Free Negroes and Mulattoes

[Page 1]

The Committee, directed by an order of the House of Representatives
at the last session of the Legislature of this Commonwealth
to report a bill concerning the admission into this State
of free Negroes and mullatoes, have considered the matter
referred to them and have agreed to the following report.

That the Committee since the last session of the Legislature
have examined the laws of other States besides those mentioned
in the former report, concerning that description of population
which is now the subject of consideration, but as the
spirit of those laws does not differ from the Statutes
to which reference has already been made, the Committee
forbear consuming the time of the Legislature in a detail
of them provising.

[Page 2]

That this further examination of the statute of other
states has served to confirm the Committee in an opinion
expressed in the report of the last Session, and to convince
them, of the necessity of [illegible] the increase of
a species of population which threatens to be both injurious
and bothersome of which circumstances the following facts
furnish abundant evidence that the blacks convicts in
the States [illegible] on the 1. of January 1821, formed
1461/2 part of the black population of the
whole, while the white convicts at the same time formed
but 2140 part of the white population.

That the Committee have never been ignorant of that feeling
of tenderness and kindness which, awakened by most powerful
and praise worthy causes has for a long time existed in
this Commonwealth for that unhappy and degraded class
of individuals whose colour alone has exposed them to
the cruelties and miseries of the Slave trade. The Committee
fully participate in that feeling and it is widely remote,
indeed, from their purpose to endeavour to diminish or
discourage it, but they consider it to be the duty of

[Page 2-note]

It is believed that a similar proportion will be found
to exist in all Public establishments of this State, as
well Prisons as Poor Houses.

[Page 3]

the Legislature, whatever pain or reluctance may accompany
the exercise of such a power, to protect the population
of this Commonwealth from all dangers and injuries whether
affecting morals or health, whether introduced from foreign
countries, or from the Sister States of these United States;
and feeling a great degree of confidence in the results,
which the Committee before stated, might be looked for
from the operation of those laws, that have been passed
within three years in many of the States of this Republic
concerning free Negroes and Mullatoes they deemed it expedient
to recommend the subject to the attention of the Legislature.
They should believe themselves equally under the necessity
of soliciting the intercession of the Legislature to provide
for the security of this Commonwealth against the effect
of laws which would drive into Massachusetts the white
paupers of a majority of the other States. The Committee
cannot doubt but

[Page 4]

that such a measure of self defence would be justified
by the severest interpretation of the constitution and
by the truest precepts of humanity. That the Committee
would have been little justified by the circumstances
of this Commonwealth at the present time in proposing
coercive laws if that part of the population of this country,
to which the subject of this report relates, had been
left in its natural and original condition. But they believe
the opinion well founded that the laws lately enacted
in many of the States of this union will have an effect
to drive to those States, where a universal civil + political
toleration prevails, a large proportion of the persons
against whom those laws are strongly and solely directed.
The Committee are at a loss to understand why a political
persecution should not be accompanied with the same emigrations,
that have been observed

[Page 5]

always to attend religious persecutions and conceding
every thing that shall be asked in favour of the argument
grounded upon a difference of climate, character and condition,
they still are of opinion that all facts and probabilities
authorize the conclusion that persons of colour [sic]
will hereafter increase in this State much beyond the
proportion heretofore recorded in our books on population.

The Committee have been especially led to make the foregoing
remarks, though in some degree repeated from the former
report, inasmuch as they have found it impossible, after
all the research and deliberation in their power to bestow
upon the subject, to accomplish that duty which they undertook
by the direction of the House of Representatives. They
have not succeeded in preparing a bill the provisions
of which they could conscientiously indicate to this House.
They have already found in the Statute books of this Commonwealth
a law passed in 1788 regulating the residence in this
State of certain persons of colour, – they believe that
this law has never been enforced and ineffectual it has
proved, they would never

[Page 6]

have been the authors of placing among the Statutes a
law so arbitrary in its principle and in its operation
so little accordant with the institutions, feelings and
practices of the people of this Commonwealth. The History
of that law has well convinced the committee that no measure,
which they could devise, would be attended with the smallest
good consequence. That it would have been matter of satisfaction
and congratulation to the committee if they had succeeded
in framing a law, which should have received the approbation
of this Legislature and should have promised to check
and finally to overcome an evil upon which they have never
been able to look with unconcern. But a law which should
produce that effect would entirely depart from that love
of humanity, that respect for hospitality and for the
just rights of all classes of men in the constant and
successful exercise and maintenance of which the inhabitants
of Massachusetts have been singularly conspicuous.

And the Committee have agreed to this further report.
That in these times when

[Page 7]

the Slave trade is matter of daily and anxious deliberation
in foreign Courts, when in our own Country topicks [sic]
connected with that subject have awakened the most protracted
and fearful discussing and when nations already begin
to point their efforts for the abolition of this hateful
traffic as tokens of national superiority and triumph,
it does not comport with the dignity of this State to
withold [sic] that brief statement of facts, to be found
in its annals, concerning the abolition of this trade
in Massachusetts, – a statement which will prove both
highly honorable and in perfect accordance with that remarkable
spirit of wholesome and national liberty by which this
Commonwealth has been greatly distinguished from the earliest
period. But to the clearer understanding and better elucidation
of this subject, the Committee think it useful to introduce
the following short account of the existence of Slavery
in Massachusetts.

The earliest mention of Slaves which the Committee have
been able to discover is in the year 1639. – On the 20
of October of that year one of the early writers upon
New England

[Page 8]

had occasion to go on shore upon Noddles Island in Boston
harbour, at that time in possession of one Maverick, and
there found a Negroe man and two Negroe women. From the
circumstance that neither of the women could speak or
understand English it is evident that they had been in
this country only a short time. One of the women was said
to have been a person of great rank in Africa and was
treated by the others with great respect. The same writer
in another place observes that “the people are well accommodated
with servants, some of them are English and others Negroes.”
The Negroes were doubtless Slaves. In the Journal of another
author, whose published writings do not pass the year
1646 mention is made of two Negroe maids, one of whom
was converted to Christianity, baptized and received into
the Church. The only mention of Slaves upon the early
records of the town of Boston is in the case of one Thomas
Deane in 1661 who was prohibited from

[Page 9]

employing a Negroe in the “manufacture of hoops under
a penalty of twenty shillings” for what reason is not
stated. As so few references are made to Negroes in the
early writers it is not probable that Slaves were numerous
at this time. Thirtythree [sic] free Negroes are mentioned
in the minutes of the Selectmen of Boston in 1708 to whom,
according to a law of the Province, two hundred + eighteen
days of labour were assigned upon the highways and other
public works. In the years 1754 – 55 an enumeration was
made by order of the Governor of all Slaves of and above
the age of Sixteen years in the Province of Massachusetts
Bay. One hundred and nineteen towns returned Two thousand
seven hundred + twenty Slaves; but the returns of many
towns have not been preserved. Of the above number of
Slaves Twelve hundred + seventy were in the County of
Suffolk. Four hundred + fortytwo in Essex. Three hundred
+ sixtyone in Middlesex. Eightyeight in Worcester. Seventyfour
in Hampshire. One hundred thirtythree in Plymouth. One
hundred and twentytwo in Bristol. Seventysix in Barnstable

[Page 10]

Seven in Dukes and one hundred + fortyseven in Yorke.
In the year 1763, the number of blacks was Five thousand
two hundred and fourteen and to the whites as one is to
fortyfive.

In 1776, the numver of blacks was Five thousand two hundred
+ fortynine and to the whites as one is to Sixtyfive.

In 1784, the number of Blacks was Four thousand three
hundred + ninetyseven, and to the whites as one is to
eighty. From the above statement there is little doubt
that the return of 1754 was very incomplete. A learned
writer upon one of the New England States think that Slaves
were more numerous before 1763, as many had enlisted in
the preceeding [sic] French wars either in the Navy or
the Army for the purpose of obtaining their freedom and
this opinion was confirmed by the observations of Prince
Hall “a very intelligent black man” whom the author consulted.
The period of their greatest number was therefore in all
probability between 1740 and 1750. It is well known that
the Slaves were chiefly employed in the Maritime towns.
Husbandmen in general

[Page 11]

preferring white to black labourers. The same author
remarks that Negroe children were reckoned an incumbrance
in a family and when weaned were given away like “puppies.”
They have been publickly [sic] advertised in the news
Papers to be given away. These Slaves were procured
in several ways – either from the Dutch in New York, from
the Southern Provinces of North America into one of which
Provinces 20 Slaves were imported as early as 1620, and
it is probable that the greatest supply came in this manner
as many instances are mentioned of vessels, having sold
all that the market required in the South, arriving with
the remained of the Cargo in New England. Few came by
direct trade, for according to the best authorities it
appears that not more than three Slave Ships were ever
owned at one time in Boston, though the colony of Massachusetts
Bay, had a great trade with Africa, in the article of
Rum of which in the year 1769, Two hundred ninetytwo thousand
nine hundred + sixtysix gallons were exported to that
Country, and in the products of

[Page 12]

the Sea. These articles were exchanged for Slaves, Gold
dust etc. But a sufficient supply could always gave been
procured from the west Indies as the Slaves trade even
in the year 1639 had already continued a hundred + thirty
years and the English themselves had been engaged in it
for Seventyseven years.

The English begun this trade in 1562 under John Hawkins,
afterwards made a Knight by Queen Elizabeth. The next
year he was appointed to a Ship called the [blank] and
owned by the Queen herself – he was joined at sea by another
vessel also owned by the Queen called the Jerusalem. The
English conducted this trade with great profit till 1768,
when owing to some accidents it totally failed. John Hawkins
was made a Knight by Queen Elizabeth and it is a little
remarkable that the crest which he assumed greatly resembled
the device adopted by the abolition Society in London
in 1787, vist [sic], a Moor in his proper colour bound
with a cord.

The Colony as early as 1641, ordained that “that none
shall be held in bond, slavery, villanage  [sic]

[Page 13]

or captivity unless it be lawful captives taken in just
wars or willingly sell themselves and are sold to us and
such shall have the liberty and Christian usage which
the law of God, established in Israel concerning such
persons, doth morally require” – This law applied to Indians
as well as to Negroes for the Colonists were in the habit
of holding the Indians as Slaves and even of selling those
taken in war to tribes with whom the Colony was at peace.

In the year 1646 an event took place that every inhabitant
of this State will always regard with a just pride and
admiration. It is the earliest public manifestation of
the sense which our ancestors had of the freedom and personal
rights of every man, whatever might be his country or
complexion and it is more worthy of notice in the present
day inasmuch as the Slave trade was not at that time regarded
by Nations with the abhorrence which has been manifested
concerning it within the last fifty years.

The Committee have attained a history of the interesting
transaction which led to the ordinance they are about
to quote from the unpublished journal of Governor Winthrop,
for the use of which they are indebted to the kind attention
of a learned gentleman in this town.

[Page 14]

One James Smith with his mate Keysar sailed from Boston
in the year 1644, for the coast of Guinea “there to trade
for Negroes” – Falling into the company of some Londoners
they landed and stormed a village, killed many of the
natives, but the country being alarmed and coming down
upon them they were compelled to retreat with little booty
and the loss of one man killed. Smith soon after sailed
for Madeira, took on board a quantity of wine and thence
sailed for Barbados to put off his cargo, but in consequence
of a quarrel with his mate Keysar he was left on shore
and the vessel returned safely to Boston – “For the matter
of the Negroes whereof two were brought home in the Ship
and near one hundred slain by the confession of some of
the mariners, the magistrates took order to have these
two set at liberty. But for the slaughter committed they
were in great doubt what to do in it, seeing it was in
another Country and the Londoners pretended a just revenge,
so they called the Elders + desired their advice.

[Page 15]

In relation to this matter the General Court of Elections
passed the following order in 1646.

“The Gennerall Courte [sic] concerning themselves bound
by the first opportunity to bear witness against the hainous
[sic] and crying sin of man- stealing, as also to prescribe
such timely redresse [sic] for what is part and such a
law for the future as may sufficiently deter all those
belonging to us to have to do in such vile and most odious
conduct justly abhorred of all good and just men do order
that the Negro interpreter with others unlawfully taken
be by the first opportunity at the charge of the countiey
[sic]for the present sent to his native country of Gyrmy
[sic] and a letter with him of the indignation of the
Court thereabout and justice thereof. The execution of
this order is left to the care of our Honoured Governor
for the present. By both Houses” – It is however proper
to remark that this was a declaration against man stealing
and not against slavery which it has been seen was tolerated
by our ancestors in certain cases.

The quotation from the colony laws just

[Page 16]

made and the early history of the Country clearly prove
that our ancestors were much governed in their nations
concerning bondage by the doctrines of the Levitical code.
The same influence may be discovered in all their proceedings
and it is probably owing to the provisions made by Moses
in favor of Slavery that they themselves were afterwards
made to regard it with some degree of complacency. For
it appears that all the acts respecting capital offences
passed before 1646 were grounded upon the same text of
the Pentateauch. That relating to man stealing was expressed
in these words, almost copied to a syllable from a verse
in Exodus – “If any man stealeth a man or mankind he shall
surely be put to death” – But the entire severity of the
Levitical law was far from being imitated, for the Israelites
made it only death to steal an Israelite but our ancestors
made it death to steal a man of any nation whatsoever.

Other persons are mentioned in these early times as consenting
to a toleration of slavery from a religious motive of
a still more exhalted [sic] kind in hopes in the words
of a writer of that

[Page 17]

day, “to lead them to a land of Gospel light from heathenish
darkness” –

In a country where owing to the nature of the soil and
climate the labour of Slaves had little value, where from
a peculiar organization of body the deaths were more numerous
amongst that description of persons than amongst the whites
and where a proper knowledge of the just rights of men
and the enjoyment of a reasonable liberty and independence
were the study and aim of all classes of individuals,
it cannot be matter of wonder that Slavery should never
have been much encouraged and that a desire to effect
an abolition should have been early expressed. As early
as the year 1701, the following vote was entered upon
the minutes of the Selectmen of the Town of Boston “The
Representatives are desired to promote the encouraging
the bringing of white servants and to put a period to
Negroes being slaves” –

Without referring to the decrees + declarations of the
Emperor Charles the 5th – Pope Leo the Xth
of Queen Elizabeth and of a distinguished

[Page 18]

Statesman of the same century concerning Slavery decrees
made remarkable by the inconsistent conduct of those Sovereigns,
one whom early in the 16th century had sold
a license to export Four thousand Negroes to the West
Indies and a Second was personally engaged in the Slave
trade, decrees neither dictated by the voice of their
people nor followed by other acts restraining or even
discouraging that practice, it may be doubted if there
exists upon Record an earlier testimony given by a body
of men than this vote of the Town of Boston, at any rate
the greatest emphasis may most deservedly be placed upon
this record and the highest and truest compliment be paid
to the generous and just feeling which prevailed at so
early a period in this State, as no formal resolution
either of governments or individuals, since become so
conspicuous in this undertaking, can be traced back to
within twenty six years of this time. But the Committee
have not been able to discover that any order was passed
upon this subject either by the Council or Representatives.

[Page 19]

In 1705, a law was passed imposing a duty of L4- upon
every Negro imported into the Province. The whole duty
was allowed in draw-back, provided the Negro was exported
within twelve months or died within Six weeks.

And in 1712 the importation of Indians as servants or
slaves was strictly forbidden under a penalty of forfeiture
of the subject this introduced.

But this subject awakened but little warmth or anxiety
in the community till about the middle of the last century.
At that time it was coupled with great propriety and success
with that controversy which concerned the most precious
interests of the Country. In most of the political writings
of the day the rights of the blacks are blended with those
of the whites and in the course of a few years it was
deemed a subject worthy of being recommended to the attention
of the Government of the Province.

In 1767 a Bill was brought into the “Great and General
Court” to prevent the unwarrantable and unnatural system
of enslaving mankind and

[Page 20]

prevent the importation of Slaves into the Province.
Doubtless evidence may be found upon the Records of many
of the towns of this Commonwealth of that feeling in the
People which led to the framing of this bill, but the
Committee deem it sufficient to copy into their report
a vote of this town in instructions to their Representatives
passed in March 1767, to wit, “And for the total abolishing
of Slavery among us, that you move for a law to prohibit
the importation and the purchasing of Slaves for the future”
– This Bill in its progress was altered into the imposing
an impost [sic] upon Negroes. It only passed the lower
House, but even if it had also passed the Council, Governor
Bernard was particularly instructed by his Government
to check and oppose all endeavours leading to the abolition
of the Slave trade. Though unsuccessful, this bill was
introduced into the assembly of this colony five years
before the Burgesses of Virginia petitioned his

[Page 21]

Majesty to remove all impediments in the instructions
of the Royal Governors “to the checking that inhuman and
impolitic commerce the Slave trade” – and nine years before
Mr. Hartley made his celebrated motion in the British
Parliament that “the Slave trade was contrary to the laws
of God and the rights of man.” –

In 1770 Negroes began to sue their masters for their
freedom and for payment of all services rendered after
the age of twentyone. Many actions for that purpose were
brought between this time and the Revolution all of which
were successful. The Committee fortunately have it in
their power to relate the circumstance leading to the
first act of emancipation in this commonwealth in consequence
of the verdict of a Jury. These circumstances were obtained
from a venerable and most respectable gentleman now living
in New Bedford and still an active member of that Religious
Society which has truly merited the respect and gratitude
of all good men for its unequalled labours in the most
Christian, salutary and memorable

[Page 22]

work undertaken by man. This Gentleman while living in
Nantucket, confident that no law of the Colony justified
Slavery, received on board a vessel called the Friendship
at that time engaged in the Whale Fishery and commanded
by Elisha Folger, a young man by the name of “Boston”
held as a Slave by the heirs of William Swain and at the
termination of the voyage paid this young man his proportion
of the proceeds. This circumstance took place between
the years 1769 and 1770. In the mean time his reputed
master, John Swain brought an action against the captain
of the vessel in the Court of Common Pleas at Nantucket
for the recovery of his slave, but the Jury returned a
verdict in favor of the defendant and the slave called
Prince Boston was manumitted by the Magistrates. Swain
appealed from this judgment to the Supreme Court at Boston.
Mr. Rotch thought it advisable to retain John Adams as
his counsel in the case but Swain discouraged by the feelings
of the people and the circumstances of the Country never
prosecuted the appeal. After that period

[Page 23]

all the Slaves on the Island of Nantucket obtained their
freedom. It adds greatly to the satisfaction which this
event inspires to be assured that Prince Boston was a
respectable and industerious [sic] man and conducted himself
with such prudence and economy as to be possessed at an
early period in his life of one hundred pounds Sterling
in the English funds.

The decisions in these trials furnish undoubted evidence
of the sentiments of the people, in the highest degree
honourable to them, but it is difficult to reconcile such
decisions either with that principle of the Charter, which
conveyed only to native born subjects in the Province
the rights and immunities of subjects born within the
“realm of England” – or with that principle upon which
rested the immortal judgment in the case of Sommersett,
because not only had Slavery always existed in New England,
but there was a positive law of the colony establishing
it in certain cases. But as a manifestation of public
feeling and as production of the

[Page 24]

most valuable results, it is not in our power to bestow
too great commendation upon the sublime and eternal principles
to which these juries appealed, and they are therefore
entitled to the remarkable praise of having not only anticipated
that decision of Lord Mansfield, which forever put at
rest this great question in England, but of having first
established in Courts of law those doctrines which have
since been incorporated into all the Bills of Rights of
the State Governments of this Country. However an excellent
historian of one of the New England States mentions a
fact highly honorable to this State, that several towns
passed votes abolishing Slavery within their precincts
and discharging the Masters of Slaves thus emancipated
from all liability to charges for the support of the slave
– a very meritorious proceeding but a certain confession
that Slavery was recognized by the laws of the Commonwealth.

[Page 25]

In 1773 a petition was presented by the Negroes praying
for the abolition of Slavery. This petition was read and
referred to the next Session; but it does not appear to
have been called up at that time.

In January 1774, A Bill “to prevent the importation of
Negroes and others as slaves into this Province” – passed
both the Council and the House of Representatives and
on the 8th day of March it was presented to
Governor Hutchinson for his signature but the nest day
the House was prorogued. The Governor however informed
a deputation of Negroes, who had gone to his house to
solicit his approbation of the bill that his instructions
strictly forbade him from approving any bill which should
have a tendency to check the Slave trade. His Successor
Governor Gage used language equally decided and emphatic,
and no doubt was entertained to resist all endeavours
to abolish Slavery as to remove those other acts by which
this Country was at that time oppressed.

[Page 26]

Separate from the influence possessed by the West
India merchants in the cabinet at home the Government
was resolved to offer no encouragement whatever to those
principles of freedom and independence which were maintained
at the time in the colonies with great boldness and success.

The Historian already
referred to makes the following important remark that
the principle inserted in the constitution of this State
in 1780, that all men are born free and equal, applied
particularly to the Blacks and in confirmation of that
observation he mentions the following singular fact. A
man tried in Worcester in 1783, for beating a black whom
he called his Slave, was found guilty and fined forty
shillings by an application by the Judge of this principle.

It may be observed in this place that the constitution
of this State is the only one among the early constitutions
except the constitution of New Hampshire in which this
language can be found, though the

[Page 27]

substance of it is strongly expressed in the declaration
of Independence. The construction given to this phrase
in New Hampshire, is this, that all blacks born since
the formation of the constitution are free but not those
born before that event. The doctrine of Massachusetts
was however acknowledged in Pennsylvania.

It may therefore be properly considered that Slavery
was effectually abolished in this State just before the
declaration of independence, though the law by which this
event was officially and formerly made known was not passed
till the 26th March 1788, Seventeen years before
the abolition in Denmark, the earliest European abolition.
This law imposed a penalty of L50 upon every citizen or
person residing in this Commonwealth for each Slave bought
or transported and L200 upon every vessel engaged in the
Slave trade, and it is said that the law was especially
enacted at that time in consequence of the wicked and
base conduct of an individual, who was engaged in loading
a vessel in Boston

[Page 28-29]

harbour, having decoyed three black men on board under
pretence of work and having secured them in the hold,
sailed away for the West Indies. This proceeding being
made known, public indignation was infinitely excited
and the Governor and French consul immediately wrote letters
to the Governor of the Island of St. Bartholomew where
the vessel was bound. These unhappy men were offered for
sale in that Island, but the Governor having received
the letters from Boston prohibited the sale. The blacks
were soon after released and sent home to Boston where
they arrived on the 29th of July which on that
account was made a day of great rejoicing.

In the first census of the inhabitants of the United
States in the year 1790, no other than free persons were
returned from Massachusetts, the only State in the Union,
which at that time did not contain Slaves and the only
State represented in the first congress held at

[Page 30]

Philadelphia in 1788 which had finally abolished Slavery.

In concluding this report there remains to the committee
the single duty of submitting the following remarks. The
feelings of the people disclosed since the year 1760 in
the votes of towns, and in the verdicts of Juries – the
compositions of many learned and enlightened individuals
published just before the declaration of independence
for the purpose of explaining and interpreting the just
principles of a proper freedom – the fact that there is
no law at present in force which makes a distinction between
white and black persons. (rejection from the militia being
derived from a law of the United States) the restriction
as to marriage between whites and blacks equally affecting
whites as well as blacks – the same law, which allows
Justices to expel blacks from the State after a certain
notice expressly recognizing the right of blacks to become
citizens – a law, the constitutionality of which has been
called in question and which it is well known was passed
on the same day as the abolition act of March 1788 in
order to prevent the

[Page 31]

State from being overrun with runaway Slaves – Blacks
having the same public provisions for education and the
same public support in case of sickness and poverty. Many
blacks before and during the Revolution having obtained
their freedom by a legal process, and as the spirit of
the constitution of this State abrogates all exclusive
laws thereby becoming invested with all the rights of
freemen and with a capability of becoming freeholders,
and the constitution distinctly declares that a freeholder
without other exception than relates to religion and property
and age is capable of being elected or appointed to any
office or place under the State – and above all the constitution
given to the first principle in the declaration of rights
at the time of the adoption of this constitution both
in the public mind and in the courts of law clearly manifest
and demonstrate that the people of this Commonwealth have
always believed Negroes and Mullattoes [sic] to possess
the same right and capabilities to become citizens as
white persons. In giving this account of the existence
of

[Page 32]

Slavery and its abolition in Massachusetts, the Committee
have not been insensible to the great merits of other
States in this particular. They remember with gratitude
and admiration the solemn agreement entered into by all
the States then assembled in the first continental congress
held in Philadelphia wholly to discontinue the Slave trade,
and as a farther evidence of the high sense which the
committee entertain of the endeavours of other States
in this great work, they shall finish this portion of
the Report by extracting the following remarkable expression
from a petition presented to his Majesty in 1772 by the
House of Burgesses of Virginia – “The importation of Slaves
into the colonies made under its present encouragements,
we have too much reason to fear, will endanger the very
existence of your Majestys American Dominions –

And the Committee prays now to be discharged from the
further consideration of the subject committed to them
by an order of the House of Representatives of June [illegible]

            For the Committee

            Theodore Lyman Jr.

            House of Representatives January 15, 1822

            Read + accepted.

            Josiah Quincy [illegible]

[Page 33]

The Committee on Negroes and Mulattoes have directed
me to make the enclosed report.

            For the Committee

            Theodore Lyman Jr.

            H. Representatives

            Jan. 16. – 1822