The New York herald. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1840-1920, 1852-11-14
IMPORTANT SLAVE CASE.
Liberation of ths Eight Alleged Slaves
Opinion OF Judge PAiac.


InN morning at an early hours numbers OF peope Of
color Hsmblsd sbsut the City Hall courts anxious
hesr the decision of Judge Paine in the case Of the cgh
slaves, whose freedom claimed by the soo.onists
under the sct Of is4 The particulars OF this case have
been already pubshkin the preliminary sx,uins sions
The excitement amongst the blacks vsry great The
court was deDteiy crosded MIR. and Mrs Lsmm,n. ths
claimants also present and evidently much
pressed at the resu Of the which depvss Of
their propcry-ther all being invested in those savss
They are now beret Of their only support and be
ieve without the means of proceeding to Texas their
passage thitb being forfeited By the delay ocoaoned
by this In vestigstoD.
At twelve DOL OK Judgs Paine TOOK his aea up IN the
bench, and delivered the following decision -
The People &c Louis Napoeor rs, .yona hsa Iemmon
Respondent This case Gomez before upon Wit OF
hAbeas corpus issued TO the respondent requiring b 70
have The bodies Of eight ooored persons lately taken
from the ftesner City o. Richmond aud now coudoed
In hoe IN this CITY before together with the cause
of their inprioDnent and detention
The respondent has rcturnei to this wit that said
eight coored pers Ms are tue property of his Wit. juliet
Lennon, who has been their for severst yesrs
part, she being resident OF vrginis. . sIavrh.ding
State aud that by the constitution aua las Of tnat
State they have been and still bound her
pery nansu from, Virginia 20 Texas. another slave
holding State and by the constitution asd laws ~ which
he would be entitled to said slaves ard 60 their ser voa:
that she had any atentioD of briagng ant did
not bring tbem into this State to res,de but
ppssrg through the haibor of Now York oa her way
from Virginia TO Texas, when he compelled ny
oessy to touch, LAND wthou. intending TO rem ala
longer than was necessary And she ins's. that .sd
persons not free but slaves aforesaid that
she is entitled to their possession and custody.
To this return, the reator has Fut in Q general de
murrer.
certainly supposed, when this frat present
cd TO me- that there could be dispute about tho
facts there would be no delay difficulty dsoong
Of It, But upon the argument the for the rss-
poDdent cited several oases which satssd thai this
case could not be decided until those mad been oAefuy
examined.
The principle which those cases tend more or less for
ciby to sustain s that IL Of slaves merely
passing from homo With than through free state
another slave State without any intention rem
the slaves while in such free State will be allowed
to their freedom. A. that precisely the state Of
facts constituting this 1t becomes necessary to In
quire whether the doctsnc of those be mxu.
this State Goes not er from the laws of those STATE,
where the decicions made
shall fret consider whether those be
tanned upon g. neral principles
The first Of the kind which occurred was tbs. OF
sewalls slaves which decided io Iodasa in 1879 by
Judge Morris and will be fouud reported IN Am. Jurie
404 The return TO the hdbeas corpus stated that Sswx
resided In Virginia and owned held tho slaves under
to Missouri and his way passing through indiana
| when he ferved with the hIsess corpus
It. however appeared the hearing that Sswail
not going Mirsoari reside but 60 ILLINOIS, state
whose aws dc not allow OF slavery. The judge for this
in point and would be entirely irrelevsat to the
present 1t lot called for By portion the judges
opinion which not csbed for ~ ,As bcoro him
but eppltss directly to the case nov before
by the law fe says, OF nature aud Of nations,
atei 100 and tie necessary snd legal consequences
reuiDg from the civil and pcicst rel sti'u subsi,ug
between the citizens welt states Of thi, fedora
tive republic have uht but the citiz~n OF siavo
State has hight to pass, upon busces. pleasure
through sny the attended by his slsve or ser
wants and willis he retains The rights OF
sa :. ?. ss,s s.' ns ,sss to se,.e es ssssg
upon the psitCn 81 hi while Journey t6PoVgh
tIee STATE should be oons ser-a q. an ssospafse@ W.
State where the master had right OF cie1aup A5d by
the laws Of which the service Of the siaye
emgrant from 5e.e anoshsr n ghs sideyed
Mos fhan <sk
which he removing and shou 10 tected ia thi
enjoy Of those rights ha in sbe sta fro
which he emgrated snd vhior yecogestd aud peo.
teoted by the laws OF hs ssr wpich bes eo,og But
this right conceive cannot be derived em any provi
The relied upon Wilssa W The People a
scanmons Rep. 4G and which asdecded In the state
OF Illinois In 1o4o IL ~a ae Indictment for secretins
woman Of color owing service to of Louhin
The indictment under the ls9th ssoon OF the Crm
M. Code, which provides thai II any person sos hsr
bor or secretc negro mustto psrson OF tho
same being save servant owing service labor to
any other prsons ~hensr they resis iu this safe
IN any other safe or Terri org, District wIrha the
limits and under the jurisdiction Of sbe UHied states or
shall In wise hinder present the awful
owners If suoh slaves from rstakisg ia
lawful manner every such pereoa ofsadnx shal be
deemed guilty Of misdemesbor sad 6nsa cxcsedng
fve hundred dollars, or Imprisoned not exceed six
months y
appeared that the woman OF color was slave vned
by resid Mt Of LoLsns, and that while passias with
her mistress fiom Kentucky to Louisiana through tho
State OF Illinois she made her escape the lAtce State
| and was secret by the defendant
|
1t is uDpt c6rsary TO notice The Indictment whioh
d.nu1ed to wac sustaned By the Coarr Toe
Jection to that the section o the Gods ucder VIII
1t found violation Of the sixth artrsls of tue
constitution Of the State OF Illinois which declares tnat
"Ntither slavery Involuntary servituds shall here
after be introduced into this state her ws thsn The
punishment OF crimes whereof the party shsli have been
/ duly convicted ="
The Court in answering this obe. lon say -: The only
question therefore is rho right Of uaait With slave
for II the slave upon entering territory although for
amere transit another state be ,omes free under tn
then The defendant Ru,tv OF
cNrcfairg such peron described la the Law sod ia
the indictment The Issth secto. the oroioal code
for violation Of ~hich the plain /. iudi ted d,es
most distinctly recognize the exrr8ce Of the ustuou
OF slavery In some OF these United states AMI vh,tber
the constitution aud laws OF this State hsvs have
provided adequate remedies to enforce w,thio its urdo
tion that obligation Of service it has provided by this
pBal ssDction that shs harbor conceal slave
within this State who such eevice OF it, Every
State or government may or may not as it chooses,
recognize snd enorce this law of county aud to this
tent this State has expressly 50. IL should
therefore regard ourse,es as dtnc. and separate
n from our sister ss,ss M ,t b1 h' iss Of nations
government have right Of passage through the terri
tory Of another peacaoy for business and
that TOO without The s'er acquiring any right over tae
person or property, (vsttel, D. 107. lO9) could
deny them this right without violation
Of our duty Much less could disregard their oons
tutional right citizens Of Of tho states all the
rights In munes and privileges Of citizens Of the
raj States t. would be startling indeed II should
deny neighbos and knored that com aoa rigns Of
frtc and safe psssags which foreign nations would hardly
dare deny The recognition OF tai. right 1, violation
Of our constitution II s not introduction OF slavery
into this state ~ oontended In srgumsp and tho
slave does not become free BY She Of Illinois,
by coming into the State or the purpose Of
sage through IL
Another cited by the respondents counsel,
the Commonwealth Va. Aves QS Pickerirg's Rep. 1873
In this case the brought her ssye wih hor
New Orleans to Bostos, visit to her father with
whom she intended spend i've six and then
with the slave to New Orleans rhe sisvs being
brought UP on hoeas corpus the Court ordered her dis
charge The case fully argued aud Chief Justice
Shaw cloes very elaborate opioion with thssA words
Nor do We give any opinion upon the caps, wnsrs
owner of slave In ste Is bvns 1s removing TO
smother State where slavery IL allowed and In DO doog
necessarily passes through free State Or ehsrs BY
eidsut or necessity he IL compelled to touch laad
there In rtmaiDDg no longer than necessary
have quoted largely from the opinions In these
In order that may be understood clearly what pre-
ssrted By them as their governing pripcspie The
pcndens counsel insists IL u hs That By the Law Of
tions owner Of slave msy ifher fkom necessity
In bs absence OF all intention to an. pass with such