Anti-slavery bugle. [volume] (New-Lisbon, Ohio) 1845-1861, 1847-05-07

SU' 'D
got SO far az to see it-of "NsGRoss OR 9TH.
ER oooos !" Yet Mr. Spooner thinks there
Is nothing in this Statute TO show that g ne
groes" mems slaves, or that they are consid-
cred property!
81. If Sla very was tolerated here, the de.
cision Of Lord Mansfield, in the Somerset
case, l772, put an End 70 its legal existence.
James SOMERSET was the slave Of Charles
Stewart, Of Virginia, by whom he was car
ried thence to London, in 1869. Sometime
after he quilted Mr.. Stewart; who thereup-
on had him seized and placed on board ship
to be carried TO Jamaica. Granville Sharpe
caused him to be brought before Lord Mans
field, on a writ OF h1je1J corpus, 10 Try the
question, "whether a slave, by coming into
England, became free? ?" Lord Mansfield,
in 1872, decided that no stakeholder could
exercise any authority over his slave while
in England, or could carry a slave out of
England without his consent. 1.-THE English
Courts have since held, that if a slave choo-
Sea 10 leave England and return TO a slave
country, he resumes the condition Of a slave.
So far as the ease of Somerset has any
reference to the Colonies, it recognizes the he.
ga! erisfsnce Of !Siaue,y IN Virginia. For
the arguments of Counsel and the decision
Of Mansfield, all proceed on the supposition,
'iidt Nt fDHCs w NIiOltIus ~AS u
,ars. The decision was, that a person held
as a slave abroad, If once landed in England,
could not be taken thence against his will
Now il Somerset was not a slave in Virgin
ia, the whole case proceeded on "a mistake
As far as this ease goes, therefore, IL recog-
nizes the legal existence Of S!a7ery in Vir'
ginia.
The case Of Somerset was adopted In the
Colonies to the exact extent 10 which il went.
Those Colonies which abolished Slavery,
Massachusetts, Pennsylvania, Rhode ISL
and, Connecticut, New Hampshire, &c. Oh
Their refused. under its authority, TO deliver
up slaves brought or flying into their limits,
or specially provided on what conditions
masters should be allowed 10 bring their
slaves with them.
The Somerset case has never hecn suppo-
sed to have any further reference to the Col
onies than that above specified. Instead Of
deciding Slavery to be Illegal here, it made
no decision respecting American Slavery ei-
Their way. But if it is 10 be quoted at all,
the only thing found in it is IA ta"it recogni-
ton Of the legal existence OF Slavery in Viz.
GINA.
9TH. The Colonial Statutes establishing
or relating 10 Slavery, are void, because they
do not define. with sufficient precision, whit
are to be slaves.
In most of the English Colonies in Amer
lea, Slavery originated in custom. Such ha
usually been its origin wherever il has exist
ed. Some of the Colonies rewards regula
ted, recognized, and established it by pariic
ular statutes /; sonr left it to that irregula
custom in which it commenced. inthis res
prct, black Slavery, on tbs side the water
exactly resembled Whiie Slavery (yillrinage,
ia the mother country. Both originated il
custom, and the rules regulating each were
from time to time, Laid down by Courts, OF
by the Legislatures, as it CHANGED.
If TO this any one shall object, that "al
customs must have a reasonable beginning
and that mahu' usus aboienIus est, e. had Gus.
tom is TO he disreGarded.) we shall reply:
LIST. Why did not these maXims Of the
Common Law, il they are 10 be taken literal
Iy. abolish villeinage (wbire slavery in Eng
land ! Any explanation which makes then
consistent with that system Of Slavery, vii
show that they were consistent with GU.
Slavery also.
Sd. We reply. with Lord Coke, that "reG
sonaJe is not TO be understood of every On,
learned mans reason, but Of hgai and 0rijf
cial reason, warranted by authority of laws
and with Sir William Scott, (Lord S,owell,
'.when it is cried out that 'bad customs art
To he disregardrd,' it is first to be proved
that, even in the consideration Of England
the custom of Slavery is considered a Ja.
custom in the Colonies"
But Mr.. Spooner goes further, and asserts
that Slavery cannot legally originate in Gus
tom. Ii must be authorized, he says, from
the very first by express statute. He found
this opinion on the language of Mansfield
which is The ONLY evidence he quotes In sur
, port of such a novel and strange idea. Sc
the remarks in our last, Of Lord Srowelrs, a
S to Slavery in Antigua, .. llagg. 81. In III
SOMERSET case, Mansfield said:
$50 high an act of dominion must be re
~counized by The law of the country where
! is used, y = = The state of Slavery
2 of such a nature, that it is incapable OF bein
!, introduced on any reasons, moral or polllict
J but only positive law, which preserves II
force long after the reasons, occasion, an
= time itself from whence 1t was created,
/, erased from the memory. II is so odious this
y nothing can be suffered 10 support II but pr
= sitive law"
: From this Mr.. Spooner %infers, as follows
q "Slavery, then, being the creature of pos
: i've legislation alone, can be created only b
IL q~islalion that shall so particularly describ
the persons 10 be made slaves, that they ina
I be distinguished from all others. il there h
: any doubt left by the letter of the law, as
the persons TO he made slaves, the eficac
i of all other slave Legislation is defeated sin
ply by that uncertginty. r CustoI
= %impafts TO Slavery no legal sanction."-(
: 81, and see P. 2I.)
We confess we do not see anything Of tn
. in the remarks of Lord Mansfield. He say
merely that Slavery must be created by pos
live iaw, but not a word as to the exaclnes
o with which the person must be pointed OF
and distinguished. All this is Mr.. SPooI
er's addition.
Again; what is meant by positive lao =
Does it IsfeT exclusively to statutes, write
o1, of Legislatures, or may 1t include usage
!, customs, and rules Of Courts alsof
We answer. Il includes all Of thessI II
splthst Is as often spPlled 10 these as 10 VII