Anti-slavery bugle. [volume] (New-Lisbon, Ohio) 1845-1861, 1853-08-06
Z III E B U G L Z
Col. BcntOn's History.

lhe New YORK EVenlnB fost Is puDilsntng
extracts from Col. Benton's forth coming
work." Thirty Years in the Senate" The
following chapter from this work, deserves
the careful attention Of all. We see how
perseveringly the Government, and in the
language of Col. Benton, "Northern men
have sought to do justice to the South. That
norihrn men obtained for the South un idem-
nifty and security in our day, which n south
ern administration, with Washington ut its
head, had not been able TO obtain in the days
Of our fathers"
And all this we see prosecuted year after
year with the deliberate intent on the part of
the South, not so much for personal idemnity
as for the security and perpetuity of slavery.
The chapter is headed
BRITISH INDEMNITY FOR DEPoRTED
SLAVES.
A. D. 1727.-J. QUINCY ADAMS, PREsIDENT.1
ain this year was brought to n conclusion
the Iong-continued controversy with Great
Britain in relation TO the non-fulfIment of
the first article OF the Treaty of GhentI lSl4,l
for the rertitution Of slaves carried of hy the
British troops in the war of 1912. II was
renewal OF the misunderstanding, but with
better issue, which grew up under the seventh
article of the treaty of peace of 1893, upon
the same subject. The power of WullsIiing-
toms administration was not able to procure
the execution of TINT article, either hy res
toration Of the slaves or idemnity. The slaves
then taken away were carried to ova-Scotia,
where, becoming an annoyance, they were
a.
came the foundation of the British African
colony there. The restitution of the deported
slaves, stipulated in the first article of the
Client treaty, could not he accomplished
between the two powers ilIoy disagreed MS
TO the meaning Of words; aud, after seven
years of vain efforts To come to nn under
stnnding, il was agreed to refer the question
TO arbtrameut. The Emperor Alexander
accepted the office of arbitraior-executed il
and decided in favor of the United States.
That decision was as unintelligable TO Great
Britain as all the previous treaty s,ipulations
OH the same subject had been. She would
not understand il. A second misunderstand-
ing grew up, giving rise to n second nego-
iiation, which was concluded by final
agreement TO pay the value of the slaves
carried of. In 1927. payment was made
swelve years after the injury and the stipula-
ton TO repair it-nnd after continued aud
most strenuous eXertion.
"The case was this 1t wns part of the
system of warfare adopted by the British,
when operating in the slave states, to encOur-
nge the slaves to desert from their owners,
promising them freedom; and at the end of
ihe wnr these slaves were carried off This
carrying off was ioresecn by the United States
commissioners at Ghent, and in the first
article nI tho t,rnIiI.I
III thrse words: 'All places taken, &C., shall
be restored without delay, &c, on carrying
away any of the artillery or other public
property originally captured in the same pnrts
or places, aud which shall remain therein
upon the exchange of the Publications Of this
treaty, or any slaves or other private proper
ty.' The British government undertook TO
extend the Limitation which applied to public
property TO that which was private also, and
so TO restore only such slave as were origi-
nally captured within the forts, aud which
remained therein ut the time of the exchange
-Of ratiicntlons-a construction which would
have excluded oil that were induced to run
away, being nearly the whole; and all that
left the forts before the exchange of ratifca-
aions, which would have included the rest
Sire adhered to the construction given to the
parallel article in the treaty of 'S3, and by
uii SihNc5 hhcH war were
held 10 be lawful prize of war, and free under
the British proclamation, and not to be
compensated for. The United Suites, on the
contrary, confined this local Limitation to
things Oppurtenant to the forts; and held the
slaves to be private property, subject to
restitution, or clam for compensation il
carried away at all, no matter how acquired.
"The point was solemnly carried before
the Emperor Alexander, the United States
represented by their minister, MIR. Henry
Middleton, and Great Britain by Sir Charles
Bagot the Counts Neselrode and Cane
Distrus receiving the arguments TO be laid
before the emperor. His mojesty's decision
was peremtory That the United States OF
America are entitled to just identification
from Great Britain for al private property
carried nway by the British forces and, as
the question regards slaves more especially
for all such slaves as were carried away by
the British forces from the places and terri
aories of which the restitution was stipulated
by the treaty, in quitting the said places anc
territories This was explicit; but the Britisl
minister undertook TO understand it as no