[150] Thirteenth Annual Report of American and Foreign Anti-slavery Society, 1827, pp. 67-8. [151] Tenth Annual Report of American Colonization Society, 1827, pp. 67-8. [152] Quarterly Review of the M. E. Church, South, April, 1892, 119-120. [153] Methodist Quarterly Review, lxiii, 132. [154] Quarterly Review of the M. E. Church, South, April, 1892, 120. [155] Thirteenth Annual Report of the American and Foreign Anti-slavery Society, 1853, p. 80. [156] Ibid., p. 71. [157] Thirteenth Annual Report of American and Foreign Anti-slavery Society, 1853, pp. 73-4. [158] Ibid., pp. 67-8. [159] Ibid., p. 82. [160] McNeilly, James H., Religion and Slavery, p. 42. [161] Harrison, p. 91. [162] Ibid., p. 92. [163] Goodspeed, p. 683. [164] Harrison, p. 40. [165] Ibid., 67. [166] Ibid., 73. [167] Goodspeed, p. 694. [168] Ibid., p. 697. [169] Ibid., p. 698. [170] Memoirs of Rt. James H. Otey, p. 94. [171] _Memoirs of Rt. James H. Otey_, p. 93. [172] Harrison, 304. [173] Harrison, 304. CHAPTER VI LEGAL STATUS OF THE FREE NEGRO I. THE ESTABLISHMENT OF A POLICY. A. _The Policy of North Carolina._ The original policy of North Carolina towards manumission was that the owner of slaves could free them by deed, will, or contract. He was at liberty to renounce his title to them absolutely or in a modified manner, if he thought proper.[1] In 1777, the state asserted its control over emancipation by conferring on the county courts the power to grant petitions for freedom on a basis of meritorious services.[2] The reasons for this change were that it was thought necessary to protect the public against being charged for the maintenance of manumitted slaves, and that free negroes were a menace to the body politic. B. _The Policy of Tennessee to 1831._ This policy worked a hardship in practice because it limited the courts to cases of meritorious services. It frequently separated families because all members were seldom entitled to freedom at the same time. In 1801, Tennessee removed the limited jurisdiction of the courts by giving them practically plenary power over manumission.[3] The only restriction on the courts was that they sustain the policy of the state. Of course, the legislature could by special act grant freedom in any particular case. This was the policy of Tennessee to 1831. C. _Changes in the Policy._