There had been considerable discussion as to the status of free men of
color, and although one provision of the constitution seemed to give
the right of suffrage to all free men, yet there was a restriction
limiting the privilege of voting to those who were "competent
witnesses in a court of justice against a white person."[43] One
commentator upon his unusual provision observes that one cannot tell
how many Negroes were entitled to vote under this provision.[44] But
whatever present-day students may make of this, it was recognized by
the members of this convention that the free Negro had no suffrage
right, for near the close of the convention there was submitted a
resolution providing that since "free men of color were denied
suffrage by the constitution," the apportionment of senators and
representatives from their respective districts should be based on the
white population alone.[45] The revised constitution contains this
provision, but with different wording.

The general tendency of the whole body of legal enactments in the
period 1834-65 was toward restricting the slave more and more, and at
the same time, eliminating the element known as free Negroes. Probably
this had an effect upon the percentage of free Negroes in the total
population as seen in the years 1820 and 1850. The national percentage
for these years in question was in each case six tenths of one per
cent.[46] But as the total Negro population increased despite the
migration southward from Tennessee, the ratio for Tennessee in 1820
was 3 per cent, and for 1850, 2.4 per cent, a period of greater
repression, showing decrease, although very slight.

A general law of 1839 forbade the slave to act as a free person, that
is, to hire his own time from his master, or to have merchandisable
property and trade therewith.[47] Runaways were to be punished by
being made to labor on the streets or alleys of towns, as well as by
imprisonment. Several laws show the tendency to class free Negroes
with slaves by stating that all capital offences for slaves were also
capital offences for free Negroes.[48] Another plainly provides that
all offences made capital in the code of that time for slaves, should
also be capital for "free persons of color."[49] Further, "no free
person of color might keep a grocery or tippling house" under pain of
a heavy fine. It will be seen that the attitude thus was plainly more
and more adverse to the free Negro. An act of 1842 had made