NOTES
[56]. Laws of Md., 1846–47, chap. 27.
[57]. Art. III, sec. 43.
[58]. Revised Stat., 1852, pp. 143–46.
[59]. Laws of Mo., 1847, pp. 103–04.
[60]. Wilson: “The Rise and Fall of the Slave Power in America,” II, p. 170.
[61]. Const., 1852, Art. XIII.
[62]. This was held to be in violation of the Federal Constitution in Smith v. Moody, 1866, 26 Ind. 299, on the ground that the Negro had become a citizen and, as such, entitled to migrate from one State into another.
[63]. The section of the statute which related to colonization was repealed in 1865 because the legislature thought that those authorized to act under the statute were not rendering any adequate service to the State. Laws of Ind., 1865, p. 63.
[64]. Wilson: “The Rise and Fall of the Slave Power in America,” II, pp. 183–85.
[65]. Pub. Laws of Ill., 1853, p. 57.
[66]. Repealed Feb. 7, 1865. Pub. Laws of Ill., 1865, p. 105.
[67]. Laws of Ia., 1850–51, pp. 172–73.
[68]. Repealed in 1864. Laws of Ia., 1864, p. 6.
[69]. Gen. Laws of Ore., 1850–51, pp. 181–82.
[70]. Flack: “The Adoption of the Fourteenth Amendment,” 1908, John Hopkins Press, pp. 20, et seq.
[71]. Art. IV, sec. 19.
[72]. Art. VIII.
[73]. Laws of S. C., 1865, p. 271.
[74]. Art. II, sec. 5, par. 1.
[75]. Laws of Ky., 1863, p. 366.
[76]. Laws of S. C., 1865, p. 276.
[77]. In three places, at least, in North Carolina a Negro is not allowed to stay over night. They are Canton (Haywood County), Mitchell, and Madison Counties, all in the western part of the State. Negroes may work unmolested all day, but, if they linger after nightfall, they are reminded that it would not be healthy for them to remain during the night. The Raleigh, N. C., News and Observer, Aug. 19, 1906. Also see The Independent, vol. 59, p. 139, for a similar situation in Syracuse, Ohio, and Baker: “Following the Colour Line,” pp. 71–73 and 126.
[78]. Code, 1867, sec. 1237.
[79]. Code, 1867, sec. 1233; Laws of Ala., 1865–66, p. 105.
[80]. Laws of S. C., 1865, p. 275.
[81]. Ibid., p. 299.
[82]. Laws of Miss., 1865, pp. 82–83.
[83]. Laws of Tenn., 1865, p. 23.
[84]. Laws of Fla., 1865, pp. 25 and 37.
[85]. Laws of Miss., 1865, pp. 165–66.
[86]. Laws of S. C., 1865, p. 275.
[87]. Laws of Ala., 1865–66, p. 55.
[88]. Laws of Ky., 1865–66, pp. 68–69.
[89]. Laws of Miss., 1865, pp. 165–66.
[90]. Laws of Ariz., 1867, p. 19; 1873, p. 78.
[91]. Ibid., 1883, p. 114.
[92]. Laws of Idaho, 1879, p. 31.
[93]. Laws of Dak. Ty., 1864–65, p. 192.
[94]. Laws of Neb., 1881, p. 274; 1891, p. 267.
[95]. Gen. Laws of N. M., 1880, p. 427; act 1876, chap. 28.
[96]. Laws of Utah, 1882, p. 32.
[97]. Laws of Ore., 1868, pp. 18–19.
[98]. Laws of Wash., 1867, pp. 95–96.
[99]. Revised Stat., 1903, p. 202.
[100]. Laws of Fla., 1865, pp. 32–33.
[101]. Ibid., 1866, p. 22.
[102]. Laws of Ky., 1865–66, p. 52.
[103]. Laws of Miss., 1865, pp. 83–84.
[104]. Laws of Va., 1865–66, p. 83; repealed in 1871—Laws of Va., 1870–71, p. 147.
[105]. Laws of S. C., 1865, pp. 295–299 and 275–76.
[106]. Laws of Ala., 1865–66, pp. 128–31.
[107]. Laws of Ky., 1865–66, pp. 49–50.
[108]. Laws of Miss., 1865, pp. 86–90. This was repealed Feb. 1, 1867—Laws of Miss., 1866–67, pp. 443–44.
[109]. Laws of N. C., 1874–75, p. 92.
[110]. Laws of S. C., 1865, pp. 292–95.
[111]. Revised Code, 1852, as amended in 1893, p. 609.
[112]. In re Turner, 1867, Fed. Case No. 14,247.
[113]. Laws of S. C., 1865, pp. 303–04.
[114]. Laws of Miss., 1865, pp. 90–93.
[115]. Laws of S. C., 1865, pp. 299–303.
[116]. Laws of Miss., 1865, pp. 92–93.
CHAPTER V
RECONSTRUCTION OF MARITAL RELATIONS OF NEGROES
One of the perplexing problems that arose out of Emancipation was the fixing of the marital relations among Negroes. It is generally known that the marriage ties between slaves were loose and their domestic relations irregular. In some instances, slave marriages were solemnized according to legal requirements, by either a white clergyman or other proper officer of the law; in others, there was the common law marriage—that is, the parties lived together as husband and wife under a simple, unrecorded agreement between themselves; in still other instances, there was deplorable promiscuity.
When the Negro was made a citizen, it became necessary at once to settle his marital relations. If the usual slave marriages were not recognized as legal, then the offspring of such unions were bastards with the usual disqualifications of that class, among which is their partial incapacity to inherit property. In order to secure to Negroes the rights of heirs, it was necessary to legalize slave marriages, at least to the extent of giving to the children of such marriages the right of inheritance. This was accomplished in one of three ways. Some States required the emancipated slaves to be remarried in order to legitimate their offspring; others required them to appear before an officer, declare their desire to continue to live together, and get a certificate; others still, and these were in the majority, passed statutes legalizing all slave marriages. A few States did not adopt any one of these three methods but left it to the courts to recognize the legality of such marriages as cases arose.