[49] Acts of 1825, Ch. 24, Sec. 2.
[50] Ibid., Secs. 3-5.
[51] Thomas, T. Ebenezer, Anti-Slavery Correspondence, 71. The letter reads as follows: “Has the anti-slavery cause injured the condition of the slaves? Surely not. In my late journey through Kentucky and Tennessee, I did not see one dirty, ragged negro. The squads of little negroes I used to see naked as the pigs and calves with which they gamboled in the same grove, were now clad like human beings in shirts and pants or slips, and many of them had straw hats, such as my own little boys put on; nor did I; see, as formerly, boys and girls waiting at the table, in a state of stark nudity.”
“I was happy to acknowledge that a great change had taken place since I was conversant about Nashville, fifty-five years ago, when negroes were naked and ignorant. I said I was pleased to see so much attention paid to their bodies and their minds, and I wished that the people of Tennessee might go ahead of the people in Ohio in good offices to the negro. God speed you, dear friends, in this work.”
[52] Loftin v. Espy, 4 Yerger, 92 (1833).
[53] Wheeler, Op. Cit., 225; University v. Cambreling, 6 Yerger, 79 (1834); Craig v. Leiper, 2 Yerger, 193 (1828); Pinson and Hawkins v. Ivey, 1 Yerger, 303 (1830).
[54] Acts of 1741, Ch. 24, Sec. 40; Acts of 1753, Ch. 6, Sec. 2.
[55] Acts of 1831, Ch. 103, Sec. 3.
[56] Acts of 1835, Ch. 57, Sec. 2.
[57] James v. State, 9 Humphrey, 310 (1848).