17 I the case of Pell vs. Ball. Mr. Pell, who I believe I lived in New York, had married a lady who was perhaps the sister of Mrs. Ball, of, at any rate, one of the heirs. He and the other heirs of Mrs. Ball filed a bill in the court of equity for the pur* pose of having the benefit of this legacy. The chancellor decided, on the evidence” of a Miss Lamar, of Georgia, a very extraordinary young woman ofunusual fortitude and presence of mind, that Mrs.Ball survived, and therefore these claimants, as her heirs-at-law, were entitled to the legacy, That settled the right; and the property, consisting of over one hundred slaves, was ordered by the chancellor to be sold by the master. Another gentleman, who was equally entitled with Mr. Pell, attended the sale; and, as I learn by some papers which I have here—for I was not there* on the day of sale—among the negroes to be sold was a negro man named Frank, with his family, consisting of a wife and eight children. It is the uniform order and direction of the court of equity, that negroes shall be sold in families. This negro, man had been the favorite body servant of Mr. Ball. This other gentleman held some conversation with him on the day of sale. In that conversation it was understood that ho promised the negro that, if he would consent to be sold separate and apart from his wife and children, he would provide for and take care of him. The woman and the children were put up and bid for by Mr. Lowndes; a brother-in-law of Governor Aiken, of the. House of Representatives. He bought them, not for himself, but for his overseer. Under the impression that this aon- tract was to be carried out in fairness and in good spirit, the negro man Frank was put up, and bought in by the agent of this other gentleman. Everbody supposed that this was all right and fair; but, to the utter amazement of the people, within two or three days afterwards, this man Frank was offered for sale to anybody who would buy him. There was indignation expressed about it which this gentleman could not resist. He then sold him to Mr Lowndes, but still must have fifty dollars for his profit. He pocketed his fifty dollars and his share of the proceeds of that sale, and he returned home. Now, if any one desires to know who that man was, the letter which I send to the Secretary’s desk, and ask to have read, will disclose. Mr. CLAY. Was he a northern or a southern man ? Mr. EVANS. You will learn that when you hear the letter read. ’ The Secretary read, as follows: CuaRlkston, June 10,1856. My bear Sir: Yours of rhe 4th jnsuint, inclosing Mr. TitFany’s letter, lias been received The facts of the ease of Mr. Albert Sumner are substantially correct as staled in Mr. TitFany’s note. In a conversation wdhMr. Tiffany, when I had the pleasure of seeing him here in February last, alluding to the fanatical ai^l political ravings of tbo Abolitionists at Washington. I expressedibe opinion that they were actuated by political and sectional jealousy, and not by motives of philanthropy, and ( ineidentallv' mentioned that the instances of the sepamtio), of families, so often rhetorically described, was gcnerallr in the agency of foreigners, who were devoid ot that sympathy which exists between the native-lioru slaveholder a:id the slave. Jn illustration of my position. I stated ,e Jir. Tiffany that Iha most inhuman and revolting case ,,f the sepnra.tion of families (recently and eloipientlyalbided to by tin- Hon. Charles Sumner, to separate husband and wife, and to sell little children at the auction-block that had evex come under sachusetts man, by the name of*Knapp, is of the morals of Massachusetts. Knapp was the nephew of an aged and respectable old gentleman who had once been a member of the House of Representatives, who was eighty years of-age, and in the ordinary course of nature could have lived but a few years. His nephew was so greedy to put his hands on his property that he hired an assassin to enter his chamber at midnight and murder the old man in his sleep. I quote not that as a model of Massachusetts mo- rality, but it as fairlyrepresents Massachusetts morality as this fellow Legree docs the slaveholders of the South. 1 am sorry to say—but it is necessary that I should say, that whatever opinion a northerp man may entertain at home upon the subject of slavery, 1 have never known any qualms of conscience to disturb' him when he came to the South, and succeeded to this kind of. property, either by purchase, inheritance, or marriage. I have-never kuown any man who came among us, no matter where he came from, who, if he removed into a free State, did not put the value of his slaves in hie pocket, and go off with a quiet and peaceable conscience. I do not blame anybody for this. If what I have stated of the condition of these people when free be true, he would have done them an injustice by emancipating them. If he had carried them to New England or New York, the strong probability is that the penitentiary would have been their doom. It is very easy to be humane at other people’s expense. I have known two or three fellows who went from South Carolina to free States, and turned Abolitionists. 1 knew an exceedingly clever young man, as I supposed him to be, who removed to Mississippi, and there sold his negroes at $1,000 round. He went to Ohio, and the next I heard of him he was figuring there in an abolition meeting, very denunciatory of the slaveholders. There was another man who went from my State, who was a Baptist preacher, who I had a large number of negroes. He sold them, and carried off his money; and the next thing we heard of him was an entire mailbag full of abolition pamphlets, sent by him to his friends in South Carolina. But,sir,hehadthemoneyforbis slaves in his pocket, and he never disgorged it. There is an extraordinary case connected with || this subject which it is right that I should state. I It has some peculiar significance. In the year 1839, a Mr. Ball, who was a rice planter on Cooper river, at the mouth, of which the city of Charleston is built, took passage with his wife, who was a New England woman, and, as I have always understood, an exceedingly elever lady. It was the misfortune of this gentleman and his wife, that the steamboat in which they took passage, the-Puluski, was lost off Ihe coast of North Caro- i lina; she broke in two on |Jie high sea; and. with the exception of three or four persons, all ’perished who were on board, and among the rest this gentleman and his wife. He left a large cs- j tate. V7ho was to get it? Mr. Ball had made a I will, in which he made a large provision for his । wife. The question was, did she survive him ? 11 If she died first, it was a lapsed legacy; if she ■ survived him but for a moment, the legacy was i hers, and would.go to her heirs. The case of which 1 am speaking is known as j
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy MTM4ODY=