William Perkins spoke of the law enforced in Kent, by which the children of free colored persons, whom the officers decided the parents were unable to support, were bound out; and also of the law which prohibited a colored person returning to the State if he should happen to leave it.  They were oppressed and borne down.

   James A. Jones, of Kent, thought his native county equal to any other in
   the State, and that colored persons were not more oppressed there than
   elsewhere in the State.

Charles O. Fisher moved that a committee of five be appointed to draw up a memorial to the Legislature of Maryland, praying more indulgence to the colored people of the State, in order that they may have time to prepare themselves for a change in their condition, and for removal to some other land.

Daniel Koburn, of Baltimore, in referring to the oppressive laws of the State, said the hog law of Baltimore was better moderated than that in reference to the colored people.  The hog law said at certain seasons they should run about and at certain seasons be taken up; but the law referring to colored people allowed them to be taken up at any time.

Chas. Dobson, of Talbot, said that the time had come when free colored men in this country had been taken up and sold for one year, and when that year was out, taken up and sold for another year.  Who knew what the next Legislature would do; and if any arrangements could be made to better their condition, he was in favor of them.  He was for the appointing the committee on the memorial.

   B. Jenifer, of Dorchester, opposed the resolution; he was not in favor
   of memorializing the Legislature—­it had determined to carry out certain
   things, and it was a progressive work.

   Chas. Wyman, of Caroline; Jos.  Bantem, of Talbot; John H. Walker, Chas.
   O. Fisher and others discussed the resolution which was finally adopted.

   The following is the committee appointed:  Jno.  H. Walker and Jas. A.
   Handy, of Baltimore; William Perkins, of Kent; Thomas Fuller, of
   Dorchester; and Daniel J. Ross, of Hartford county.

A resolution of thanks to the officers of the Convention, the reporters of the morning papers, and authorities for their protection, was adopted.  The proceedings were also ordered to be printed in pamphlet form.

   The Convention, at 3 o’clock adjourned to meet on the second Monday in
   November, 1853, at Frederick, Md.

—­From the Baltimore Sun, July 27, 28, and 29, 1852.

REVIEWS OF BOOKS

The Slaveholding Indians.  Volume I:  As Slaveholder and Secessionist. By Annie Heloise Abel, Ph.D.  The Arthur H. Clark Company, Cleveland, 1915.  Pp. 394.

This is the first of three volumes on the slaveholding Indians planned by the author.  Volume II is to treat of the Indians as participants in the Civil War and Volume III on the Indian under Reconstruction.