The Camden journal. [volume] (Camden, S.C.) 1836-1851, 1848-05-31
THE SLAVE LAW.
-.,...,, Prum the South Car Gilman.
RICHARD RICHARDSON,
IS. WIrmERs, J.

VS.. WTTHERs, }.
EDWARD BRouGuroN.
The points raised for our decision in this
case, are
Ist. Had, Delendan, the right TO enter
the Plaintiffs enclosure to seize the cattle
and hogs, aIledgcd to be subject 10 such
seizure and furniture?
2nd. Was the exclusion Of verbal instruc-
iions By Magistrate to Jared w. Cantey.
with whom the Defendant was confcderalcd
in the transaction, error in the Circuit
Court
3rd. Are the damages SO far excessive as
10 warrant the interference of this Court in
granting new trial!
We are not ignorant that the determIna-
ton Of the first question carries with il an
interest to the community, as well as to the
parties in this liiigation-and, therefore. we
have endeavored to derive from the argu-
n,ent at the bar, and researches into the Sc
RES of our Provincial systems of save-law.
whatever light were attainable upon the
subject. Though the codes Of law for the
government and regulation of slaves Of a
date prior to l74O. have expired by the terms
oftheir own limitation, they arc nevertheless
sources from which some light may be bpr-
roweG, and reflected upon the provisions Of
the latter code, wich IN its main features, ex-
isis oahe present dav, by virtue ofa review
ing act in 1888.
By the 34th section Of the Negro Act Of
I740. f7 Stat. p. 4O9) an evi! is declared to
stexist in permitting slaves TO keep canoes, and
hogs, and traffic and barter for the Particu-
lar and peculiar benefit of snch slaves. thus
gaining facility to receive stolen goods, and
t. confederate and conspirc for insurrect;on.
II was, therefore, enacted that it should not
be lawful for any slave to buy, sell trade,
traffic, deal or barter Tor any goods or com
modities, "nor shall any slave he permitted
to keep any boat. perr'anger or canoe, or to
raise and breed, for the use and benefit oi
such slave, any horses, mares, neat-ca,tl',
sheep or hogs" upon pain of forfeiture of all
goods and commodities for which he may
have traffickcd, and such specified articles
and stock (which any slave shall keep, raise
or breed, for the peculiar use, benefit and
prof, of such slave" folows:-'and
il shall and NAV be lawful for any person,
or persons whatsoever, TO seize and take a.
,oay from any slauc all such goods, conmodi-
ties boats. perriangers. canoes, horses, mares,
neat. cattle, sheep or hogs, and deliver the
same into the hands of any Of his Majes,y's
Justices of the Peace, nearest the place
where the seizure shall be made,' whercup.
on the Justice is &c ascertain On oath OF the
party SEEING, the manner thereof, and If
found to be done legally, the goods so sciz-
ed are to he forfeited, and sold at auction
subject to proviso in favor OF a reclama-
tinn under an oath specified to be taken by
one who may have right to Or the lawful
custody of such goods. The oath prescrb-
ed is in the words folowing-"l do sincere
cerely swear that have Just and lawful
right or title I, certain goods seized and Ia
ken by G.. d., out of the possession OF slave
tanned d-; and do sincerely swear and
declare, that | did not directly or indirectly,
permit or suffer the said slave, nr any other
slave whatsoever. 10 use keep or employ the
said goods for the Use, benefit, or profit oi
nny slave whatsoever, or 10 sell. barter or
10 give away the same; but that the same
goods were in possession of the said slave 10y
theft, finding or otherwise. to be kept bona
Gde for my Use, or of E. F., free person
and not for the use or benefit Of any slave
whatsoever"
The question is, had Broughton the rgh
10 enter the Plaintiffs enclosure to seize as he
did, the stock captured on this occasion!
We think he had not; and therefore tha
In this very material particular the charg'
was more favorable to him than the la"
warranted. We are to be understood a
holding this proposition, even tho 'gh it bt
assumed that the cattle and hogs were sucl
as came under the condemnation Of th'
statute,
Tho earliest period at which the legisla
tive policy in question is found to have beer
adopted, was in l7l4,-when the owner .
a slave was forbidden TO allow him to plan
for himself any corn; peas, or rice, or to keeI
for himself any stock Of hogs, cattle or hor
ses, under penalty upon the master, to b
recovered by qui tum action: Il Stat. 36s.
The form which this policy next assumed
is found in the Act Of l722, sec. 81, Il Sta
3S2) where the inconvenience was aIledge
to arise from the danger Of insurrection b
reason of slaves being permitted to keep on
breed horses. Then It was required Of an
Justice ofthe Peace, who from his Persor