The southern press., 1851-08-06

IMPORTANT TO SLAVE OWNERS AND OruERs-
A case of considerable importance to South
ern men, and involving some points Of general
interest, was decided by Judge Key, ut Cincin-
natl, on Saturday last. The Cincinnati Com
mercial says: sgs 49s
aThe plaintiff, Harper, was farmer in Boone
county, Kentucky, and the defendant was we'll
known colored person of this city, named Keyte.
A bill was filed by the plaintiff to forelose a
mortgage; and the defence was want of cop-
sderation for the mortgage. The facts were
these: The complainant had been the owner of
three slaves--a man, (the son of the defendant,)
a woman, and child, the offspring Of the other
two slaves. The three were worth, in Kentucky,
about $1,000. They escaped from their mas
ter and came to this city in l849, where they
were concealed. The master pursued, but was
unable to discover them; and the defendant
opened negotiation with the complainant for
the purchase of the three slaves. Finally, they
were sold to him for $3.50, and bill OF sale
executed in this city, by complainant, in which
he warranted that he had a good title to the
slaves, but did not undertake to give possession
of them. The defendant executed to him promjs-
sorry notes for the payment of the money, and q
mortgage, on which the suit was brought. The
first point urged by the defence was that Keyte
was deceived by the complainant, who was
charged to have represented the female slave TO
be the wife of his (defendant's) son; both ver
bally, and in the bill of sale, when in fact, as
defendant claimed, she was not--next, that tho
plaintiff had warranted his title good to the
slaves, when, Gas defendant insisted) At the
time of the escape the man was not slave.
The third point of defence was, that con.
tract with the State of Ohio for the purcha-e
of fugitive slaves then within the Ststs, could
not be sustained under our laws
In relation to the first point, il was held by
Judge Key, that the testimony showed that the
verbal representations Of complainant II regard
to the relations existing between the male and
female slaves were in accordanoe with the
facts that the statement in the bill of sale, that
she was the wife of defendant, was mere matter
of description; and also, that according to the
usages prevailing among slaves, she was prop
erly described as his wife.
II was held by the court, in regard TO the Sec
ond point, that il appeared from the testimony,
that the male slave had once come to the city Of
Cincinnati, driving wagon with his master, and
had voluntarily returned on the same day-and
that, although the slave might then, according 10
the rules Of law universally recognized in the
courts of Ohio, have asserted his freedom, and
could not have been compelled by his master TO
return yet that, having voluntarily returned the
Status or legal condition Of the slave so return
ing to Kentucky, remained according TO the de-
cisions Of the courts Of that State, without
change. Upon the third poin', the court held
that, il having been decided by the Supreme
Court of the United States, in case involving
the same question, that the status, or legal con-
dition OF an alleged fugitive from service, was TO
be viewed according to the law Of the State from
which the escape was made and the Consttu-
tion Of the United States, and the act Of Con-
gress then in force (than phich, as erpounded by
The Oniied Mates Supreme Court, this court knen
no higher laD,) giving right Of recapture, such
right Of recapture was sufficient 10 sustain a
contract Of sale executed by the master 10
free State conveying fugitives, then in such free
State, 10 citizen Of such State. The court fur
ther remarked, that the effect Of such convey
ance would be 10 place the fugitives at once
In the condition Of free persons, as completely
as any other citizens Of Ohio. A decree was ac-
cordingly rendered for the complainant for the
amount Of the mortgage tes