Thank you for visiting SNEWPapers!
Sign up freeThe Liberator
Boston, Suffolk County, Massachusetts
What is this article about?
Massachusetts House refuses to repeal discriminatory marriage law provision against colored citizens, voting 134-127 against and rejecting reconsideration 130-108. Editorial calls for abolitionists to track votes and push for change at next election, highlighting inequality.
OCR Quality
Full Text
We stated, in our last number, that that portion of the Marriage Law which punishes and degrades our colored fellow-citizens on account of their complexion, had been repealed by the Senate of this State. It was hoped that, in so just and virtuous an act, the House would abandon its foolish and wicked opposition, and concur with the Senate; but, on Tuesday, that body again refused to obliterate the foul and despotic enactment, by a vote of 134 to 127. On Wednesday, a motion was made to reconsider the vote, but it was lost—130 to 108. As the ayes and noes were refused to be ordered, we are unable to present to the people the names of those who voted in the affirmative; but we call upon our abolition friends, in every town in the Commonwealth, to make it their special business to ascertain how the representative or representatives from their several towns voted on this question, and govern themselves accordingly at the next election. Men who are conscious that they are disposed to do a mean or dishonorable act, naturally shun the light: hence the refusal, in the present case, to allow the question to be taken by ayes and noes. But if our friends will carry out our suggestion, the outrage may be remedied most effectually.
We have to repeat, that this marriage law question cannot be abandoned by the friends of purity, of justice, and of equal rights, until it be settled on an equitable basis. No proposition can be more self-evident, than that no legislature, either under the Constitution of Massachusetts, or for any pretext whatever, can rightfully determine in what channel human love and affection shall run, or what shall be the height, bulk or complexion of those who wish to unite together in wedlock. To attempt to regulate these matters is an act of usurpation, and as futile as it is oppressive.
In this State, a colored citizen is eligible to any office in the gift of the people. He may be a mayor of Boston, a member of the Senate or House, or Governor of the Commonwealth; but he has not the right to choose for himself a wife!! This is a specimen of republican legislation in the nineteenth century.
At the next session of the Legislature, we are confident that such a demonstration will be made on the part of the virtuous and high-minded inhabitants of this State, on this subject, in the form of petitions, as that this last remnant of slavery will be done away, and with it the only vestige that remains of any legal inequality between the people of the Commonwealth on account of the manner in which it has pleased an all-wise Creator to make them.
What sub-type of article is it?
What keywords are associated?
Where did it happen?
Domestic News Details
Primary Location
Massachusetts
Event Date
Tuesday And Wednesday
Outcome
house refused repeal 134 to 127; motion to reconsider lost 130 to 108; ayes and noes not ordered
Event Details
Senate repealed discriminatory portion of Marriage Law against colored citizens; House opposed and refused to concur; editorial urges abolitionists to track representatives' votes for next election and predicts future petitions to end inequality