the old thirteen States _all freemen_ without distinction of color were _citizens_, but also under the Articles of Confederation they were _citizens_. By the fourth article it was expressly declared that “the _free inhabitants_ of each of these States (paupers, vagabonds, and fugitives from justice excepted) shall be entitled to all privileges and immunities of _free citizens_ in the several States.” The meaning of this clause, which is clear on its face, becomes clearer still, when it is known, that, while it was under discussion, on the 25th of June, 1778, the delegates from South Carolina moved to amend it by inserting between the words “free inhabitants” the word “white,” so that the character of a citizen should be restricted to white persons. This proposition was rejected,--two States only voting for it, eight States against it, and the vote of one State being divided; so that the term “free inhabitants” was left in its full significance, without any distinction of descent or color. The Constitution of the United States next followed. And it contains not a sentence, phrase, or word of disfranchisement on account of descent or color, any more than on account of religion. * * * * *