The New York herald. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1840-1920, 1851-01-26
l0Eortant Deeision ,n tho UnsteA states
60PIt me Court, reIatlye 20 SlaYorX.

JsWcs md John .fTraSy mann
n0s ~ error rs Christorer Graham In eyrsr 10 the
| Court Of .appeaisJor the State Of Kentuckv
Mr Chief ustice Tsney delivered the opiaion Of the
This case h brought here by writ error directed to
the Court OF Appeals OF the State Of Kentucky.
The facts In the far they ar. msteria 10
the decision OF the court, briefly folows:-The
defendant in error Ia citizen Of the State OF Keu-
tucky, and three negro men whom he claimed and
held as his slaves were received on board the
boat Pike at Louisville without his knowledge and
consent and apsported to Cincinnati and from that
place escaped TO Canada, and finally lost to him
The proceedings before instituted under q
statute Of Kentucky, In the Louisville Chancery
value Of the slaves which had thus escaped and in
default OF the payment by them, to charge the boat
hfef With the damages sustained strsdsr and q or
man were the owners OF the boat and Armstrong the
mater.
The plaintiff in error. among other dsfsnces, in.
Sisted that the gegroes claimed slaves were free
averiing that rome time before they taken on
board the boat they had been sent by the per-
mission OF the defendant In error, TO the sta.s Of
Ohio TO perform service slaves and that in
quence thereof they had acquired their freedom and
were tree when received on beard the boat.
IL appear, by the evidence that these men were
musicians and had gone 70 Ohio more 90
cssions 70 perform AZ proiic entertainments; that
they had been taken there for this purpose with
permission of defendant In error by a man by the
name Of williams, under whose care and direction
he bad fcr tine placed them that they had always
returned 10 Kentucky ~ soon this brief service
and for the two years preo edng their escape
they bad not LETT the State OF Kentucky and had
narot there In the service OF the In
as their Ia wful owner.
The Louisville chancery court finally decided that
the negroes in question his slaves and that he
was eniitl, to recover So ooo for bis damages Aud
IL that rum was not paid by certain day specified
In ths eecrse 1t directed that the steamboat should
be sold for the purpose OF raising It, together with
costs Of suit. This decree was afterwards irmed In
the court Of appeals OF Kentucky, and the case Is
brought here by writ of error upon the Judgment.
Much OF the argument the part of the plaintiffs
in error has been offered for the purpose of showing
hsi 1ns Of the STATE eoIri was in
ssted that their previous employ Mcnt in Oh 10 had
mads them Tree when they returned to Kentucky.
But this question is not before Every State has
an undoubted right 70 determnsthe statas domestic
and social condition of the persons domiced within
its territory except In powers of the States
In this respect are restrained duties and
mpoeed upon them by the constitution OF the United
states Theirs Is nothing in the constitution Of the
cf cfKenfucky upon this subject. Ard the condition OF
the negroes therefore as to freedom slavery after
their return depended altogether upon the laws Of
that State ard could not by tha laws Of
Ohio eNclusvcy In tho power OF Kentucky to de-
ternine fe1 tsei wheber thth employment in another
State should or should not make them tree their
return The court Of appeal. have determined that by
e laws Of the State they continued % be aavs And
their Judgment upon this rcipt Is, this writ OF
eIrer, conclusive upon this court, and We have no
jurisdiction over Il
But 1t sstas to be supposed IN tho arguru emit that
the law q ohio, upon this suaect has some peculiar
.orct Is rirtue oi the ordinance 81 1887 TOR the a.
v.rnment of the northwestern tesrltory-oho being
one o. the States carved ont Ct il
ore OF the articles OF this ordnance prsTidOs that
" there shal be- no slavery nor involuntary servitude
for crimes whereof the party shall have duly
vctod but that any persen escaping into the came,
nom whom iaeor or service is lssfay claimed In any
of the original Ssa,ss, such fugitive may be isw
fully reclaimed and conveyed q the person claiming
hi, or her labor or service Rfcresa'd And this
tice Is ono q Tho six which the ordinance declares
shall b. pact between the ognsl States and the
people ana state 4! esid territory and forever
upa,tersbi. ualeSs By con- wcn cement
The Argument assumes chat tt, six articles which
that oz1ina1cs declares 70 le perpetual still In
.oree in the states slnee formed within the territory
n n HvFatt fEhk knfr hN Ertf
III this proposition cosld be maintained would not
alter ths qasstioa ;or the regulations of Congress
hcn ,cr tne gereTnEest ft particular Territory
coHll have DC force bc-cnd Its limits. IL certainly
eVu.h ~. ses,rsc' ILe pener et re states within
their fssrsctiye territories, nor ia any manner
iDtsr:tys With their lnwr suj in.titptou give
ihls court enJ cont.oi ever shrm. 1hs ordinance
IN question still In fcroc cord have opera
ticn tt9a thr Laws oG ohio r tho State OF Kentucky
snd tou.d n2t in1ueuce tn. decision upon the rights Of
ss OF he tlAye Ia that tst- nor give this
court .art lotion nron tire subject.
Gpt hss 4 beea ..tted sy iuoioal decision in this
ctnft that tbs ordinance 1. not IN fcrcr'
The esse cf Peruoh ys irst Muhicipslitv. Uow,
sst dptaiaa afon tbe same prncipos rith the csss
before ns AZ 1 true that toe question that case
srcte Ia Iopisiara Bet the act ct Goa vrcss OF April
1873, chapter IS q stat 80 large, 5i0) extended
TIE c-dtranee {. i9sl TO the The, territory a hes.
sipr' with tAs exception q tes snslslsrsry clsu.e
snG asc'azed thu. the people of that territory should
b. entities % Rod enicy all the risbts privileges and
advantage. graast TO tns peore Territory aorth
vest cf III Ohio. Aaa by the sct OF March ., 1896
caartsr r. q Stat 4 LARGE D.. Il was enacted that
tbs nhtbtEnt, CT tha then ttrgto.y Of New Orleans
-nould De entitled to and sElcy oil the right, pvi-
nsss and advantages secure- by the ordnance Of 1857
hna st tae tns enjoyed o. sfe people Q; the hssis
In the csss sboVs mentioned, Pes.aoii claimed the
TfrtsCtira cf tAe clause n o. the SIX srticles
which provides tor the freedom q religion, alleging
that " naa bega violated ey tne tirst Municipality
and Dc bgous ht thc Quetiun before ths court upon
Tie ground tast II hsd jurisdiction under the urlls
rance Bat toe covrt nplA tnat the ordinance ceased
20 - N force whea LouiSns beoeue State and ds-
U'ssd tie cas-. for want - iurisd elton This opn-
ION is Indeed oondnfd 10 th. territory In which the
tire arose. Hat Il s.7tdfut that tie ordinance
mot b Ia ercs Ia TIRE sntss fcrms1 10 Ia. korthwss
EN- ttrrtery and ~ the tie not "a In the
states Termed In tho Sousaaestssn terrific ~ TO which
va, cTt-pde1 ~ he tr..rnt gcvtru.asrt-for ths
odnance- an pledges cf The Cor grefs the old
fsdsTftion csuAot D. more Cnaaring and obligatory
than tstss ~ the nes rovcrniacnt can there 10
any Ssascn iCr riy ng dfr1t Interpretation 10 the
sssre words ured IN iinilvr Instruments becsuie ;he
crs = b. TIC cd snd the other ~ the
Ers nj goFstrrsat and tea Il l. jecided that tas
ordinance II Ia force In LuIsisDa IL follows that
u cannt. le IA 'crce IN Ohio.
Bot ;sr whole Qrsaticn upon tho ordinance ofITG.
aud ths scts o. Congress extending u q 1ther territory
si'sEarda acquired vRs carefully considered In Pol
lard ~ MEEEn, How. zi2 Thg suit oct Ia fully SKA
ufsed ia n. osiAlon prcutUncsd ia nat cr.- with
vhtth - corcur ars 10 ~ -unncter' u9w 20 rcier 20
TIE sensani-g .nd principles by whseh that judgment
), wsitislssh, without entering upens fu e1auiss-
tlrn * tie question.
rcdsei. H l. 'usrcl,ibs 20 lock ., the ,ix Articles
vhich ate tupIossf In the a-g1msat - be sti!i IN
force h1ut rtt'nx NJ thkt unrv of the rvovi
rr.s G. atsi-tt - them NJ srccnslstsnt With the
rTee ~ ofaE4AtMt4Cn A1A, " hney coko pc ktk4Eoeh
- gst Ia opsrs.os In the etsses iormed -ithla the
tna't8 6t ttR aorhvsstern ttrTitCrr, Il wsult pssee
them IA "a lstsfivr cooat-oe 81 comtsssd s.th the
eth or Satas ana suhect thor dcmestic tns;tutions
ana municipal rsguatcrg - ke crn.eat su ervirtcn
ru1 ccatzsA of THE CsrFs. tie coosltutica was Ia
ths isrrwsgs II the ordnance EGopted by common
consent s1d the reo,ie q the tetritoris. must ne
cesssrI - yensrisA parties te II, aud bcuad b. a.
pnc eztiso T. - hpr It, veli the rssgl ot tho
thsN erIirE .tEts. u became ths supreme lsu
irorehE4i trt Uults3 htsiss ana - far AZ noy OBJ
setoF' = good fs,a hsa tosn rre,lo ssly ioeu.rsi
- th9 O. they we-s thtrtuly carried iaio
saecpita ~ q. rcvur rst sutnotity sf tho new 20
trruNsos.
1,fsct uSc ths consultation vas rAcptst, the set
tsnsnt X that vast territgy sils begun, aos
tas people ate nled a. and focmst the great snt
roru'eur Ets1sa that nsw H. became tnhssttant
81 the tsrtN0-- after .hs ecnstteiien vEs adapted
Aud n srsssc arcn % faith tet - protection an
btpstts vr,u,a - u1teadcd Co ttsu. ssd that the.
WOULD, - dge tims, ecccrdlps g 10 pr-ti.ons an
trtGi. ~ srntta iuto ITO tnit upcr "a uai foot
ag v'gs tke old pfstss ftr tta ntw - vern ssnt
cured ths tll he pubic rrnvs 81 natisstion sr
corgefcs wtioA ths orslEarse Ii1 cr ecud ere VII
fcrs .swI. Ia han e4Ns