For the Christian Recorder.

COLORED MEN IN THE REVOLUTION, AND IN
THE WAR OF 1812.

On the capture of Washington by the British forces, it was judged expedient to fortify, without delay, the principal towns and cities exposed to similar attacks. The vigilance Committee of Philadelphia waited upon three of the principal colored citizens, James Forten, Bishop Allen, and << Absalom Jones>> , soliciting the aid of the people of color in erecting suitable defences for the city. Accordingly, twenty-five hundred colored men assembled in the State House yard, and from thence marched to Gray's Ferry, where they labored for two days almost without intermission. Their labors were so faithful and efficient that a vote of thanks was tendered to them by the committee. A battalion of colored troops was at the same time organized in the city under an officer of the United States' Army, and they were on the point of marching to the frontier when peace was proclaimed. General Jackson's proclamations to the free colored inhabitants of Louisiana, in his first inviting them to take up arms, he said: - "As sons of freedom, you are now called on to defend our most inestimable blessings. As Americans, your country looks with confidence to her adopted children for a valorous support. As fathers, husbands, and brothers, you are summoned to rally around the standard of the eagle to defend all which is dear in existence." The second proclamation is one of the highest compliments ever paid by a military chief to his soldiers: -
"to the free people of color - Soldiers: When, on the banks of the Mobile, I called you to take up arms, inviting you to partake of the perils and glory of your white fellow citizens, I expected much from you, for I was not ignorant that you possessed qualities most formidable to an invading enemy. I knew with what fortitude you could endure hunger and thirst, and all the fatigues of a campaign. I knew well how you loved your native country, and that you, as well as ourselves, had to defend what man holds most dear - his parents, wife, children, and property. You have done more than I expected. In addition to the previous qualities I before knew you to possess, I found among you a noble enthusiasm which leads to the performance of great things.
"Soldiers: The President of the United States shall hear how praiseworthy was your conduct in the hour of danger, and the representatives of the American people will give you the praise your exploits entitle you to. Your General anticipates them in applauding your noble ardor."
It will thus be seen that whatever honor belongs to the "heroes of the Revolution and the volunteers in the second war of independence," is to volunteers in the second war of independence," is to be divided between the white and the colored man. And now they (the whites) tell us we have no rights that they are bound to respect. "What right, I demand," said an American orator, in this city, some years ago, "have the children of Africa to a homestead in the white man's country?" The answer will in part be found in the facts which we have presented to your notice. Their rights, like that of their white fellow citizens, date back to the dread arbitrament of battle; their bones whiten every stricken field of the Revolution; their feet tracked with blood the snows of Jersey; their toil built up every fortification south of the Potomac; they shared the famine and nakedness of Valley forge; and the pestilential horrors of the old Jersey prison ship. Have they, then, no claim to an equal participation in the blessings which have grown out of the National Independence for which they fought? Is it just, is it magnanimous, is it safe even, to starve the patriotism of such a people - to cast their heart out of the treasury of the Republic, and to convert them, by political disfranchisement and social oppression, into enemies?
J.W.P.

February 9, 1861
THE CHRISTIAN RECORDER
Philadelphia, Pennsylvania

OUR DUTY. NO. 2.

What are the obligations and duties of the colored population of Pennsylvania?
In a former article we aimed to direct attention to the past policy of Pennsylvania, with respect to our rights and privileges. It is now our purpose to point out the corresponding obligations imposed on us, as colored citizens, for the rich blessing of freedom and happiness we enjoy.
We ask here to state explicitly, that as the highest legal tribunal in the land has declared that we are not citizens in the national sense of that term, that we, in turn, are absolved from any allegiance to the federal government. Every State that refuses to grant us the rights and privileges of citizenship, is to us a foreign government, while those who do, are entitled to receive our respect and allegiance.
In the great question of the union of these States which constitutes the Federal Government, we cannot claim to have any peculiar interest, except so far as Pennsylvania is involved in the various conflicting interests arising out of her relation to her sister states in the federal union. We should, as far as possible, survey the present struggle for constitutional rights, as interested, yet impartial witnesses, of the heroic labors of those who have dedicated their lives and fortunes to the cause of human freedom. If, in this conflict, states whose cause is unjust, should totter and fall, like the ancient republics, or dilapidated empires, we may deeply regret the cause but not the consequences of their action. The future historian will record the present difficulty as having its birth in the fact that the American people, in the formation of the republic, erred, by attempting to incorporate two conflicting elements in the framework of their government. It will, doubtless, furnish a landmark, that will protect future generations from the fallacy of attempting to perpetuate light with darkness.
Pennsylvania having, by her beneficent code, bestowed on us a qualified citizenship, which may be favorably contrasted with that conferred on whites, we in turn, owe her our support and allegiance, in the same proportion as we have received the protection of her laws.
It is a cardinal law of every nation, and under every for of civil government, that protection and allegiance are twin elements, and are indissolubly bound together. The citizen bestows on his government his loyalty, and a portion of his natural freedom, and in return, receives its protection. The maxim, "Our government right or wrong," embodies the principle of obedience to our civil rulers. Therefore, if in the impending contest between hostile sections, and sovereign states, the peaceful soil of Pennsylvania should be invaded, it should be our pride as well as our duty, to lend such aid as the State should demand.
General Jackson, in his proclamation to the free colored soldiers, after the battle of New Orleans, said to them, "I knew well how you loved your native country, and that you, as well as ourselves, had to defend what man holds most dear - his parents, wife, children, and property. You have done more than I expected."
And pray have we not like affections, interests, and sympathies? Cannot we view with pride and delight, the cloud-capped mountains of Pennsylvania, her rich valleys, noble rivers, silvery brooks, and green fields; not as foreigners and strangers, but as citizens, filled with all the endearing enchantments of home? We recur with pleasure and delight, to the truly noble deeds of our fathers in the American revolution, and the late war with Great Britain. Shall we, with our present enlightenment, be less inspired with the great question of human freedom, than they who were just emerging from the barbarism of the old world?
Let us show by our actions, that we are worthy sons of noble sires. Let the proud historic deeds of RICHARD ALLEN, << ABSALOM JONES>> , JAMES FOSTER, JEFFERY, JOHNSON, DAVIS, BLACK, DURHAM, and VASHON, animate us to place on record an enduring claim, to the affectionate regard, justice and humanity of the people of Pennsylvania.
With he Union as it is, we enter no claim, nor have we any special pleadings for its preservation. It belongs to those who created it. When it ceases to perform the object for which it was designed, it will no longer be useful. But to US, Pennsylvania is different; with her we have an abiding interest. In the preservation of her sovereignty, is involved our dearest associations, our liberty, happiness, and future prosperity.
With political creeds and political parties, we have no common investment; and look upon them only as the controlling machinery of civil liberty.
It is the individual humanity of the people which creates the public sentiment, that is the parent of law, on which we rely for refuge and support in a trying hour. Let us endeavor by our actions, to keep this stream purified, and amid the revolutionary changes in civil government, our course will be upward and onward.

(TO BE CONTINUED.)

August 5, 1789
The Pennsylvania Gazette

Philadelphia, August 1, 1789.

BY virtue of a writ of venditioni exponas, to me directed, will be exposed to sale, by public vendue, at the Merchants Coffee House in Second street, on Wednesday, the 12th instant, at seven o'clock in the evening, the following messuages and lots of ground, viz.

No. 1. A two story frame house and lot of land, situate on the east side of Third street from the river Delaware, and between Pine and Lombard streets, in the city of Philadelphia, nearly opposite to St. Peter's church; containing in front on Third street about 20 feet, and in length or depth 75 feet; bounded east by ground of John Miller, west by Third street, north by the next described lot, and south by ground of James Forrest, deceased.

No. 2. Also, one other two story frame messuage and lot of piece of ground, adjoining the aforesaid lot; bounded eastward by ground of John Miller, westward by Third street, northward by ground of Thomas Attmore, and southward by the above described lot. Said lots are subject to a ground-rent of L 13 10 0 per annum: Taken in execution as the property of << Absalom Jones>> , and to be sold, by

JAMES ASH, Sheriff.

April 5, 1786
The Pennsylvania Gazette

BY virtue of a writ of Levari Facias, to me directed, will be exposed to sale by Public Vendue, at the Old Coffee-House, in the city of Philadelphia, on Saturday, the 8th day of April next, at 7 o'clock in the evening, A two story Frame House, Frame Kitchen, and a new Frame stable, and Lot of Ground thereunto belonging; situate in the city of Philadelphia, containing in breadth on the east side of Third street (between Spruce and Lombard streets, and opposite to St. Peter's church) 22 feet, and in depth on the south side of Chester (or Stamper's) alley 66 feet; bounded on the east by ground of Edward Shippen, Esq; on the south by ground of << Absalom Jones>> &c. Said place has been for some time past (and now is) occupied as a public house of entertainment; subject to L [blank] per annum, and sold as the property of John Macklin, by

JOSEPH COWPERTHWAIT, Sheriff.
Philadelphia, March 27, 1786.

September 5, 1878
THE CHRISTIAN RECORDER
Philadelphia, Pennsylvania

EPISCOPACY IN THE AFRICAN

METHODIST EPISCOPAL
CHURCH.
-----
BY REV. T.G. STEWARD.
-----

Besides being elective ordination or rather consecration, bears a [ ] to the Episcopacy. The [ ] to the chapter containing the ritual for setting a part bishops is “For the order of Bishops,” but no spiritual functions are bestowed which the elder did not possess, consequently the term in general use, “Consecration,” is more fitting. This would agree better with the historic statement that Rev. Richard Allen was “solemnly set apart to the Episcopal office” or rather “for” the Episcopal office. If any stress is to be laid upon this “for” it would seem that the election and the ordination were not complete in effect “until the General Conference did unanimously receive the said Richard Allen as their Bishop.”
The question ask at the annual conference is, “Who have been elected by the General Conference to the episcopal office and to superintend the church." Here it is held that a man is made superintend and by election and an incumbent of the Episcopal office bite election. If there are is any difference in the significance of the terms “bishop” and “superintendent,” it is evident that he is made one as much as the other by election. He is elected to the episcopal office and elected to superintend.
In the ordination formula, the Bishop and elder say (The Lord) “pour upon thee the Holy Ghost for the office and work of a bishop in the church of God now committed unto thee bite imposition of our hands,” etc.
here again we have the same results following ordination which follow election. The man is inducted into the office and work of Bishop. It is the same episcopal office to which he was elected and a special "work” to super intend the church. So that election and ordination conjoin to bring the candidate to the same result, and the whole result is sometimes ascribed to election, sometimes to ordination. It is safe to say that although consecration followers election it conveys no additional power.
It election and ordination terminate at the same point, they also start from the same point. In election is by the General conference, ordination is by the General conference, not in its entirety, but in special delegation a "Bishop and six elders.” The Bishop himself says, “our hands,” speaking for himself and the elders jointly officiating; but Bishop and elders performed the act by the authority and on behalf of the General conference, and carry to the candidate no higher authority than the General conference.
The difficulty of maintaining a different view from this has driven not a few good man into the << Absalom Jones>> theory; a theory which can only provoke a smile among those who have read the controversies respecting episcopacy occurring in the 17th and 18th-centuries. For the sake of giving the stream a higher bed, men have tried to give the fountain a higher placed on the << Absalom Jones>> theory; but it is an "empty cistern,” because if all our Bishop should die or be expelled general conference has provided that seven elders without any << Absalom Jones>> should set apart the elected Bishop not to a new Episcopacy but to the same old Episcopacy. All of our episcopacy therefore comes from the General conference and is so completely under the control of the General conference that restriction of similar to that which God enjoined concerning job is considered necessary; God said to satan of Job, “behold he is in thine hand, but save his life.” Episcopacy among us is in the hands of the General Conference with the single pledge that it shall not be done away with.
But conclusion, than, I think, is safely reached, that Episcopacy as it obtains in this African Methodist Episcopal Church is not an imported institution having rights, powers, functions, privileges and prerogatives previously determined; but is both in election and ordination the creature of the General conference, having no existence or possibility of existence previous to the origin of the church.
From this conclusion the way to the discussion of the character of the office and its responsibilities is comparatively easy, and yet I do not remember ever to have met anything in all our publications defining the office and work of a Bishop.

August 15, 1878
THE CHRISTIAN RECORDER
Philadelphia, Pennsylvania

EPISCOPACY IN THE AFRICAN
METHODIST EPISCOPAL
CHURCH.
-----
REV. T.G. STEWARD.
-----

As we are about half way between the sessions of the General Conference, the preachers certainly are cool enough to consider in a quiet way, questions relating to the important office of the episcopate.

Already the question, “Do we need more bishops?” has been discussed in the columns of the RECORDER, and I doubt not the question who these “more bishops” should be, have been talked over in meetings which might have been better employed. Not that I would condemn such discussions of men and measures, but then they so often lead to schemes, and preachers, in the main, being very poor politicians, are often doomed to disappointment as they see

“The best laid schemes of mice and men

Gang aft aglee.”

It may, however, be fitting to ask all candidates and their friends to come squarely up to the consideration of the nature, labors and responsibilities of this office as it exists among us.
Episcopacy is elective. Rev. Richard Allen was unanimously elected to the bishopric, and every other incumbent has reached that office since by election. This cannot be too strongly insisted upon, as it defines at once the source of all its powers. Our episcopacy derives nothing out of, or antecedent to that first vote. This fact makes our episcopacy truly original and leaves its functions and powers to determine, not by appeals to ancient models, but by the body crating it. This power alone shall declare what manner of office they create.
Stress has been laid upon the part taking the ordination by Rev. Absolom Jones, as though this conveyed to Allen some shadow of Episcopacy as it existed in the Protestant Episcopal Church.
This has been pushed with so much force that in a book now before me called “A History of the Rise of Methodism in America,” published in 1859, by Rev. John Lednum, of the Philadelphia Conference, this paragraph occurs: “The next place of worship erected by the Methodists in this city was for the use of the colored people and was called 'Bethel.' It was opened about 1794. For several years the society connected with this house was subject to the discipline of the Methodist Episcopal Church, the preacher in charge of the St. George's Station having charge of it. But a plan was devised among them by which they became independent with Richard Allen at their head, who subsequently was ordained bishop by the Rev. Bishop White of the Protestant Episcopal Church, of this city.” This is a very harmless misstatement on account of its very grossness! A black man ordained to the episcopacy by Bishop White in this city under such circumstance as this writer describes. How could a man write with such ignorance of his subject, and this in 1859! And he a member of the Methodist Episcopal Church within a half hour's reach of information which would have saved him from writing a paragraph impossible to be true! The thing did not take place and could not take place and the Methodist Minister who did not know that much in 1859 was Rev. J. Lednum, of the Philadelphia Conference!
What the Rev. << Absalom Jones>> did carries with it no weight whatever, as he had by the laws of his church no authority to ordain. His hand touching Allen's head carried to it none of the traditions of that old historic church which he represented, nor in any way clothed him with the whole or any part of the episcopacy of that great church. Allen's episcopacy comes up in that unanimous election and is entirely the bold gift of that humble body of Christian ministers. Episcopacy, with us, is purely American in birth, being born in Philadelphia, the city Independence, and purely American in character, being purely elective and deriving not a part, but all its powers from the General Conference.

(To be continued.)

June 2, 1838
THE COLORED AMERICAN
New York, New York

SELECTED.

APPEAL
Of Forty Thousand Citizens, threatened with Disfranchisement,
to the people of Pennsylvania: -

Concluded from our last.

Said the Hon. Charles Miner, of Pennsylvania, in Congress, February 7th, 1828 -

"The African race make excellent soldiers. - Large numbers of them were with Perry, and aided to gain the brilliant victory on lake Erie. A whole battalion of them was distinguished for its soldiery appearance."

The Hon. Mr. Clark, in the Convention which revised the Constitution of New York, in 1821, said, in regard to the right of suffrage of colored men -

"In the war of the revolution these people helped to fight your battles by land and by sea. Some of your states were glad to turn out corps of colored men, and to stand shoulder to shoulder with them. In your late war they contributed largely towards .... splendid victories. On lakes Erie and Champlain, where your fleets triumphed over a foe superior in numbers and engines of death, they were manned in a large proportion with men of color. And in this very house, in the fall of 1814, a bill passed, receiving the approbation of all the branches of your government, authorizing the governor to accept the services of 2,000 free people of color."

On the 20th of March, 1779, it was recommended by Congress to the States of Georgia and South Carolina to raise 3,000 colored troops who were to be rewarded for their services by their freedom. - The delegations from those States informed Congress that such a body of troops would be not only "formidable to the enemy," but would "lessen the danger of revolts and desertions" among the slaves themselves. (See Secret Journal of the Old Congress, Vol. 1. pages 105-107.)

During the last war, the free people of color were called to the defense of the country by GENERAL JACKSON, and received the following testimony to the value of their services, in which let it be remarked that they are addressed as fellow citizens with the whites:

"SOLDIERS! When, on the banks of the Mobile, I called you to take up arms, inviting you to partake the perils and glory of your white fellow citizens, I expected much from you - for I was not ignorant that you possessed qualities most formidable to an invading enemy. I knew with what fortitude you could endure hunger and thirst, and all the fatigues of a campaign. I knew well how you loved your native country, and that you had, as well as ourselves, to defend what man holds most dear, his parents, relations, wife, children, and property. You have done more than I expected. In addition to the qualities which I previously knew you to possess, I find, moreover, among you a noble enthusiasm, which leads you to the performance of great things. SOLDIERS - the President of the United States shall hear how praiseworthy was your conduct in the hour of danger, and the representatives of the American people will, I doubt not, give you the praise which your deeds deserve. Your General anticipates them in applauding your noble ardor, &c.

By order, (Signed) THOMAS BUTLER
Aid-de-Camp."

Are we to be thus looked to for help in the "hour of danger," be trampled under foot in the time of peace? In which of the battles of the revolution did not our fathers fight as bravely as yours, for American liberty? Was it that their children might be disfranchised and loaded with insult that they endured the famine of Valley Forge, and the horrors of the Jersey Prison Ship? Nay, among those from whom you are asked to wrench the birthright of CIVIL LIBERTY, are those who themselves when their blood on the snows of Jersey, and faced British bayonets in the most desperate hour of the revolution.

In the hours of danger, too, colored men have shown themselves the friends of their white countrymen. When the yellow fever ravaged Philadelphia in 1793, and the whites fled, and there were not found enough of them in the city to bury their own dead, the colored people volunteered to do that painful and dangerous duty. They appointed two of their own number to superintend the sad work, who afterwards received the following testimonial: -

"Having, during the prevalence of the late malignant disorder, had almost daily opportunities of seeing the conduct of << Absalom Jones>> and Richard Allen, and the people employed by them to bury the dead, I with cheerfulness give this testimony of my approbation of their proceedings, as far as the same came under my notice. Their diligence, attention and decency of deportment, afforded me at the time much satisfaction.

(Signed) MATTHEW CLARKSON, Mayor.
Philadelphia, Jan 23, 1794.

It is notorious that many whites who were forsaken by their own relations and left to the mercy of this fell disease, were nursed gratuitously by the colored people. Does this speak an enmity which would abuse the privileges of civil liberty to the injury of the whites? We have the testimony of a committee of the Senate of this commonwealth, no longer age than 1830, who were appointed to report upon the expediency of restricting the emigration of colored people into the commonwealth. The following extract from their report, signed by Hon. Mr. Breck, chairman, testifies to our character: "On this subject your committee beg to remark, that by the last census our colored population amounted to about 36,000, or whom 30,000 inhabit the eastern district, and only 6,000 the western. And this number, so small compared with the white population, is scattered among 1,500,000 of our own color, making 1 colored to 42 whites. So few of these, it is believed by your committee, need not at present be an object of uneasiness, and would not seem to require the enactment of any restrictive laws, MORE ESPECIALLY AS THEY ARE FOR THE GREATER PART, INDUSTRIOUS, PEACEABLE, AND USEFUL PEOPLE."

Be it remembered, fellow citizens, that it is only the "industrious, peaceable, and useful" part of the colored people that we plead. We would have the right of suffrage only as the reward of industry and worth. We care not how high the qualification be placed. All we ask, is that no man shall be excluded on account of his color, that the same rule shall be applied to all.

Are we to be disfranchised, lest the purity of the white blood should be sullied by an intermixture with ours? It seems to us that our white brethren might well enough reserve their fear, till we seek such alliance with them. We ask no social favors. We would not willingly darken the doors of these to whom the complexion and features, which our Maker has given us, are disagreeable. The territories of the commonwealth are sufficiently ample to afford us a home without doing violence to the delicate nerves of our white brethren, for centuries to come. Besides, we are not intruders here, nor were our ancestors. Surely you ought to bear as unrepiningly the evil consequences of your father's guilt as we those of our fathers' misfortune. Proscription and disfranchisement are the last things in the world to alleviate these evil consequences. Nothing, as shameful experience has already proved, can so powerfully promote the evil which you profess to deprecate, as the degradation of our race to the oppressive rule of yours. Give us that fair and honor, able ground which self-respect requires to stand on - and the dreaded amalgamation, if it takes place at all, shall be by your own fault, as indeed it always has been. We dare not give full vent to the indignation we feel on this point, but we will not attempt to wholly to conceal it. We ask a voice in the disposition of those public resources which we ourselves have helped to earn; we claim a right to be heard, according to our numbers, in regard to all those great public measures which involve our lives and fortunes, as well as those of our fellow citizens; we assert our right to vote at the polls as a shield against that strange species of benevolence which seeks legislative aid to banish us - and we are told that our white fellow citizens cannot submit to an intermixture of the races! Then let the indenturers, title-deeds, contracts, notes of hand, and all other evidences of bargain, in which colored men have been treated as men, be torn and scattered on the winds. Consistency is a jewel. Let no white man hereafter ask his colored neighbor's consent when he wants his property or his labor, lest he should endanger the Anglo-Saxon purity of his descendants? Why should not the same principle hold good between neighbor and neighbor, which is deemed necessary, as a fundamental principle, in the Constitution itself? Why should you be ashamed to act in private business, as the Reform Convention would have you act in the capacity of a commonwealth? But, no! we do not believe our fellow citizens, while with good faith they hold ourselves bound by their contracts with us, and while they feel bound to deal with us only by fair contract will ratify the arbitrary principle of the Convention, howmuchsoever they may prefer the complexion in which their Maker has pleased to clothe themselves.

We would not misrepresent the motives of the Convention, but we are constrained to believe that they have laid our rights a sacrifice on the altar of slavery. We do not believe our disfranchisement would have been proposed, but for the desire which is felt by political aspirants to gain the favor of the slaveholding States. This is not the first time that northern statesmen have "bowed the knee to the dark spirit of slavery," but it is the first time that they have bowed so low! Is Pennsylvania, which abolished slavery in 1780, and enfranchised her tax-paying colored citizens in 1790, now, in 1838, to get upon her knees and repent of her humanity, to gratify those who disgrace the very name of American Liberty, by holding our brethren as goods and chattels? We freely acknowledge our brotherhood to the slave, and our interest in his welfare. Is this a crime for which we should be ignominiously punished? The very fact that we are deeply interested for our kindred in bonds, shows that we are the right sort of stuff to make good citizens of. Were we not so, we should better deserve a lodging in your peniteutiaries than a franchise at your polls. Doubtless it will be well pleasing to the slaveholder of the South to see us degraded. They regard our freedom from chains as a dangerous example, much more our political freedom. They see in everything which fortifies our rights, an obstacle to the recovery of their fugitive property. Will Pennsylvania go backwards towards slavery, for the better safety of southern slave property? Be assured the South will never be satisfied till the old "Keystone" has returned to the point from which she started in 1780. And since the number of colored men in the commonwealth is so inconsiderable, the safety of slavery may require still more. It may demand that a portion of the white tax-payers should be unmanned and turned into chattels - we mean those whose hands are hardened by daily toil.
Fellow citizens, will you take the first step towards re-imposing the chains which have not rusted for more than fifty years? Need we inform you that every colored man in Pennsylvania is exposed to be arrested as a fugitive from slavery? and that it depends not upon the verdict of a jury of his peers, but upon the decision of a judge on summary process, whether or not he shall be dragged into Southern bondage? The Constitution of the U. States provides that "no person shall be derived of life, liberty or property, without due process of law," by which is certainly meant a TRIAL BY JURY. Yet the act of Congress of 1793, for the recovery of fugitive slaves, authorises the claimant to seize his victim without a warrant from any magistrate, and allows him to drag him before any magistrate of a county, city, or town corporate, where such seizure has been made, and upon proving, by "oral testimony or affidavit," to the satisfaction of such magistrate that the man is his slave, gives him a right to take him into everlasting bondage. Thus may a free-born citizen of Pennsylvania be arrested, tried without counsel, jury or power to call witnesses, condemned by a single man, and carried across Mason and Dixon's line within the compass of a single day. An act of this commonwealth, passed 1820, and enlarged and enacted in 1825, it is true, puts some restraint upon the power of the claimant under the act of Congress - but it still leaves the case to the decision of a single judge, without the privilege of a jury! What unspeakably aggravates our loss of the right of suffrage at this moment is, that, while the increased activity of the slave-cathers enhance our danger, the Reform Convention has refused to amend the Constitution so as to protect our liberty by a jury trial! We entreat you to make our case your own - imagine your wives and children to be trembling at the approach of every stranger, lest their husbands and fathers should be dragged into a slavery worse than Algerine - worse than death!

Fellow citizens, if there is one of us who has abused the right of suffrage, let him be tried and punished according to law. But in the name of humanity, in the name of justice, in the name of the God you profess to worship, who has no respect of persons, do not turn into gall and wormwood the friendship we bear to yourselves, by ratifying a Constitution which tears from us a privilege dearly earned and inestimably prized. We lay hold of the principles which Pennsylvania asserted in the hour which tried men's souls - which BENJAMIN FRANKLIN and his eight colleagues, in the name of the commonwealth, pledged their lives, their fortunes, and their sacred honor to sustain. - We take our stand upon the solemn declaration, that to protect inalienable rights, "governments are instituted among men, deriving their just powers from CONSENT of the governed," and proclaim that a government which tears away from us and our posterity the very power of CONSENT, is a tyrannical usurpation which we will never cease to oppose. We have seen with amazement and grief the apathy of white Pennsylvanians, while the "Reform Convention" has been perpetrating this outrage upon the good old principles of Pennsylvania freedom. But however others may forsake these principles, we promise to maintain them on Pennsylvania soil, to the last man. If this disfranchisement is designed to uproot us, it shall fail. Pennsylvania's fields, valleys, mountains and rivers - her canals, rail-roads, forests and mines: her domestic altars, and her public, religious and benevolent institutions; her Penn and Franklin, her Rush, Rawle, Wistar and Vaux; her consecrated past and her brilliant future, are as dear to us as they can be to you. Firm upon our old Pennsylvania BILL OF RIGHTS, and trusting in a God of truth and justice, we lay our claim before you, with the warning that no amendments of the present Constitution can compensate for the loss of its foundation principle of equal rights, nor for the conversion into enemies, of 40,000 friends.

In behalf of the Committee,
ROBERT PURVIS, CHAIRMAN.

July 22, 1847
THE NATIONAL ERA
Washington, D.C., Vol. I No. 29 p. 1

THE BLACK MEN OF THE REVOLUTION AND WAR OF 1812.
-----

The return of the Festival of our National Independence has called our attention to a matter which has been very carefully kept out of sight by orators and toast-drinkers. We allude to the participation of colored men in the great struggle for Freedom. It is not in accordance with our taste or our principles to eulogize the shedders of blood, even in a cause of acknowledged justice; but when we see a whole nation doing honor to the memories of one class of its defenders, to the total neglect of another class, who had the misfortune to be of darker complexion, we cannot forego the satisfaction of inviting notice to certain historical facts, which for the last half century have been quietly elbowed aside, as no more deserving of a place in patriotic recollection, than the descendants of the men to whom the facts in question relate have to a place in a Fourth of July procession.

Of the services and sufferings of the colored soldiers of the Revolution, no attempt has, to our knowledge, been made to preserve a record. They have had no historian. With here and there an exception, they have all passed away, and only some faint tradition of their campaigns under Washington, and Greene, and Lafayette, and of their cruisings under Decatur and Barry, lingers among their descendants. Yet enough is known to show that the free colored men of the United States bore their full proportion of the sacrifices and trials of the Revolutionary war.

The late Governor Eustis, of Massachusetts, the pride and boast of the Democracy of the East - himself an active participant in the war, and therefore a most competent witness - Governor Morrill, of New Hampshire, Judge Hemphill, of Pennsylvania, and other members of Congress, in the debate on the question of admitting Missouri as a slave state into the Union, bore emphatic testimony to the efficiency and heroism of the black troops. Hon. Calvin Goddard, of Connecticut, states that, in the little circle of his residence, he was instrumental in securing, under the act of 1818, the pensions of nineteen colored soldiers. "I cannot," he says, "refrain from mentioning one aged black man, Primus Babcock, who proudly presented to me an honorable discharge from service during the war, dated at the close of it, wholly in the handwriting of George Washington. Nor can I forget the expression of his feelings when informed, after his discharge had been sent to the War Department, that it could not be returned. At his request it was written for, as he seemed inclined to spurn the pension and reclaim the discharge." There is a touching anecdote related of Baron Steuben on the occasion of the disbandment of the American army. A black soldier, with his wounds unhealed, utterly destitute, stood on the wharf just as a vessel bound for his distant home was getting under weigh [sic]. The poor fellow gazed at the vessel with tears in his eyes, and gave himself up to despair. The warm-hearted foreigner witnessed his emotion, and, inquiring into the cause of it, took his last dollar from his purse, and gave it to him, with tears of sympathy trickling down his cheeks. Overwhelmed with gratitude, the poor wounded soldier hailed the sloop, and was received on board. As it moved out from the wharf, he cried back to his noble friend on shore, "God Almighty bless you, master Baron."

"In Rhode Island," says Governor Eustis, in his able speech against slavery in Missouri, 12th of 12th month, 1820, "the blacks formed an entire regiment, and they discharged their duty with zeal and fidelity. The gallant defence of Red Bank, in which the black regiment bore a part, is among the proofs of their valor." In this contest, it will be recollected that four hundred men met and repulsed, after a terrible and sanguinary struggle, fifteen hundred Hessian troops, headed by Count Donop. The glory of the defence of Red Bank, which has been pronounced one of the most heroic actions of the war, belongs in reality to black men; ye who now hears them spoken of in connection with it? Among the traits which distinguished the black regiment, was devotion to their officers. In the attack made upon the American lines near Croton river, on the 13th of 5th month, 1781, Colonel Greene, the commander of the regiment, was cut down and mortally wounded; but the sabres of the enemy only reached him through the bodies of his faithful guard of blacks, who hovered over him to protect him, every one of whom was killed. The late Rev. Dr. Harris, of Dunbarton, New Hampshire, a revolutionary veteran, stated, in a speech at Francestown, New Hampshire, some years ago, that on one occasion the regiment to which he was attached was commanded to defend an important position, which the enemy thrice assailed, and from which they were as often repulsed. "There was," said the venerable speaker, "a regiment of blacks in the same situation - a regiment of negroes fighting for our liberty and independence, not a white man among them but the officers - in the same dangerous and responsible position. Had they been unfaithful, or given way before the enemy, all would have been lost. Three times in succession were they attacked with most desperate fury by well-disciplined and veteran troops, and three times did they successfully repel the assault, and thus preserve an army. They fought thus through the war. They were brave and hardy troops."

In the debate in the New York Convention of 1821, for amending the Constitution of the State, on the question of extending the right of suffrage to the blacks, Dr. Clarke, the delegate from Delaware county, and other members, made honorable mention of the services of the colored troops in the Revolutionary army.

The late James Forten, of Philadelphia, well known as a colored man of wealth, intelligence, and philanthropy, enlisted in the American navy under Captain Decatur, of the Royal Louis, was taken prisoner during this second cruise, and, with nineteen other colored men, confined on board the horrible Jersey prison ship. All the vessels in the American service at that period were partly manned by blacks. The old citizens of Philadelphia to this day remember the fact, that when the troops of the North marched through the city, one or more colored companies were attached to nearly all the regiments.

Governor Eustis, in the speech before quoted, states that the free colored soldiers entered the ranks with the whites. The time of those who were slaves was purchased of their masters, and they were induced to enter the service in consequence of a law of Congress by which, on condition of their serving in the ranks during the war, they were made freeman. This hope of Liberty inspired them with courage to oppose their breasts to the Hessian bayonet at Red Bank, and enabled them to endure with fortitude the cold and famine of Valley Forge. The anecdote of the slave of General Sullivan, of New Hampshire, is well known. When his master told him that they were on the point of starting for the army, to fight for Liberty, he shrewdly suggested that it would be a great satisfaction to know that he was indeed going to fight for his liberty. Struck with the reasonableness and justice of this suggestion, General S. at once gave him his freedom.

The Hon. Tristam Burges, of Rhode Island, in a speech in Congress, 1st month, 1828, said: "At the commencement of the Revolutionary war, Rhode Island had a number of slaves. A regiment of them were enlisted into the Continental service, and no braver men met the enemy in battle; but not one of them was permitted to be a soldier until he had first been made a freeman."

The celebrated Charles Pinckney, of South Carolina, in his speech on the Missouri question, and in defence of the slave representation of the South, made the following admissions:

"They (the colored people) were in numerous instances the pioneers, and in all, the laborers of our armies. To their hands were owing the greatest part of the fortifications raised for the protection of the country. Fort Moultrie gave, at an early period of the inexperience and untried valor of our citizens, immorality to the American arms. And in the Northern States numerous bodies of them were enrolled, and fought side by side with the whites at the battles of the Revolution."

Let us know look forward thirty or forty years, to the last war with Great Britain, and see whether the whites enjoyed a monopoly of patriotism at that time.

Said Martindale, of New York, in Congress, 22d of 1st month, 1828: "Slaves, or negroes who had been slaves, were enlisted as soldiers in the war of the Revolution; and I myself saw a battalion of them, as fine martial looking men as I ever saw, attached to the Northern army in the last war, on its march from Plattsburg to Sackett's Harbor."
Hon. Charles Miner, of Pennsylvania, in Congress, 2d month 7th, 1828, said: "The African race make excellent soldiers. Large numbers of them were with Perry, and helped to gain the brilliant victory of Lake Erie. A whole battalion of them were distinguished for their orderly appearance."

Dr. Clarke, in the Convention which revised the Constitution of New York, in 1821, speaking of the colored inhabitants of the State, said:

"In your late war, they contributed largely towards some of your most splendid victories. On Lakes Erie and Champlain, where your fleets triumphed over a foe superior in numbers and engines of death, they were manned in a large proportion with men of color. And in this very House, in the fall of 1814, a bill passed, receiving the approbation of all the branches of your Government authorizing the Governor to accept the services of a corps of 2,000 free people of color. Sir, these were times which tried men's souls. In these times it was no sporting matter to bear arms. These were times when a man who shouldered his musket did not know but he bared his bosom to receive a death wound from the enemy ere he laid it aside; and in these times, these people were found as ready and as willing to volunteer in your service as any other. They were not compelled to go; they were not drafted. No; your pride had placed them beyond your compulsory power. But there was no necessity for its exercise; they were volunteers; yes, sir, volunteers to defend that very country from the inroads and ravages of a ruthless and vindictive foe, which had treated them with insult, degradation, and slavery."

On the capture of Washington by the British forces, it was judged expedient to fortify, without delay, the principal towns and cities exposed to similar attacks. The Vigilance Committee of Philadelphia waited upon three of the principal colored citizens, viz: James Forten, Bishop Allen, and << Absalom Jones>> , soliciting the aid of the people of color in erecting suitable defences for the city. Accordingly, 2,500 colored men assembled in the Statehouse yard, and from thence marched to Gray's ferry, where they labored for two days almost with intermission. Their labors were so faithful and efficient, that a vote of thanks was tendered them by the committee. A battalion of colored troops was at the same time organized in the city, under an office of the United States army; and they were on the point of marching to the frontier, which peace was proclaimed.

General Jackson's proclamations to the free colored inhabitants of Louisiana are well known. In his first, inviting them to take up arms, he said:

"As sons of freedom, you are now called on to defend our most inestimable blessings. As AMERICANS, your country looks with confidence to her adopted children for a valorous support. As fathers, husbands, and brothers, you are summoned to rally round the standard of the Eagle, to defend all which is dear in existence."

The second proclamation is one of the highest compliments ever paid by a military chief to his soldiers"

"TO THE FREE PEOPLE OF COLOR.

"SOLDIERS! When on the banks of the Mobile I called you to take up arms, inviting you to partake the perils and glory of your white fellow-citizens, I expected much from you; for I was not ignorant that you possessed qualities most formidable to an invading enemy. I knew well how you loved your native country, and that you, as well as ourselves, had to defend what man holds most dear - his parents, wife, children, and property. You have done more than I expected. In addition to the previous qualities I before knew you to possess, I found among you a noble enthusiasm which leads to the performance of great things.

"Soldiers! The President of the United States shall hear how praiseworthy was your conduct in the hour of danger, and the Representatives of the American people will give you the praise your exploits entitle you to. Your General anticipates them in applauding your noble ardor."

It will thus be seen, that whatever honor belongs to the "heroes of the Revolution," and the volunteers in "the second war for independence," is to be divided between the white and the colored man. We have dwelt upon this subject at length, not because it accords with our principles or feelings, for it is scarcely necessary for us to say that we are one of those who hold that

"Peace hath her victories
No less renowned than war,"

and certainly far more desirable and useful, but because in popular estimation the patriotism which dares and does on the battlefield, takes a higher place than the quiet exercise of the duties of peaceful citizenship; and we are willing that colored soldiers, with their descendants, should have the benefit, if possible, of a public sentiment which has so extravagantly loaded their white companions in arms. If pulpits must be desecrated by eulogies of the patriotism of bloodshed, we see no reason why black defenders of their country in the war for Liberty should not receive honorable mention, as well as white invaders of a neighboring Republic, who have volunteered in a war for Slavery. For the latter class of "heroes," we have very little respect. The patriotism of too many of them forcibly reminds us of Dr. Johsons's definition of that much-abused term: "Patriotism, sir! 'Tis the last refuge of a scoundrel."

"What right, I demand," said an orator of the Colonization Society some years ago, "have the children of Africa to a homestead in the white man's country?" The answer will in part be found in the facts which we have presented in this paper. Their right, like that of their white fellow-citizens, dates back to the dread arbitrament of battle. Their bones whiten every stricken field of the Revolution; their feet tracked with blood the snow of Jersey; their toil built up every fortification sought of the Potomac; they shared the famine and nakedness of valley Forge, and the pestilential horrors of the old Jersey prison ship. Have they, then, no claim to an equal participation in the blessings which have grown out of the national independence for which they fought? Is it just, is it magnanimous, is it safe even, to starve the patriotism of such a people - to cast their hearts out of the treasury of the Republic, and to convert them by political disfranchisement and social oppression, into enemies? J.G.W.

February 21, 1798
The Pennsylvania Gazette

PHILADELPHIA.

To the Senate and House of Representatives of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, in General Assembly met,

The Representation and Petition of the subscribers, appointed by divers religious denominations in the City and Liberties of Philadelphia, to prepare and present the same,

RESPECTFULLY SHEWETH,

THAT your petitioners, and those in whose behalf they act, have been long and greatly aggrieved by the prevalence of certain evil practices, which they conceive to be equally contrary to the moral law of God, to the peace and welfare of society, and to the spirit and intention of an existing act of the legislature of this state for the prevention of vice and immorality. Under this impression, your petitioners have been using all the means in their power, for a considerable time past, to obtain the correction of the evils of which they complain; and they are not reluctant to acknowledge that they consider the sore calamity under which this city has lately and renewedly suffered as a solemn intimation to them not to relax, but to increase their efforts, for the accomplishment of so desirable an end. In the prosecution of their purpose, therefore, they do hereby state to the legislature of the commonwealth, that as all their past exertions have been ineffectual, so all that they shall make in future will be in danger of proving abortive, unless the legislature shall think fit to countenance and give energy to them. - Hoping and trusting that this countenance and aid will not be refused in so good a cause, your petitioners beg a patient attention to the following petition, which they not long since presented to the select and common council of the city, to the subjoined address to the magistrates both of the city and suburbs, which was prepared at the same time, and to the answers which have been severally returned to them; as the legislature will learn from these, at one view, what are the aim and desires of your petitioners, what the reasons by which they are justified, what the efforts which have been made to accomplish them, and what the obstacles which have hitherto stood in the way of success, and for the removal of which legislative assistance is now earnestly solicited.

The Address to the City Corporation was as follows:

"We whose names are underwritten, members of divers religious denominations in the city of Philadelphia, and representatives of the same, for the purpose herein expressed, beg leave to lay before the Corporation of the said city, the following representation and petition, viz.
We represent, that our religious assemblies are incommoded and disturbed by the noise and confusion occasioned by the passage of carriages through the streets of the city during the time of public worship, to so great a degree, as not only to interrupt our peace and quiet, but in some measure to defeat the very ends for which our worship is instituted. We therefore respectfully petition the Corporation of the city to be allowed to extend a chain or chains across the street or streets of the city, opposite to our several places of public worship, during the hours of its continuance, on the first day of the week, commonly called the Lord's Day, - so as to prevent the passage of all carriages during that time.

The granting of this petition, as it will greatly conduce to the comfort and advantage of your petitioners, so we believe it to e entirely consistent with the principles of natural right, and with the constitution and laws of the state of Pennsylvania.

The fundamental principle by which the exercise of our natural rights must be regulated and bounded is - That every man shall so use his own rights as to not interfere with those of his neighbour. But those who occasion the disturbance complained of do interfere with the natural and constitutional right of your petitioners to worship God without molestation or disturbance; - an interference which these persons can avoid or forbear without great inconvenience to themselves; while your petitioners cannot in conscience forbear public worship, nor without great inconvenience continue it, as long as this grievance is permitted to exist.

The constitution of this state declares that "The rights, privileges, immunities and estates of religious societies and corporate bodies, shall remain as if the constitution of this state had not been altered or amended." (Article 7, Sect. 3.) Here is a direct reference to the former constitution, where we find this declaration (Sect. 45.) "Laws for the encouragement of virtue and prevention of vice and immorality shall be made and constantly kept in force, and provision shall be made for their due execution: And all religious societies or bodies of men heretofore united or incorporated for the advancement of religion or learning, or for other pious and charitable purposes, shall be encouraged and protected in the enjoyment of the privileges, immunities and estates, which they were accustomed to enjoy, or could of right have enjoyed under the laws and former constitution of this state."

Here it is expressly provided that laws for the encouragement of virtue and prevention of vice and immorality shall be made, and your petitioners submit to the consideration of the Corporation, whether virtue will be more encouraged and vice and immorality more prevented, by granting the prayer of our petition, or by suffering things to remain as they are; and consequently whether the Corporation, in their legislative capacity, ought not, to establish such an ordinance as we respectfully solicit.

Your petitioners would also submit to the consideration of the Corporation, how far the engagement in this article of the constitution, that religious societies shall be encouraged and protected in the enjoyment of the privileges, immunities and estates, which they were accustomed to enjoy, ought to operate in favour of your petitioners, only remarking, that we most sensibly feel, that, so far as the cause of our complaint and petition extends, we are in no sense encouraged and not even fully protected in our religious privileges and immunities, and that this is a growing evil, entrenching on the advantages for worship, which we have heretofore enjoyed, and thus strictly within the meaning of the constitutional grant.

Your petitioners presume that no one can seriously give such a construction to that article of the bill of rights, which relates to the rights of conscience, as shall furnish an argument against the prayer of this petition.

This article is as follows, "All men have a natural and indefeasible right to worship Almighty God according to the dictates of their own conscience; that no man can of right be compelled to attend, erect or support any place or worship or to maintain any minister against his consent; that no human authority can in any case whatever controul or interfere with the rights of conscience, and that no preference shall ever be given by law, to any religious establishment or modes or worship."

Your petitioners, manifestly, do not aim to interfere with the dictates of any man's conscience in the worship of God, they do not ask that any should be compelled to assist in the support of religious worship, they desire no preference to be given to any mode of worship, nor do they seek or wish for any religious establishment: And they hope that it never will be considered as a controul of or interference with the rights of conscience, that they petition to be preserved from disturbance in their own worship. Your petitioners cannot conceive that it ever was in the contemplation of the framers of the constitution, or that any man can seriously maintain, that one of the rights of conscience consists in being allowed to interrupt the worship of others, merely because certain individuals have a conscience which will permit them to do it. On the contrary, they consider this article itself as decidedly in their favour, because the rights of their conscience are in a measure controuled or interfered with, by the disturbance in question.

Neither can your petitioners forbear, in this place, to bring to the view of the Corporation the existing act of this State against vice and immorality, in one section of which it is ordained, "That if any person shall do or perform any worldly employment or business whatsoever on the Lord's day, commonly called Sunday, works of necessity and charity only excepted, or shall use or practise any unlawful game, hunting, shooting, sport or diversion whatsoever, on the same day, and be convicted thereof, every such person, so offending, shall, for every such offence, forfeit and pay four dollars, to be levied by distress; or in case he or they shall refuse or neglect to pay the said sum, or goods and chattels cannot be found, whereof to levy the same by distress, he or she shall suffer six days imprisonment in the house of correction of the proper county: Provided always, that nothing herein contained shall be construed to prohibit the dressing of victuals in private families, bake houses, lodging houses, inns, and other houses of entertainment, for the use of sojourners, travellers or strangers, or to hinder watermen from landing their passengers, or ferry-men from carrying over the water travellers, or persons removing with their families, on the Lord's Day, commonly called Sunday, nor to the delivery of milk, or the necessaries of life, before nine o'clock in the forenoon, nor after five of the clock in the afternoon of the same day."

Your petitioners conceive it to be a fact too stubborn to be contradicted, and too notorious to be disguised, that by far the greater part of that disturbance of which they complain, is occasioned by the passing of carriages employed in worldly business or unlawful diversion, against which this law is directly and explicitly pointed. And your petitioners do therefore hope that a regulation will not be refused, which, while it will greatly contribute to their particular convenience, will no less serve to restrain a notorious and shameful violation of the laws of the State. - On the whole, as your petitioners confidently believe that natural right and the constitution and laws of the State are not hostile, but entirely favourable to the object of their petition, so they trust, that the Corporation of the city will grant it to them without hesitation.

Philadelphia, July 26th, 1797.

The subscribers of the foregoing address were the same with those which have subscribed this representation and petition to the Legislature.

On the subject of the foregoing address the Common Council of the city have determined, "That being strongly impressed with the laudable design of the petitioners, the existence of the evil complained of, and its pernicious effects, they have given all the consideration in their power to the representations of the petitioners, and lament that while they have every inclination to afford the relief prayed for, they feel themselves wanting in the power."

The address to the Magistrate was as follows:

"To the Mayor, Recorder, Aldermen, and Magistrates of the city and liberties of Philadelphia.

The memorial and representation of a committee appointed by delegates of the churches and congregations of Christ Church, St. Peter's, St. Paul's, the German Lutheran, German Reformed, Methodist, Third Presbyterian, Catholic, St. Mary's, Baptist, Associate, Free Quakers, Scotch Presbyterian, African, Second Presbyterian, Moravian and Swedes, worshipping Almighty God in the city and liberties aforesaid,

RESPECTFULLY SHEWETH,

That the different churches, and religious societies whom they represent are greatly aggrieved and distressed by the numerous and flagrant violations of an existing law of this state, made for the suppression of vice and immorality.

Your memorialists state that, in direct transgression of the said law, the public stages do constantly enter and depart from this city as freely and frequently on the Lord's day as on any other day of the week, to the general disturbance and shameful violation of the religious rest to which that day is consecrated, and even to the interruption of the worship of God in several public assemblies near which the said stages pass:

That numerous other carriages of every description, by going from and returning to the city on said day, do also interrupt many of the assemblies for religious worship, and convert the city into a scene of incessent noise, confusion and disorder:

That amendments have been publicly advertised for the Lord's day and admission to them offered at a reduced price, with a view to entice the young and unthinking to violate their duty both to God and man:

That children and youth are allowed to engage in the public streets and on the commons near the city in the most boisterous and unlawful sports and diversions, to use the most prophane and unseemly language, and by going into the river to bathe near one of the assemblies for religious worship, not only to offend against all law, but to disregard and violate all the sentiments of decency, and to bring reproach on the manners and civilization of the city.

That houses of ill-fame and places of lewd resort are permitted to exist, with a publicity that is alike injurious to the virtue and disgraceful to the character of our city:

That many taverns and other places of public entertainment, by keeping open house on the Lord's day, and at other times by permitting unlawful games, riotous practices, and drinking to intoxication, trangress the design of their license, essentially injure the morals of the community, and greatly disturb the peace of the inhabitants:

Your memorialists are at a loss to conceive how these and many other contraventions and evasions of the act for the prevention of vice and immorality, (passed by the legislature of the state, shortly after our city had been delivered from that awful visitation of heaven, by which thousands were suddenly swept into eternity) can have passed unnoticed and unpunished by those who are set to enforce the laws. Your memorialists cannot conceive that it is reasonable to expect that private individuals should incur the odium and the persecution resulting from becoming informers, in regard to actions which are so public that no eye can avoid beholding them, and so offensive that they force themselves on the notice of every sense and feeling. To refuse, in such cases as these, to execute the law, unless individuals become informers and prosecutors, will ever prove in effect an evasion of it.

Your memorialists state these facts and sentiments to the magistrates of the city and liberties, with the most unreserved freedom - not from any want of respect to their persons and offices, but because the nature and importance of the subject forbids them to present it in any equivocal language, or under any indecisive aspect. The enormities are notorious and disgraceful, and in every lawful way we are determinately set on obtaining their suppression and removal. We speak in behalf of that part of the community (it is not vanity to assert it) which best deserves encouragement and protection; and we confidently trust that the justice of our cause will induce the guardians of the city to pursue such active and vigorous measures as will speedily remove the evils of which we complain.

That a written answer to this address should be returned by the magistrates was, from the nature of the case, not to be expected. But your petitioners are assured by the committee who presented it, that the mayor of the city, after expressing it as his sincere and strong desire that he might be instrumental in suppressing the disorders which form the subject of complaint, and after consulting the recorder on the nature and extent of the law by which his agency was to be directed and sanctioned, had stated to the committee that the said law was, in several respects, greatly defective.

On the whole, then, it appears by what your petitioners have now submitted to the legislature, that the corporation of the city esteem their powers insufficient to authorize the religious assemblies to extend chains across the streets, during the hours of worship on the Lord's day; and that the magistrates find themselves circumscribed in their endeavours to prevent and punish vice and disorder, by the imperfections of the law under which they are called to act.

Your petitioners, therefore, most earnestly entreat the legislature of the State, either to pass an act immediately granting to the religious societies the right to protect themselves from disturbance, and interruption by the method already specified, or else so to enlarge the powers of the city corporation, as that this privilege may be granted by them. The justice and propriety of such a measure your petitioners believe to be fully and incontrovertibly shown in their representation to the corporation already recited; and this idea, it will be observed, is recognized and acknowledged in the answer of the common council.

Your petitioners, also, pray that the law for the suppression of vice and immorality may be revised, and its imperfections supplied - In particular that the penalties to be incurred for violating the Lord's day, for profane cursing and swearing, and for sending or accepting a challenge to a duel, may be increased. These penalties are such, at present, that those who attempt to execute the law, sometimes find themselves held in contempt by the party offending, and the sanction of the law professedly set at defiance. For the inhuman practice of duelling, which your petitioners are sorry to observe has lately become frequent and fashionable, it is proposed and requested that confinement at hard labour should, as in other cases of attempting or destroying the lives of citizens, constitute a part of the punishment; and this the rather, as a disgraceful punishment seems best adapted to suppress those sentiments of false honour, from which the detestable custom of duelling proceeds.

Your petitioners farther and earnestly pray, that, in supplying the defects of law aforesaid, the travelling of stages on the Lord's day, and all travelling for recreation, amusement, or worldly business, not included in the exception which permits acts of necessity and mercy, may be explicitly and particularly prohibited. - The importance of this will obviously occur, if the sanctifying of the Sabbath be really intended to be enjoined and secured by a legal provision.

Your petitioners are sorry to have made so large a demand on the time of the legislature as is done by the length of this petition. But they are consoled with the thought that this time has not been consumed by an unimportant subject, but in attending to the claims of virtue and piety, which constitute the radical principles of all social happiness, and without a regard to which no society can long exist. The same consideration induces your petitioners fervently to hope that the prayer of their petition will be granted, and your petitioners, as in duty bound, will ever pray.

THOMAS CUMPSTON - Christ Church and St. Peter's.
JOSEPH DELAVARE - St. Paul's.
WILLIAM SHEAFF - German Lutheran.
JACOB LAWERSWYLER - German Reformed.
JOHN MEDER - Moravian.
JOHN DICKINS - Methodist.
GEORGE MEADE - Catholic Church St. Mary's.
THOMAS USTIC, WILLIAM ROGERS, SALLOWS SHEWELL,
MATHEW RANDALL, - Baptist Society.
JOHN MCCULLOCH - Associate.
JEHU ELDREDGE, GEORGE KEMBLE, SAMUEL WETHERILL - Free Quakers.
JOSEPH MAGOFFIN, ROBERT AITKIN - Scotch Presbyterian.
<< ABSALOM JONES>> , JAMES FORTEN - African.
ASHBEL GREEN, ROBERT RALSTON - Second Presbyterian.
PAUL COX, FERG. MCELWAINE - Third Presbyterian.
JOHN LISLE, SAMUEL ERWIN - First Presbyterian.