i 
 
 Ct^i 
 
 
 ^b 
 
 OJ 
 
 
 ^m 
 
 M42 
 
 
J" ^^ •> ' ^^ "^ V / <L^ ^^ •.^' 
 
 
 \ "^ _^ -f^^ \ 'i- ^ 
 
 - '°*' x^^' ^-^ ,>^ ^<«'°" ^^ % 
 

 
 
 ^ V 
 
 ' • o. 
 
 \'-^\c/ X^^^^'^V %'--%^ \"--\ 
 
 
 
 y- 
 
 
 .^^ -o^ • --;•;. • •* / \ - ■ . ;■; •• ,.*' "°. ■••■■•■ / . . ' 
 
 x^^ -^^ <i> ^^^ •>. '^^ "^- ^- 
 
X 
 
 n 
 
 HOUSE No. 74. 
 
 REPORT 
 
 oy Tm 
 
 PETITIOIV OF S. P. SANFORD AND OTHERS, 
 
 CONCERNIKO 
 
 DISTINCTIONS OF COLOR. 
 
 yy- 
 
 l> 
 
f 
 
 
 
 
J; April, 1839.] HOUSE— No. 74. 3 
 
 eommon\uealtl) of M^fifi*itliUHtttti* 
 
 House of Representatives, April 3, 1839. 
 
 The Committee to whom was referred the petition of S. 
 P. Sanford, and other females of Dorciiester, pra)'ing 
 tlie rej)eal of all laws of Massachusetts, making any 
 distinction on account of color among the inhabitants, 
 have considered the subject, and respectfully submit 
 their 
 
 REPORT: 
 
 With the memorial of the ladies of Dorchester, in- 
 structions were delivered to the Committee, to ascertain 
 whether any fraud had been practised in obtaining signa- 
 tures to the paper, and by whose authority it was offered. 
 Not conceiving that the word "/rrmf?" was employed by 
 the House to annex harsh descri{)tion to acts, which, if 
 incorrect, might have been the result of misguided zeal, 
 or mistaken judgment, the commission has been construed 
 to direct general inquiry into the origin of the petition 
 and the manner of its presentation. 
 
 As much time as was requisite, and could be spared 
 from more important engagements of public service, has 
 been devoted to the discharge of an unwelcome task. 
 Sessions were held from week to week, attended by all 
 who desired to see, or hear, or speak, on the subject of 
 
4 DISTINCTIONS OF COLOR. [April, 
 
 the examinntion. Those interested in its progress or re- 
 sulis, liHve been present, with counsel learned in the laws, 
 or friends lending gratuitous aid. The Committee felt 
 that they might safely entrust the labor of collecting tes- 
 timony to those whose diligence was stimulated hy strong 
 feeling, without exercising the extensive power of send- 
 ing for persons or searching for papers. The voluntary 
 attendance of witnesses anticij)ated the issue of any com- 
 pulsory process or official summons. Relieved hy able 
 counsel, who could present explanations and evidence in 
 the manner most agreeable to the j)arlies, and best adap- 
 ted to elicit truth, it remains for the Committee, ha\ing 
 endeavored to discharge their duty \\ ith im))artiality, to 
 attempt to exhibit its results with fairness. 
 
 The necessity of a tedious detail of voluminous evi- 
 dence, will be obviated by reference to an abstract of the 
 testimony of witnesses, prej)ared and a|)j)ended by the 
 chairman, and to original documents annexed to this re- 
 port. They will afford the means of verifying the state- 
 ments made, and of correcting any inaccuracy which 
 may inadvertently occur. A brief summary of the prin- 
 cipal facts, and most material conclusions, will possibly 
 be found to lay a tax on patience sufficiently severe. 
 
 The petition, on the face, purports to express the opin- 
 ion of two hundred and eleven females, on a question of 
 legislation. From the request to repeal all existing laws 
 on a particular subject, it would be {)resumed, in the ab- 
 sence of an\ I'XjjIanations, that ihc\ had considered the 
 policy and o|)eration of the statutes. 
 
 It will be convenient to arranue in classes the facts de- 
 veloped, as they relate to the authenticity of the memo- 
 rial and the weiizht to be allowed to the signatures. 
 
 First. It ai)peared that some of those signatures were 
 
1839.] HOUSE— No. 74. 6 
 
 not genuine. The worthy mutron, wlio has lind the mis- 
 fortune to be named at the liead of the cohimn of sisn- 
 eis, and to he recorded foremost amouir those sohciiiii": 
 the repeal of the law of color, expressly declined to be- 
 come a p;irty to a measure which six; disapproved. Two 
 other names, next following on the roll, are denied to be 
 in the hand writing, or to have been inscribed wiih the 
 consent of the ladies. It was admitted, that they were 
 placed in the position they occu|)y, by one of the witnes- 
 ses. In explanation, it \vas stated, and tesiiinony was 
 offered tending to show, that such circumstances existed 
 as to justify tiie supposition in the writer that the use of 
 the names was authorized. 
 
 Second. Some names were written on the petition, 
 without j)revious consultation with the principals, in the 
 expectation that they would ratify the act of the volun- 
 tary attorney. In one instance, wiien conlirmation was 
 subserjuently sought, it was refused. 
 
 Third. The memorial is expressed to be from females 
 of Dorchester. Two ladies of Milton became subscri- 
 bers, without noticing the terms confining its circulation 
 within the limits of a town. 
 
 Fourth. Names are written twice upon tiie same pa- 
 per, and by being repeated, eight subscriptions are niulti- 
 plicd to sixte(?n. The explanation offered was, that they 
 were accidentally signed by different members of the 
 same household without wrong j)urj)ose. The repetition 
 affords intrinsic evidence of carelessness not respectful to 
 the Leiiislature, nor entirelv excusable in the exercise of 
 an important privilege. 
 
 Fifth. The names of minors are included in the lists 
 without the age being indicated. The effect is decep- 
 tive, when the inmates of the nursery are presented 
 
6 DISTINCTIONS OF COLOR. [April, 
 
 among adult members of the community, praying for 
 chaii'Tes affeclinjr the closest relations of social and do- 
 
 mestic life. 
 
 Sixth. Signatures were affixed to the memorial under 
 mistake of its meaning, and with the understanding that 
 it related to the district of Columbia, and not to the state 
 of Massachusetts. The language of thirty-two of the 
 subscribers of the petition, in one of the papers communi- 
 cated to the Committee, will elucidate this point. 
 
 "Understanding" say they " that our names are at- 
 l;iclii"d 10 a jjetiiion from the ladies of Dorchester to abol- 
 ish all laws making distinction on account of color, we 
 take the oppoituniiy to say to the Committee, that we 
 never knowingly signed such petition, but understood it 
 to be a petition for abolishing slavery in the District of 
 Columbia : and if our names are annexed to such i)eti- 
 tion it was done without our consent or knowledge, or 
 under misre[)rescntaiions, and we respectfully ask to have 
 our names taken from the same." 
 
 Of those \\lio appeared in jjcrson, or addressed the 
 Conmiiitee in writing, /b/i^-OJie were not acquainted with 
 the object of the petition, but designed to lend their 
 names to promote refortiiation of the institutions of other 
 states, and advance the cause of freedom. 
 
 Seventh. Some signatures were obtained under the 
 belief thiit the laws of the Commonwealth made distinc- 
 tions of civil rights between the inhabitants. 
 
 In other states, it is true, there are statutes which give 
 the terrible power to tear asunder the relations of domes- 
 tic life, to break the tics of parental affection and filial 
 love, and to crush llic h;i|)|)in('.ss of homes which may be 
 bunibh", but should be smckhI, by the scpaiaiion of parent 
 and child, and of husband and wife. One race is disfran- 
 
1839.] HOUSE— No. 74. 7 
 
 chised, while iinother is invested with the authority of 
 oppression. No such acts of misery disgrace tlie statute- 
 book of Massachusetts, to be bewailed by the tears of any 
 of its inhabitants. Even when the institution of shivery 
 darkened the soil of New Enghuid, it existed in a miti- 
 gated and comparatively mild form. Many of the impre- 
 cations of its abstract evils, breathed against others, 
 unhappily came back to rest on the graves of our own 
 honored ancestors. The revolution, whose principles are 
 embodied in the Constitution, shattered the last link of 
 servitude, and the citizens have since been, in the view 
 of the law, equally free in thought, and word, and act, 
 entitled to the same protection, sharing the same civil 
 privileges, and enjoying the even distribution of the bless- 
 ings of the great charity of government provided for all 
 comjjiexions, without discrimination. 
 
 On this subject, some misunderstanding has prevailed 
 in the community. It has been imagined, that the peti- 
 tions have intimate connexion with the abolition of slav- 
 ery, and were necessary parts of that series of eloquent 
 remonstrances against its dark dominion, which have gone 
 up from the villages of the north to the national assembly. 
 Whatever may have been the intentions of the females, 
 the terms they employ cannot be applied to the emanci- 
 pation of the slave. If the words are not well chosen, it 
 is the fault of those who have written, and not of those 
 who are compelled to read them, according to the com- 
 mon and usual signification. They are limited, by their 
 own force, to a particular state and to a distinct subject. 
 First, the memorialists ask the repeal of laws of 3Iassa- 
 chusetts, a C »inii oi wealth free in the broadest sense of 
 liberty, where no servitude is permitted. Next, they 
 point to laws making distinctions among the inhabitants 
 
8 DISTINCTIONS OF COLOR. [April, 
 
 on account of color. To find what enactments are in- 
 cluded wiliiin the desc-ription, reference to the statute 
 shows, that the only peculiar ordinances recognising the 
 complexions of tlie citizens, ar'; those of marriage and 
 divorce. The obligations of military service, derived 
 from the legislature of the Union, as they were imposed, 
 can only he rescindtnl hy the delegated power higher than 
 stale sovereignty. The jjciiiions, expressly confined to 
 laws of Massachusetts, must be applied to the aljoliiion 
 of the restraints on matrimonial alliance, and not to the 
 extinction of the oppression of slavery where it has no 
 
 existence. 
 
 The Committee are unable to perceive, that any law of 
 Massachusetts can rightly and fairly be considered as 
 makin"- distinctions anions: its inhabitants. The statute 
 forbidding the white from uniting in marriage with the 
 ])lack, or red, or mixed race, forbids the colored from 
 joining in nuptial riles with the white. It deals with all 
 as slaiiding on the same common and level ground of 
 equality. No privilege is bestowed, no prohibition en- 
 forced for one, which is not given or restrained for the 
 other. No immunity is provided, and no restriction im- 
 posed, which is not balanced by even-handed justice. 
 Where each race is treated alike, the supposed distinction, 
 restin"^ on no real difference, is too shadowy to be grasped 
 by reason. If ])r('judice has built walls of partition be- 
 tween the walks of the members of the same social fam- 
 ily, they must be removed by that spirit of liberality 
 already busy in its work. The progress of its improve- 
 ments would be little! aided by anniiHing laws regarded » 
 as wholesome through two centuries of experience. 
 
 An explanation of ihe misapplication of the memorials, 
 which has taken place, too reasonable to be doubted, was 
 
1839.] HOUSE— No. 74. 9 
 
 afforded bv an intellisent "eiitlciniui, who attended the 
 sessions of the Committee as counsel lor some of the fe- 
 males. For the ])m-j)().se of obtaining tlie exjiression of 
 public opinion on toj)ics of int(;rest, petitions were j)rc- 
 pared by those who have ardently engaged in the work 
 of emancipation, for circulation through the wliole coun- 
 try. Among them was that relating to color, appropriate 
 to portions of the Union where distinctions exist amount- 
 ing to the deprivation of every ipolilical right. This was 
 distributed in New England, and has been subscribed in 
 many, if not in most instances, without knowing tlu; ap- 
 plication to an institution embraced by its terms, must be 
 applied, and without designing to solicit a change of the 
 marriajre svstem of the Commonwcsilth. 
 
 Of those who appeared before the Committ(M^ or com- 
 mimicaled their views in writing, six declared th;it they 
 fiillv understood the j)recise application of the jicliiions, 
 knowingly affixed th; ir signatiu-es, and were ready to 
 maintain the princij)les they adopted. Doubtless there 
 may be others, unrepresented, who may concur in the 
 same opinions. 
 
 While the virtues and graces of the memorialists com- 
 mand admiration and res[)ect, the Committee hav(! the 
 misfortune to dissent entirely from the views entertained 
 by sonie. They are ready to admit, th;it the erroneous 
 course has been prompted by a spirit of charity seeking 
 to alleviate suffering, and by that benevolence which 
 would j)romote the happiness of the whole human family. 
 While they do justice to the jiurity of purpose, they are 
 compelled to declare their deliberate conviction, that it is 
 inconsistent with the modesty of a virtuous woman to so- 
 licit the repeal of laws restraining the union of the white 
 and black races in marriage. 
 
10 DISTINCTIONS OF COLOR. [April, 
 
 It is not necessary for the Committee to vindicate tlio 
 policy of those statutes from the severe reproach with 
 which iht'V have heen assailed. Adopted bv the vene- 
 rated lathers of New England, in the early period of its 
 history, they were approved by the founders of the Con- 
 stitution in the re-enactment of provincial legislation, and 
 in recent time received the sanction of the statesmen who 
 revised tin; whole legal system of the Commonwealth. 
 The bitter words which have been ajjplied, while they 
 are insulting to the memories ol' our ancestors, are unjust 
 to their descendants. If it was permitted, reference to 
 the facts developed by the researches of physiology, 
 and to the experience of other lands, would furnish argu- 
 ments to show, that demoralizing and degrading effects 
 have followed the unhappy connexions prohil)ited by the 
 law of Massachusetts. It is to be recollected, that the 
 force of legislative ])r()visions for morality, apply to the 
 vicious and profligate ; while the high moral sense and 
 purity of the; petitioners would afford perfect security 
 against the profanation of marriage vows, society could 
 find no such protection against the passions of the volup- 
 tuous and unprincipled. While the re[)eal of the laws 
 would be understood by the l)eneyolent ])etitioners as 
 removin;; what lliey consider an odious distinction, it is 
 obvious, that it might be taken by the licentious as sanc- 
 tioning alliances of misery, and might tend to produce 
 heavier i)ractical evils than the possible wrongs to be re- 
 lieved. The Legislature, Icnvinir dreamy abstractions to 
 theorists, must be confnicd to practical vi{>us. 
 
 The memorial was transmitted to a re|)resentaiive, bv 
 a resj)onsil)l(; individual, and was presented to the House 
 in conformity with its rules. 
 
 I'he Commiitee have arrived to the conclusion, that 
 
1839.] HOUSE— No. 74. 11 
 
 the petition of the ladies of Dorchester is erroneous in 
 several particulars. Some names are placed on the sheet 
 without the consent and against the wish of the respec- 
 tal)lo individuals to whom thcv belonij, and are in fact 
 false signatures. Some autograph and true subscriptions 
 were written und(.'r the impression that the memorial was 
 for a different subject — some, that it was addressed to 
 Congress and not to the Legislature. It was signed bv 
 some, under mistake of the legal distinctions of color — 
 hv many without suspicion of the prominent subject em- 
 braced bj its terms — by some without reading — by some 
 without deliberate consideration — by a few, with full 
 knowledge and approbation of the end and object — by 
 all, with the intention of expressing their protest against 
 a great social evil, and to lend their influence for promo- 
 ting a great moral good. 
 
 While the Committee have been satisfied that errors 
 have been permitted to exist, they are not ready to attrib- 
 ute their origin to fraud or wrong purpose. They are 
 willing to believe that they sprung from innocent njistake 
 or inadvertence. Benevolent intentions have, perhaps, 
 been sometimes executed with zeal too ardent to regard 
 possible consequences, and reliance on general rectitude 
 of purpose prevented the cautious examination of the 
 tendency of particular acts injurious to the interests and 
 feelings of others. 
 
 Beneath the inquiry into subjects of local concern or 
 personal bearing, which may have excited curiosity of a 
 village, there are principles which affect the whole com- 
 munity. 
 
 The right of the citizen to address the Legislature, and 
 by way of petition or remonstrance to seek redress of 
 wrongs and relief from evils, is one of the most sacred ot 
 
12 DISTINCTIONS OF COLOR. [April, 
 
 the privileges of freedom. It is the appeal of the indi- 
 vidual to the \\ Iioie people liuough their iej)resentatives. 
 
 \Vhile the free exercise of the ri^ht of petition is to be 
 vigilantly defended, it is a solemn duty to j)rotest against 
 that abuse which impairs its value, and diminishes confi- 
 dence in its list;. 
 
 Heretofore, it has been sup|«)sed that those who have 
 the duty of acting in political n)atters, were peculiarly 
 entitled to address the Legislature on political questions. 
 Undoubtedly, it must be presumed that the employment 
 of the great remedy for civil wronij:, should be exercised 
 by persons arrived to years of discretion. The facility 
 with which the ear of childhood lends itself u ilh unhesi- 
 tating confidence to the influence of those it has been 
 taught to revere — the control of the parent and guard- 
 ian over its acts and almost thouiihts — tlu; want of 
 developed intellect and experience to comprehend the- 
 theory of government — \\ould deprive its voice of the 
 weight d('ri\ t'd from t!ie t>Xj)ressi()n of the opinion of the 
 elder citizen. Yet examples might be found, where the 
 supplications of the children were mingl(>d with those of 
 tlie electors of the Commonwealth, on measures of the 
 gravest imjjortance. The wisdom of asking the memo- 
 rials of th()S(! uho would not be entrusted wiih the man- 
 agement ol" the ordinary affairs of business without over- 
 si;:ht, uj)on topics which affect the perpetuity of the 
 Union itself, is more than doubtful. 
 
 No man would transmit the common letter of courtesy 
 Avithout his own proper signature. No man would place 
 the name of another even to a bill of parcels. No man 
 would subscribe his own name to the most unimportant 
 document of private concern, without attentive perusal. 
 The most trilling papers of business, arc executed with 
 
1839.] HOUSE~No. 74. 13 
 
 cautious formality, and their authenticity certified by the 
 attestation of magistrate and witness. The higher and 
 graver instrument claiming redress for wrong, and de- 
 manding changes which may affect the whole social con- 
 dition, has sometimes been prepared with less care than 
 would be bestowed on the most hasty communication be- 
 tween friends. Hundreds of names are on the petitions 
 swelling the files, inscribed by the same hand. It might 
 almost be imagined, that an address to the Legislature, 
 was considered of too little consequence to deserve even 
 the trouble of placing a signature beneath its petition. 
 
 The Committee believe, that the right of petition is 
 violated by the perversion to unworthy purposes or by 
 negligent use. Danger to our institutions cannot come 
 from external violence. If our sail should be profaned 
 by an armed foe, the whole population would rise to re- 
 pel invasion, and the spirit of the Revolution rekindle by 
 every fireside of New England. But peril does spring 
 from that silent corruption which excites no attention to 
 its undermining course, and from that carelessness per- 
 mitting the dearest of the privileges of the citizen to be 
 diminished by such abuses as have been tolerated until 
 they have grown frequent and common. 
 
 To the Legislature, as trustees for the common good, 
 belongs the duty of vindicating their own dignity, and 
 defending the right of petition from being degraded or 
 brought into contempt, and of marking with reprobation 
 every abuse of the privilege whose purity is essential to 
 freedom. 
 
 The petition of the ladies of Brookfield, on color, was 
 referred to your Committee. It exhibits one hundred 
 and sixty names in the same hand-writing. The great 
 inconvenience and expense which would have attended 
 
14 DISTINCTIONS OF COLOR. [April, 
 
 summoning so many females from their homes and em- 
 ployments, have prevented the attempt to pursue the 
 examination by that mode. No satisfactory voluntary 
 explanation of the similarity of the signatures has been 
 given. Another petition, with the same names save two, 
 relating to the abolition of slavery, and of similar pen- 
 manship is on the files. Without further instructions, 
 the Committee have not deemed it expedient, to prose- 
 cute the investigation of the reasons why the original 
 papers have been retained, and copies deposited among 
 the public archives. 
 
 Having endeavored to discharge the duty assigned 
 them in the most foithful manner their circumstances 
 permitted, and having expressed their opinions with that 
 frankness demanded by respect for the Legislature, the 
 Committee ask to be discharged from the further consid- 
 eration of the petitions and of the subject. 
 
 Per order, 
 
 MINOTT THAYER, Chairman. 
 
1839.] MOUSE— No. 74. 15 
 
 EVIDENCE BEFORE THE COMMITTEE. 
 
 Rev. David Sanford and Mrs. Ann P. Reed were present, and 
 were sworn. 
 
 Rev. David Sanford said, that the lady who signed the certificate 
 attached to the letter written by him to the Committee, of 2Gth ult., 
 was his wife, and that she signed the certificate. [Marked A.] 
 
 Mrs. Ann P. Reed said, that the petition signed by S. P. San- 
 ford and other women of Dorchester, was presented by her to Mrs. 
 S. P. Sanford, and that Mrs. Sanford refused to sign it, and gave 
 her reasons for not signing it. Tiiat she (Mrs. Reed) took back the 
 petition, and obtained several signers, as far on the first column of the 
 petition as to the name of Amelia Jordon. She then gave it to Miss 
 Catharine .lordon, and other names were added as far as to the name 
 of Alalia L. Jordon ; the she (Mrs. Reed) took the petition, and ob- 
 tained other names, including the first column, then it was given to 
 Miss Sarah Baker, at which time, the three first names were not on 
 the petition. 
 
 At the next meeting of the Committee, Mrs. Ruth Hildreth was 
 present and was sworn ; and said, that when she signed her name, the 
 names of S. P. Sanford and Laura M. .Spaulding were on the petition, 
 and there was no space above for others to sign ; that Miss Sarah 
 Baker brought her the petition, requested her to sign' it, and took it 
 away. 
 
 Mrs. Hildreth further said, that she was surprised to see Mrs. 
 Sanford 's name on the petition, as she had understood that Mrs. 
 Sanford was opposed to signing it. She also said that she signed the 
 names of Mrs. Jane Robinson and Sophia Hildreth, by their partic- 
 ular request, and that they were present at the time ; also, that she 
 caused the petition to be circulated by one of her children, and that 
 she was ignorant of the laws relating to the colored people ; that she 
 bad been told that they were deprived of many privileges which 
 
16 DISTINCTIONS OF COLOR. [April, 
 
 the white people enjoyed ; and that had she known them, she 
 never would have sigiied the petition. She was asked, in what par- 
 ticular she was ignorant of the laws relating to the colored people. 
 She replied, that she thought they were deprived of other privileges 
 than that of marrying white people. 
 
 To this part of her testimony, Mr. Hildreth, her husband, op- 
 posed its being received as evidence. She replied, that she spake 
 conscientiously, and she wished to tell the truth, and that she never 
 would have signed it, had she known the laws. 
 
 Mr. Oren P. Bacon, was sworn. 
 
 At a subsequent time, iNIr. George Bradbum called on the chair- 
 man of the Committee, and said that two ladies wished to see the 
 petition, and wished to have the loan of it. This request was re- 
 fused in regard to the loan of it, but that they might see it. Accord- 
 ingly, the petition was shown to him. Miss Sarah Baker, and an- 
 other lady. Sarah Baker said that she signed the petition, and the 
 other lady (her sister) said she signed it and would stand to it. 
 
 Mr. George Bradburn said, that the alterations and interlineations 
 made on the outside of the petition, was written by him ; that he did 
 it to make it belter grammar. 
 
 The Committee has seen several gentlemen of Dorchester upon 
 this subject ; one ol them said that his two daughters signed the peti- 
 tion after seeing ISlrs. Sanford's nanie on it, and that they did not 
 read or know what its contents were, and that many young ladies in 
 the town had signed it in the same manner. 
 
 At another meeting of the Committee, Mr. George Bradburn was 
 present and was sworn. 
 
 Mr. Bradburn testified and said, that the petition was sent to him 
 with a number of others, by Miss Western, of Weymouth, wishing 
 him to present them to the Legislature. 
 
 Again said that he was not positive whether it was sent to him by 
 Miss Western or Mr. Jackson ; if not by Mr. Jackson, it was by 
 Miss Western. 
 
 Quesiion by the Commiltee. Was the petition in the same situa- 
 tion that it now is .'' 
 
 Jlnsicer. I do not know ; it appears now to be torn — the altera- 
 tions on the outside were made by me, to bring it into form. 
 
 Sarah Baker appeared and refused to be sworn. 
 
1839.] HOUSE— No. 74. 17 
 
 She was then told that all the witnesses had testified under oaih, 
 and that she would not be heard as a wiiness unless she was sworn. 
 
 Mr. Wendal Philips appeared as her friend, and said that she was 
 not obliged to commit herself. 
 
 Alter many inquiries, and putting the question, several times, 
 whether she signed the name of S. P. Sanford, she wished to an- 
 swer by stating many particular circumstances. 
 
 She was told that she must answer the question, and if she did sign 
 it, she might give her reasons afterwards. 
 
 Question, again. Did you write the name of S. P. Sanford on 
 the petition, and did Mrs. tr'anford ever authorize you to ? 
 
 Answer — I did write the name of Mrs. Sanford on the petition, 
 and I have not seen her since. 
 
 Question, again — Did Mrs. Sanford authorize you to sign her 
 name.^ 
 
 Answer — She never did authorize me to. 
 
 She also said that she did write the name of Laura M. Spaulding 
 on the petition, without her authority, and that she sent the petition to 
 the Anti-Slavery Office with directions to its being ]iresented to the 
 Legislature. 
 
 She refus ^d t > take an oath — said that she had conscientious scru- 
 ples — but would affirm. 
 
 The oath of affirmation was administered to her. 
 
 She then affirmed as follows : — 
 
 In the month of June she was authorized, at the Quarterly Meet- 
 ing of the Anti-Slavery Society, to procure petitioners. She re- 
 ceived a number of blank petitions from Philadelphia, in July or Au- 
 gust last. Sent a number of petitions by Mrs. M. Spaulding to Mrs. 
 Sanford. On the second Tuesday of September, had another Quar- 
 terly Meeting ; those petitions were brought before tlie meeting with- 
 out signatures — gave a number of petitions to Mrs. Ann P. Reed, 
 requesting her to get signers. Akev the petitions were returned, a 
 discussion took place — and feeling very warm and animated, and mis- 
 understanding Mrs. Reed, I wrote the names on the paper, there be- 
 ing no space left. 
 
 Mrs. Laura M. Spaulding was sworn. — Knew nothing about the 
 matter. 
 
 Almira Baker took the oath of affirmation — Said, that when Sarah 
 3 
 
18 DISTINCTIONS OF COLOR. [April, 
 
 Baker gave the petition to Mrs. Spaulding, that she stated, that she 
 wished Mr. and Mrs. Sanford to withdraw any one that was iin- 
 wilhng to sign. Sarah Baker again said, that at a quarterly meeting, 
 she understood Mrs. A. P. Reed to give her authority lo put on 
 the names of Mrs. Sanford and Mrs. Spaulding, iliat she was very 
 much out of health, and could not recollect many things. 
 
 Question by Mr. Bradburn. — Was the petition circulated some 
 two or three months, after the names of S. P. Sanford and Mrs. 
 Spaulding were on ? 
 
 Answer — Yes. 
 
 Question by same — Was Mrs. Sanford present in Dorchester 
 during the time the petition was circulated after her name was on. 
 
 Answer. — I cannot say. The petitions were in circulation six 
 or seven months before they were sent to the Legislature. Knows 
 of no person's name on the petition, hut what are now or formerly 
 were of Dorchester. 
 
 Rev. Mr. Spaulding was sworn, — And said, that the Rev. Mr. 
 Sanford was in Dorchester frequently after the petition was circu- 
 lated with Mrs. Sanford's name on it, as often as once a week, some- 
 times twice in a week. iNIrs. Sanford was not in Dorchester after her 
 name was on the petition ; was acquainted with the petitioners, and 
 they were all virtuous women. 
 
 Richard Clapp was sworn, — And said, that ^Ir. Blake, of Dor- 
 chester, called on him on Sabbath morning, and said that a lady's 
 name was on the petition, that she never signed, and that was wrong 
 to put person's names on, that did not consent to. I said so, too ; 
 and that I would inquire. I did call on Miss Baker the next day, 
 and she said that she knew the person. Miss Baker told me in the 
 presence of her mother and sister, that she knew she did sign it, and 
 as evidence, her mother and sister saw her sio;n it, with five others, 
 and there was no forgery i i this name. 
 
 Mrs. Spaulding called again. — Said ihnt Miss Badger said, that she 
 thought that she did not put her name to the paper, but that she put 
 her name on after seeing the name of Mrs. Spaulding, and that she 
 put her name on all the petitions that were presented to her, that 
 -Mrs. Sj)aulding's name was on. 
 
 Question by L. Metcall to .Miss Sarah Baker — Did you not say 
 
1839.] HOUSE— No. 74. 19 
 
 to Mr. Sanlbid, that you did not sign tlie name of Mrs. Sanford on 
 the petition. 
 
 Answer — Mr. Sanford called on uie last Tliursday and being con- 
 fined by sickness, 1 had not the power of recollection of facts that 
 took place five or six months ago, to answer some of Mr. Sanford's 
 questions, this among the rest ; also said that she denied having trans- 
 ferred any heading of petitions, and stated to l\[r. Sanford that I did 
 write on the outside of the petition that part which appears to have 
 been originally written. 
 
 Question again by L. Metcalf, Esq. — Refresh your memory ; 
 did not Mr. Sanford ask you whether you did not put the name of 
 Mrs. Sanford on the petition.'' 
 
 Answer — i will admit that I did put it on, and the names of Miss 
 Patty and the Kenney's family were placed at first on the petition 
 by Miss Patty, with the consent of the Pattys. 
 
 Rev. Mr. Sanford testified at a former meeting of the Committee 
 that Miss Sarah Baker positively denied to him, that she ever put the 
 name of Mrs. S. P. Sanford on the petition. 
 
 Question by i.. Metcalf to Miss Sarah Baker — Did you not 
 tell Mr. Sanford that you did not put Mrs. Sanford's name on 
 the paper. 
 
 Answer — I think that I added, to the best of my recollection. 
 
 Question by same — How many names have you wrote on the 
 paper .'' 
 
 Answer — I think that the names of Rebecca Clapp, Elizabeth 
 Clapp, Charlotte Tuttle, E. H. Clapp, were written in pencil, and 
 that I wrote them over with a pen ; that E. H. Clapp and Char- 
 lotte, names were put down by me without authority ; but afterwards, 
 I called on them, before the petition was handed to the Legislature, 
 and they said let them go. 
 
 Question by same — Did you not know that Mrs. Sanford refused 
 to sign the petition. 
 
 Answer — No. 
 
 Did you not write to Mr. Bradburn, that all the names were writ- 
 ten by the persons themselves. 
 
 Answer — I refer you to the letter — which was produced — and is 
 annexed. 
 
 Was you acquainted with Mrs. Sanford ^ — Yes 1 was. 
 
20 DISTINCTIONS OF COLOR. [April, 
 
 Was you aware at the time you wrote to Mr. Bradbuin, that Mrs. 
 Sanford's name was on the paper. 
 
 Answer — I had no recollection of it at that time ; and I wish to 
 add, that after I told Mr. Stanford, I recollected the next day, and 
 wrote him, as appears by my letter to Mrs. Sanford. 
 
 Amelia Baker was called. 
 
 Question by Mr. Phillips. — What did Sarah Baker say to Mr. 
 Sanlord at the time he asked whether or no she had put his wife's 
 name to the petition. 
 
 Answer — After he had asked me so many times, I said that I had 
 no recollection — no I have no recollection — when she was asked to 
 say yes or no, she refused to answer — the names of Miss Patty and 
 the Ken :ey family, w ?re | laced first on the petition by Miss Patty, 
 with the consent of the Kenneys in the factory — the second time 
 the petition was brought to the house, not certain their names had 
 been put down : one of the family wrote them a second time — Miss 
 Sarah Baker is acquainted with about seventy of the signers, and about 
 sixty of them are professors of Religion. 
 
 Mr. Richard Clapp — Testified that the names of the inmates of 
 his brother's family were, Elizabeth, Elizabeth H., Charlotte Tuttle, 
 and Rebecca D. Clapp, one of them was dead, and some of them very 
 sick before the petition came along, as he understood. 
 
 Miss. Baker — Testified that Ci-arlotte Tuttle and E. H. Clapp, 
 were members of the Anti-Slavery Society, and she took the liberty 
 of taking their names. 
 
 Mr. Sharp, of Dorchester — Testified that there was great ex- 
 citement and uneasiness in the town in consequence of the ladies' 
 names having been taken wiiliout their knowledge ; that they felt ex- 
 tremely mortified in having their names published on handbills, and 
 being placed and exposed to public view, in different parts of the 
 town ; that he was acquainted with many of them, and that he be- 
 lieved them to be very respectable and worthy women : said that they 
 did not know the nature of the petition — supposed it was similar to 
 that of the last year, for abolishing slavery ; that there was a general 
 disapprobation excited on the subject ; that Miss Baker was very 
 ardent, that her zeal had led her beyond propriety, that all with 
 whom he had conversed with upon the subject disapproved very 
 much of it. 
 
1839.] HOUSE— No. 74. 21 
 
 Mrs. John' Holden — Testified that she never saw any petition 
 except in the hands of Miss Baker. She asked me to sign a peti- 
 tion. I said that if Mrs. Clapp signed the petition to go to Wash- 
 ington, to free the slaves, ask her to sign my name. 
 
 The ladies were distressed and wretched. I never heard of the 
 petition until after it was printed : heard that my name was tiiere. 
 If the reception had been favorable, should have been grieved and 
 mortified. Miss Rebecca Clapp and Elizabeth Clapp were very 
 sick, and were deranged : Rebecca died. Have told Miss Baker 
 never to come into my house again. She said that she should, 
 when she had another petition. There was a great many children's 
 names on the petition, some very young. 
 
22 DISTINCTIONS OF COLOR. [April, 
 
 Medway, February 27, 1839. 
 Dear Sir, 
 
 Yours of the 26th has this moment come to hand, and I hasten to 
 reply, by saying, that I have already written to L, Metcalf, Esq., one 
 of your honorable body, giving a statement of facts relating to the sub- 
 ject which you introduced. I am happy to explain still farther the 
 particulars Sometime last fall, I believe in August, a number of pe- 
 titions were presented to Mrs. Sanford to sign, most of them relating 
 to the subject of slavery. Among tjiem was one "for a repeal of all 
 laws making a distinction on account of color." This petition she re- 
 fused to sisn, and gave her reasons for refusing, and at the same time 
 she expressed a strong desire to me to prevent the circulation of the 
 above named petition. My views coincided perfectly with hers, and I 
 regretted that it was in circulation. Our views and feelings were 
 known, and others refused to sign it for the same reasons. Some oth- 
 ers differed from us in the matter who circulated the petition, and I 
 believe with upright and worthy motives. These are facts in the case. 
 You are at liberty to use them as your judgment may dictate. 
 
 With earnest desires that you, and all others associated with you, 
 may be guided by heavenly wisdom, 
 
 I am yours, most respectfully, 
 
 D. SANFORD. 
 
 N. B. Wishing to put into your hands full testimony, it may be 
 proper for you to receive the signature of Mrs. Sanford, who would 
 have been happy to have written more in detail, did time allow. 
 
 I hereby certify, that I did not sign any petition to the Legislature 
 of this Commonwealth "fir a repeal of all lairs making- a distinction 
 on account oj color." j 
 
 S. P. SANFORD. 
 
 Medway, Feb. 27, 1839. 
 
1839.] HOUSE— No. 74. 23 
 
 Dorchester, March 7, 1839. 
 
 Dear Sir : — Suffering this evening with feeble health prevents my 
 writing so extensively as I wish, in the statement of facts respecting 
 the petition which I saw in your possession this afternoon. I find, on 
 farther inquiry, that the ladies generally, (nor indeed have I found a 
 single exception,) were entirely mistaken in regard to the disabilities 
 of colored people. They have supposed that many civil privileges 
 were denied them, and a number have remarked to me, that, in their 
 opinion, should such a paper be circulated again, with a correct knowl- 
 edge of the condition of colored people — not half the signatures 
 would be obtained which are now secured. Many of the ladies signed 
 w-ithout reading the petition, and others gave permission to have their 
 names entered without knowing hardly to what they gave permission. 
 
 I have reason to believe that many names are not forged. And in 
 the case of Mrs. Sanford's name and one or two others, I am still 
 inclined to think that the name was signed without considering the 
 guilt or the consequences. I have written to Mrs. Hildrelh, express- 
 ing my desire and also yours, to have her call on you to-morrow 
 morning. 
 
 In great haste, 
 
 Yours, respectfully and affectionately, 
 
 D. SAN FORD. 
 
 Medw.w, March 17. 1839. 
 
 Dear Sir ; 
 
 I am sorry not to be able to be with you tomorrow, but my duties to 
 my people actually forbid. I wish here to state, that Mrs. Sanford 
 and myself were entirely ignorant of her name's being entered on that 
 offensive petition until after the time it was presented to the Legisla- 
 ture. On the 14th of February I saw the notice of it in " the Daily 
 Advertiser." I was surprised to see it, as I knew Mrs. Sanford did 
 refuse to sign it. I found also that many others in the village of Dor- 
 
24 DISThNCTlONS OF COLOR. [April, 
 
 Chester were equally surprised to find it tlms entered, as they knew 
 that Mrs. S. refused to sign it. I understand that Rev. Mr. Spaulding 
 testified that I was in Dorchester about every week, after my leaving. 
 He labored under a mistake, which I will now rectify. My family 
 moved the 10th of October. After that time, I was in Dorchester at 
 the ordination of my successor, about the 30th of October. I after- 
 wards exchanged with him ; and, besides these, 1 once passed through 
 the place, to Weymouth, and once to Boston. These were the only 
 times of my being in Dorchester before the close of the year. On 
 the first of January I passed through Dorchester to Haverhill ; on the 
 20th of January 1 was there to spend the night, and, on the 30th, 
 passed through the place to Boston. These are the only times of my 
 being in Dorchester, until I was there the fourteenth of February, 
 when I saw the notice of the petition. During my calls previous to 
 the 14th of February, no allusion whatever was made to the petitions, 
 and I presume that the people in the village were all ignorant of the 
 two first names being entered. You will just bear in mind that Mrs. 
 Reed gave the petition to Miss Baker ; it then went from the village 
 to other parts of the town, and was not returned again to the village. 
 "When circulated in the village the two first names were not down. On 
 Miss Baker's taking it from the village, she forged those names, and 
 then the paper circulated in the north and east parts of the town. 
 These circumstances will explain some facts which may be important 
 for you to know. I feel entire confidence in yourself and the other 
 gentlemen of the Committee, and trust you will be guided right in the 
 result, and in your report ; and cannot but believe that your efforts 
 will be crowned with great good, although now, in some respects, 
 trying. 
 
 In great haste, I am yours, affectionately, 
 
 D. SANFORD. 
 
 MARcn Sth, 1S;39. 
 
 Dear Brother Samoiu) : — .\ftcr you called on ine yesterday, I 
 learned by inquiry, that one of the six A. S. petitions I filled out last 
 summer did not have the names of Mrs. Sanford and Spauldino- on 
 it when Mrs. Reed gave back to me the petitions. A remark then 
 
1839.] nOUSK— No. 74. 25 
 
 struck my mind, made to me four or five months ago, by Mrs Reed or 
 Lyon, (I am not quite positive which, but think it was by Mrs. R.,) 
 that the space at the head of one ol the petitions was left to put tlie 
 names of Mrs. Sanford and SpauUling, and therefore I put down tlieir 
 names. At the time I did it, I did not take notice which of the peti- 
 tions it was. All the while the petitions were in circulation, I did 7iot 
 hear one syllable about an unwillingness of Mrs. S. and S. signing any 
 one of them, and did not, till after they came before the Legislature. 
 
 After hearing what you had to say to me yesterday, the thought 
 struck my mind, that this was the petition, at the head of which, with 
 the best of motives, I placed, as I thought I was authorized to do, the 
 names of Mrs. Sanford and Spaulding I accordingly went to the 
 Committee and requested to see the petition, and found the signatures 
 were in my own hand writing. 
 
 I will now state, that next Tuesday morn, at nine o'clock, I will ap- 
 pear (God permitting) before the Committee, and state the facts in the 
 case. 
 
 I would further state, that I have some other facts, which I also in- 
 tend to state, which will also go to prove it icas not an intentional for- 
 gery. Had I time I would state to you those facts. 
 
 I should be glad to see you before the Committee when I am there, 
 if it is so you can. 
 
 I would say further, that so far as I can now recollect your questions 
 to me, that what I said, w^as correct, with a single exception. 
 
 I feel a consciousness of having tried to do the thing that was right ; 
 but have in one important particular erred through a misunderstanding of 
 (I think) Mrs. Reed. It was so long ago when this occurred, that 
 when you called on me, I could not bring to my recollection any thing 
 of the subject, you wished to know, or should have frankly and freely 
 told you. 
 
 That God may bring about in this event his own glory, is my sincere 
 _^and humble prayer. 
 
 Respectfully yours, 
 
 Rev. Mr. Sanford. 
 
 SARAH BAKER. 
 4 
 
26 DISTIXCTIONS OF COLOR. [April, 
 
 Dorchester, Friday, March, B. 
 
 Mrs. Hildreth, 
 
 Dear Madam : — I found yesterday, in looking at the petition, that 
 there were but four names signed after it went from the hands of Mrs 
 Reed, before you signed ; that those four names were evidently "litten 
 by llie same hand, and that AFiss Baker told me of her own accord that 
 she wrote two of them. // appiars, too, that Mrs. Sanford's name 
 was written by the same hand uliich wrote the four, and also, wliich 
 wrote the nnme of Sarah Baker. The ciicumstances are such, that I 
 cannot avoid the conviction, th;it such might be the case, though it 
 might have been done with good motives and without regard to con- 
 sequence. Mrs. Reed and myself saw the Committee and they desired 
 to see you this morning, to secure your testimony on two points, one 
 relating to Mrs. Sanf)rd's signature when vou signed, and the cir- 
 cumstances then which came up in your own mind, namely, the fact 
 tiiat you had heard that Mrs. Sandford had refused to sign. They 
 also wish to see you respecting the fact, that you and others were ig- 
 norant at the time of the disabilities of the colored people. These 
 facts should be known to the Legislature, and they will aid in giving 
 right in>prcssions upon the public mind. I wish, therefore, if it is 
 possible, that you will go in with Mr. Hildreth this morning, and you 
 will find the Committee together bv inquiiinrr for Mr. Minott Thaver^ 
 of Brniiitrcc, who is one of the Committee. Mrs. Bacon I believe is 
 going in, and will aid you in the matter. 
 
 Yours truly, 
 
 D. SANFORD- 
 
 Dorchester, March "^l, 1S39. 
 To \\. Lincoln, Esq., 
 
 Sm: 
 
 It is with painful surprise, that I find my name is annexed to a list 
 of pitiliontjj fur the rights and privileges of the colored population of 
 
1839.1 HOIISK— No. 74. 27 
 
 our Slate; and hearing, that you were a member of the Committee, to 
 whom that subject was referred, I take the liberty to request you to 
 erase my name, as it is a base forger i/ ; for so far from signing such a 
 petition, I have never seen it. 
 
 There are many names upon that paper which I know to be unau- 
 thorized, and I presume that more than one third of them, were ob- 
 tained by a species of deception. 
 
 A knowledge of your compliance with my request, to erase my 
 name, will be received with gratitude, by one who has no wish to in- 
 trude herself upon the public. 
 
 With much respect, yours, &c., 
 
 N. D. BARNARD. 
 To William Lixcoln, Esq. 
 
 To the Chairman of the Committee on the Petition of the Ladies of 
 
 Dorchester. 
 
 Sir: 
 
 Having understood, that our names are attached to a petition of the 
 ladies of Dorchester, for abolishing all laws making a distinction on 
 account of color, we take this method to say to the Committee, that 
 we never saw or signed the petition, nor authorized any person to sign 
 the same for us, and that we do not in the least approve of it, we fur- 
 ther wish to have our names erased from the same. 
 
 Yours, respectfully, 
 
 Mrs. JOHN HOLDEN, 
 
 HANNAH HOLDEN, 
 ANN PAYSON, 
 LYDIA PAYSON. 
 Dorchester, March IC, 1839. 
 
28 
 
 DISTINCTIONS OF COLOR. 
 
 [Aprils 
 
 Dorchester, March 21, 1839. 
 
 To the Chairman of the Committee on the Petition of the Ladies of 
 
 Dorchester. 
 
 Sir: 
 
 Having understood that our names are attached to a petition from 
 the ladies of Dorchester, to abolish all laws making a distinction on 
 account of color, we take tliis opportunity to say to the Committee, 
 that we never knotmngly signed said petition, but understood it to be a 
 petition for the abolishing slavery in the District of Columbia ; and if our 
 names are attached to said petition, it was done without our consult or 
 knowledge, or under 3Iisrepresentations, and we respectfully ask tc 
 have our names taken from the same. 
 
 With respect, yours, &c. 
 
 Celia M. Humphrey, 
 Celia F. Humphrey, 
 Maria A. Pierce, 
 Mary Williams, 
 Julia N. Swan, 
 Mary Ann Lambert, 
 Eliza B. Randall, 
 Ann E. Randall, 
 Abigail Howe, 
 Eliza V. Howe, 
 Sarah L. Scaverns, 
 Sarah B. Seaverns, 
 Mehitable Howe, 
 Mary Seaverns, 
 Elizabeth G. Pierce, 
 Lydia H. Pierce, 
 
 Harriet Pierce, 
 Anna Pearson, 
 Harriet T. Pearson, 
 Susan M. Pearson, 
 Mary A. Pearson, 
 Mary Tolman, 
 Rachel Tolman, 
 Elizabeth Chamberlain , 
 Betsey Gill, 
 Mary Nichols, 
 Anna L. Harris, 
 Anna Clapp, 
 Mary Adams, 
 Jane B. Adams, 
 Mary E. Adams, 
 Hannah W. Adams. 
 
 This is to certify, that I carried the petitions to the Mis.«;es Paysons, 
 and that Miss A. R. Payson wrote her name, and her sister's, L. Pay- 
 son. 
 
 M. F. LYON. 
 
1839.] HOUSE— No. 74. 29 
 
 I would state that Mrs. M. F. Lyon is one of the authorized circu- 
 lators of our petitions. 
 
 S. BAKER, 
 
 Cor. Sec. Dorchester F. A. S. Society. 
 
 We hereby certify, that we never signed any petition to the Legisla- 
 ture of this Commonwealth, to request them "to repeal all laws which 
 make any distinction on account of color." Nor did we ever give per- 
 mission foi" any one to sign our names. 
 
 NANCY B. SEAGROVE, 
 MARTHA T. PAINE. 
 
 We hereby certify, that we placed our names upon a paper presented 
 us by Mrs. Lyon of Dorchester, she only named a petition for the abo- 
 lition of slavery in the District of Columbia, which we cursorily read 
 and signed. We were not aware that it was filled out from the ladies 
 of Dorchester only, and that our names were out of place, as we resi- 
 ded in Milton. 
 
 We do not wish to criminate any person on account of our names 
 being on the other petition, as we suppose it to have arisen from some 
 mistake. 
 
 NANCY B. SEAGROVE. 
 MARTHA T. PAINE. 
 
 Milton, March 14, 1839. 
 
 Mr. Geo. Bradburn 
 
 Dorchester, March 1, 1839. 
 
 Dear Sir, — Your letter of to-day, addressed to Mr. Richard Clapp, 
 has been put into my hand by the gentleman to whom it is addressed, 
 with a request to give you a statement of those facts therein desired re- 
 specting the genuineness of the signatures to the petition of S. P. San- 
 ford and 210 others, women of Dorchester, praying for the repeal of 
 those laws in this State which make a distinction among its people on 
 account of color. To this request, for your sake aod the cause of truth, 
 
so DISTINCTIONS OF COLOK. [April, 
 
 I cheerfully comply, although it seems of little use to do so, for the 
 information of a man who has no more respect for the signers of the 
 petition, than to express publicly, "I don't believe there is a virtuous 
 woman amon? them." If the gentleman, (yes, I say gentleman,) who 
 made the above remark concerning us, has never before succeeded in 
 attracting the notice of the ladies, he has done so now, and he will 
 see proof of it if he lives a little longer. 
 
 But now to your inquiry about the genuineness of the signatures to 
 the above mentioned petition. I would state that I am acquainted wiili 
 most of the ladies who circulated the petition, and to my personal 
 knowledge, they may be relied on. 1 would say, further, I am person- 
 ally knowing to some of the signatures, that they are true, arid I believe 
 all arc. Many of the signers are classed among the most enlightened 
 and virtuous of the community. 
 
 The object of our petition, so far as I have been able to learn, has 
 been fully expressed in your remarks on its presentation. 
 
 May God bless and prosper you in advocating the cause of justice and 
 humanity, is the sincere desire of your humble petitioner. 
 SARAH BAKER, 
 
 Cor. Sec. of the Dorchester F. A. S. Society- 
 
 P. S. If Mr. Thaver still contitmcs to manifest his doubts as to the 
 genuineness of our petition, I will, on being informed, call a meeting of 
 the ladies interested, and have delegates chosen to appear, personally, 
 (if they can be permitted) before the Committee. If that would not 
 bdtisfy Mr. T., I know not what would. 
 
 With due respect, &,c., 
 
 S. B. 
 
 Dear Sir, — At your request for information, relating to the genuine- 
 ness of the sitrnatures to the ladies' petition, from Dorchester, I have ap- 
 plied to Miss S. Baker, the Corresponding Secretary, for that purpose, 
 and she has given a fair statement, which I believe may be relied on as 
 correct ; she being of a virtuous and respectable character. 
 
 P. S. If Mr. Thayer still doubts, he had better send for the ladie?, 
 and inquire of them personally. 
 
 Respectfully Yours, 
 
 RICHARD CLAPP, 
 Chairman of the Stlccimai of Dorchester. 
 
 G£0. BRAi)Bl'R.N, Esq. 
 
1839.] HOUSE— No. 74. 31 
 
 I wrote the name of Mrs. John Ilolden, upon the petition respecting 
 distinction of color, understanding it to be with her consent. 
 
 MARTHA CLAP. 
 
 This certifies, that when the Rev. Mr. Spaulding inquired of me 
 how those names came on that petition twice, that I was not as par- 
 ticular and definite as I should have been if I had known that it would 
 have been stated again, and under such circumstances as it was before 
 the Committee on petitions. The circumstances in tlie case were 
 these. I had the petitions, and requested Miss R. Pattie to write the 
 names of our family in their jiresence, to which we all agreed. She 
 wrote them on two, and the bell rung to call us to work. I had 
 agreed to return them immediately. There being not sufficient time 
 for Miss R. Pattie to write them on all, I took them and handed them 
 to a friend, and told her to put them on the rest, and I presume that 
 she made a mistake and put them on one that Miss Pattie had. 
 
 HANNAH KENNEY. 
 
 March 14, 1^39. 
 
 I doubt not that the way those names came on one of the petitions 
 twice, as stated above by Miss U. Kenney, is correct. It may be as- 
 certained by my hand-writing. I did not write them designedly, if at 
 all, for I should have known that it was wrong, and would militate 
 against the cause we wished to promote. We regret that any such 
 thing should have happened, but no one, knowing the circumstance, 
 presumes that there was any evil designed. 
 
 CATHARINE JORDAN. 
 
 DoRcnESTEK, March '.25, 1839. 
 Friend Br.\dburn : 
 
 If the Committee to whom our petition is referred has not written 
 their report, I would state a few items for their instruction. Of the 
 names sent in last Friday morning, is one Anna Clapp. This person 
 
32 DISTINCTIONS OF COLOR. [April, 
 
 never signed the petition, but seeing her name on the printed list, she 
 Ihouglit it had been forged. There is one Ann Clapp who did sign, 
 that docs iwt wish to have her name taken off. I am informed by Ann 
 Clapp that she generally adds e to her name, thus : Anne. This ac- 
 counts for the mistake. A. R. and L. Payson are now convinced that 
 their names were put on the petition by A. R. Payson, as Mrs. Lyon 
 has already testified. 1 learn also that nearly all whose names are said 
 to be on the petition without their knowledge or consent, did not mean 
 to say thus. They meant to state they did not understand the object 
 of the petition, and therefore wish their names to be taken off. '^^ ill 
 you please inform the Committee of these facts. 
 
 I would also say, that Mrs. Holdcn, who appeared before the Com- 
 mittee, is an oi)poser to the object of the petition, and has done her 
 best to get those names which have virtually backed out. With a sin- 
 cere desire to have the truth, and only the truth, known, I have written 
 these lines. 
 
 Respectfully yours, 
 
 SARAH BAKER. 
 
 To the Committee to whom the petition making distinction on account of 
 
 color is referred. 
 
 Gentlemen : 
 
 I have some apprehensions that what I said before you might not be 
 rightly understood. If this is the case, I would most gladly make a 
 recjipitulation. But whether it is or not, I wish to say a few woidson 
 the subject. 
 
 I stated, respecting Mr. Sanford's question to me, " Whether 1 did 
 or did not put Mrs. Sanford's name on that petition,'' that I had no 
 recollection of doing it. This is confirmed by the testimony of Mrs. 
 Ann P. Reed and my sister. The question having been put a number 
 of times by one of your number for a positive answer, I merely ad- 
 mitted, for the time being, that T said no; having in view, when I ad- 
 mitted it, the ai)Ovcnientioned evidence, that I did answer the (juestion 
 wit/i (juallficaliun. 
 
 I would state further in allusion to the names of Charlotte Tuttle 
 and E. il. Clapp, that, when 1 mforuied them of their names bemg put 
 
 MB ■< 3. 
 
1839.] ' HOUSE— No. 74. 33 
 
 on the petition, while they were dangerously ill. I asked them if they 
 would have them taken off, and I was told " No, let them go on." 
 After the petition came into your hands for examination, I sent to 
 for a written answer to my question about their names being on, and 
 received one from Miss Tutlle, saying she had vo objection to her 
 name being on the petition. The other Miss E. H. C. was not at 
 home, so I did not get any writing from her. Miss E. H. Clapp is 
 the recording secretary of our F. A. S. Society. 
 
 One word more, in allusion to my misunderstanding about putting 
 down the names of Mrs. Sanford and Spaulding. I was informed by 
 Mrs. Lyon, in the presence of a number of witnesses, that she under- 
 stood the names of Mrs. S. and S. were to be put on the space at the 
 head of one of the petitions. It was in Mrs. Lyon's house, and at the 
 moral reform meeting alluded to, that I received the petitions of Airs. 
 Reed, and heard at the same time Mrs. R's remark by which I under- 
 stood she meant for me to put down the names of Mrs. Sanford and 
 Spaulding. In this Mrs. Lyon's testimony confirms my own. 
 
 I could allude to more evidence if necessary, to shew that my con- 
 nexion with, and knowledge of, the disputed petition has been open 
 and honest, but think any candid person would be satisfied with what 
 I have already given. 
 
 With due respects, &:-c., 
 
 SARAH BAKER. 
 
 This is to certify, that I have no objection to having my name on the 
 paper. 
 
 CHARLOTTE TUTTLE. 
 
 [The above, written in reference to the petition on color, and given 
 to Alraira Baker to present to the Committee.] 
 
 March II, 1S39. 
 
 On account of the feeble state of my health, I am prevented from 
 appearing with Miss Sarah Baker, before the Committee, to testify to 
 
34 DISTINCTIONS OF COLOR. [April, '39- 
 
 the genuineness of our righteous but insulted petition. This, there- 
 fore, is to certify, that I have been intimately acquainted with Mis3 
 Baker's course in re^rd to this petition, and that 1 approve and high- 
 ly commend her proceedings. 
 
 Furthermore, I would state, I approved of and signed the petition. 
 
 ELIZA POPE, 
 Treasurer of the D. F. A. S. S. 
 
(. 
 
 -7" 
 
 H/ 
 
 J i 
 
 I I 
 
.c 
 
 ** 
 
 
 
 
 vV 
 
 '5' ^ 
 
 ■0. -■- 
 
 
 ,0^ 
 
 x^ -V^ 
 
 ' • o , 
 
 
 ^'^ 
 
 
 ':^'" ^ .0 
 
 .5^ 
 
 * 
 I 1 
 
 
 
 '^>- >.A^ 
 
 V 
 
 
 
 c- 
 
 
 4U 
 
 
 ,.*^'r 
 
 
 -^o A^ .»• 
 
 -> %,^ ;)^^\ X/ ;>^^-. %,^ 
 
 
 ^vP A^ V 
 
 
 ••>^ 
 
 t- . ^ • o V . ''-0 
 
 V *•-* A^ % *»-" A^ ^. '"• .V 
 
 
 
 vT 
 
^"- 
 
 *'.-.«• 
 
 V 
 
 '/ 
 
 
 •''^ 
 
 0^ 
 
 
 
 >•* 
 
 °<. 
 
 
 \'^' 
 
 <. • 
 
 • . 
 
 
 '^. 
 
 
 bv^ : -^^-0^ ■ '*bv 
 
 • 
 
 ' kS 
 
 
 ■i."^ -^ 
 
 ^^ •. 
 
 
 > 
 
 'o . 
 
 ; * A 
 
 
 ^ 
 
 
 "°. 
 
 
 
 o - 
 
 >\. 
 
 
 
 ^^^ 
 
 
 
 A 
 
 
 O 
 
 V 
 
 
 
 <y 
 
 
 >P 
 
 •=v. 
 
 
 ^^ 
 
 ^^ 
 
 f 
 
 » ' 
 
 ..x 
 
 
 
 ' - 
 
 
 r 
 
 , J^ ' o V . ^' - o 1 
 
 
 ♦ '" '^ A^ ' ^'* "^V C^ 
 
 / -*,/ :--;■: ■\,*^ ^-^-••'^"'^■^0^ ^■■'■:^'^ 
 
 -^..-. . .- V^ - ^ ^ ..,^.■. ...o ^ ^ , 
 
 > •5' ■; <i • . 
 
 o 
 
 '"-^ 
 
 ^ ,> "^^ v^ » %\ V», .-V' 
 
 DOEBSBROS. , ^ • o _1 J f 
 
 O LIBRARY BINDING < O^ O *P "TV ^ f- 
 
 ^te 
 
LIBRARY OF CONGRESS 
 
 I 
 
 011 695 784 A