The slave trade : $b Slavery and colorJervey, Theodore D. (Theodore Dehon)
History
The slave trade : $b Slavery and color
Jervey, Theodore D. (Theodore Dehon)
African Americans; Slave trade -- United States; Slavery -- United States; United States -- Race relations
“On motion of Mr. W. D. Evans, Sec. 34, was recurred to, and trouble
began. Mr. Evans proposed to amend the section by providing that the
miscegenation law shall not apply to persons of mixed blood, whose
status is that of white people. Mr. George Tillman stated, that he
was very feeble, but that he felt compelled to say something on this
subject. For one, he had felt ashamed when the delegate from Beaufort
had clapped his hands, and declared that the coons had a dog up a
tree. He was further mortified to see that the gentleman from Newberry
(Mr. Sligh) and the gentleman from Edgefield (Mr. B. Tillman) goaded
and taunted into putting in the constitution, that no person with
any trace of Negro blood should intermarry with a white person and
that for such marriage the Legislature should provide punishment even
beyond that of bastardizing children and adulterizing marriage. Mr.
Tillman said the Mississippi law forbidding marriage between white
people with those with more than one-eighth Negro blood is the old
South Carolina law. If the law is made, as it now stands, respectable
families in Aiken, Barnwell, Colleton and Orangeburg will be denied
right to intermarry among the people with whom they are now associated
and identified. At least one hundred families would be affected, to
his knowledge. They had sent good soldiers to the Confederate Army,
and are now landowners and taxpayers. He asserted, as a scientific
fact that there was not a full blooded Caucasian on the floor of the
Convention. Every member had in him a certain mixture of Mongolian,
Arab, Indian or other colored blood. The pure blooded white man had
needed and received an infusion of darker blood, to give him readiness
and purpose. It would be a cruel injustice and the source of endless
litigation, of scandal, horror, feud and bloodshed to undertake to
annul or forbid marriage for a remote, perhaps obsolete trace of Negro
blood. By the rule of evidence traditional notoriety was admissible
in proving pedigree. The doors would be opened to scandal, malice and
greed; to statements on the witness stand, that the father or the
grandfather, or grandmother had said that A or B had Negro blood in
their veins. Any man who is half a man would be ready to blow up half
the world with dynamite, to prevent or avenge attacks upon the honor
of his mother or the legitimacy or purity of the blood of his father.
He moved the restoration of the section to its original form.”[247]
Mr. George D. Tillman’s effort was successful, and the section, as
finally adopted stands:
“Art. III, Sec. 33. The marriage of a white person with a Negro or
mulatto or person who shall have one eighth or more of Negro blood
shall be unlawful and void.”
FOOTNOTES:
[232] Bryce, The American Commonwealth, Revised Edition (1910) p. 503,
V. 2.
[233] _Harper’s Weekly_, January 31st, 1891.
[234] _News and Courier_, September 15th, 1890.
[235] Ibid. October 16th, 1890.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account