Southern Argus. [volume] (Columbus, Miss.) 1834-1842, 1840-07-21

public service. I
It is IN this light, in which we re-
gard the principle established 10 the
case ofLieut, Hope, and which invests
that decision with pervading and en-
during importance. Ii is a direct in
suit offered by the President and his
naval Minister, to the feelings ola large
portion Of the American people, and
in subjecting the conduct of the Naval
officers to the surveillance of the black
servants Of the commander reduces
them TO a state of degradation to which
neither Northern nor Southern gentle
men can submit. This cannot fail to
exert most banefnl influence upon
that iavori,e aIm Of the national de-
fence. Gentlemen of honor and SEN
sibiEty will, by degrees be banished
from the service, and they will be sue
ceeded by a mean-spirited generation,
willing and fit instruments to do the
bidding of master.
But there is another consequence
resulting from the principle here estab-
lished, Of no less importance. 1t
testimony is admissible in the Navy,
is it not admissible in the Army, and
even in the Federal courts We can
not conceive Of reason for a dis
tinction, and We presume there IS
none. An officer Of the army may be
cashiered upon the strength Of negro
testimony, since Lieut.. in the Navy
has been reprimanded and dismissed
upon the testimony of two servants OF
Capt. Uridh p. Levy! And in the
Federal court, any individual, if this
principle be recognized, may be pros
ecuted by the government for breach
of the Revenue or any other laws, and
by the testimony Of his own servant,
be EMERGED. Suppose, for example,
the Government should arraign clti-
zen of Richmond upon the charge OF
smuggling English cheese, or any 9th
or article paying duy-The case
comes before Judge Peter V. Daniel
Suppose the accused to be an moor
rigibIe Wing his servant or that oil
some other man is summoned to give
estimony-convictio ensues, as a
matter of course,-and his honor, the
Judge, has the supreme felicity ofpass-
ing sentence upon the political repro
bate.
This is not an impossibiity-it is
the Legitimate sequence Of the prlnci-
pie established in the case OF Hooe
i. c. that negroes are competent
witnesses in cases in which the United
States or any Of its officers are inter
esled.
Since the facts in this extraordinary
case were brought to light, several eff
forts have been made by the under
strapers of the party to relieve the Adj
ministration ofthe odium. The Globe
has put forth sundry articles, distin-
tinguished much more for their vio-
lence than respect for truth. The
Enquirer, always Charley at the hole,
has lent ahelping hand, This worthy
in his other self as editor of the Crisis;
has procured letter from Mr.. Paul
ding TO exonerate Mr.. Van Buren, from
all blame in the premises. The de-
sign, as in the case ofMr. Poinset and
the Standing Army, is decidedly good
but here, as there, the execution is de.
cidedly bad. The Hon. Secretary
hits wide of the mlrk, and does no
touch the true matter in issue. In 9th,
er words, he admits the offence charg.
ed, and does not even offer matter ir
mitigation ofdamages. He admits tina
negroes, and they the servants of Capt
Uriah p. Levy, we're introduced al
witnesses against Lieut.. Hooe This
eannotbe paliated by any combina
ton Of circumstances, or be made pal
atable to 1ohite gentleman, either nortl
or south. His apologies for approve
ing proceedings so novel and revolving
are l. "The admission of the descrip
ton oftestimony objected TO by Hoo
is universal practice on board
ships Of war;" So much the worse
if it be so, the greater the necessi
ty for arresting such practice. b
can another instance of the kind b
adduced? We never heard Of on
before. 2. "This decision was n
doubt made upon the ground, that n
disqualification of illegal nature, whlc
could only exist by a law of Congress
was shown" This admits every thin
and claims what we before state
was a legitimate sequence ofthe deci
ion that negro testimony is admissib
in the Army and in the Federal Court
3. "The evidence Of the negroes m'
be entirely rejected without affectil
the sentence Of the Court" Ho
does the Secretary know this /? b
il is a rule oflaw as well as ofcomm'
sense, that irrelevant testimony sh'
not be admitted, for there is no Gale
Iating what undue bias it may exert
the minds Of the jurors. And II a
milted, it is good cause for and apps
late jurisdiction to set aside the dec
ion. But all this has nothing to
with the main point. OF the merits
the decision, so far as relates to Lie