The national era. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1847-1860, 1853-12-01
LETTER H.

| LEI len IL
! To The Friends of american Liberty
| Having affirmed the illegality OF American
Slavery now proceed to prove the soundness
Of my position For the present and for the
sake OF the argument, shall waive the con
sidcration that statutes against fnndament-
nj morality are void" and that Slavery is,
hence, and in it's own natuth, incapable of
legalization. This position | do, indeed hold
to he an impregnable one shall bring it
forward, in another place when it will be
shown that it is not only an undeniable truth
but that it has already, and long since, re-
ceived the explicit sanction of the great ex-
Founders of Common Law. But know that
there are many in his country who would
demur against such summary process in
favor of Liberty though they find no fault with
summary proceedings in support of Slavery. |
shall therefore, for the present mark out a
course Of argument that no ono will demur
against who is willing to 90 into the investiga-
| ton at all.
NV first remark, then, is, that Slavery can
not be legal, nor sIavehodng legal practice,
or legal right, on the ground Of natural law.
| The right to hold horses and oxen ~ property
rests, originally, on this ground. Men had a
right, in the nature Of things, to hold property
in domesticated animals and inanimate OBJ
ects the products of the SOIL and the results of
manufacture, before there were any statutes
for the protection of those rights. And, even
under statute law, the right to hold such prop.
erty il, essentially, natural right, resting in
nature itself rather than upon statute law
The right does not exist in virtue Of the statute
But the statute and the judicial decision, on
the other hand, only declare and protect the
already existing inherent right. And conse
quently no statute is needed, in any State, 10
authorize and originate the right Of holding
horses ard oxen, wheat and potatoes dry goods
and hardware, cotton fabrics aud implements
Of husbandry, as property. They are property
in tho nature OF the case, belonging to those who
reared, produced, manufactured, purchased, or
inherited them.
Not 30 in the case Of holding property in
slaves. In States where this species Of proper
ty IL recognised AZ legitimate, il is never placed
by JURIsrs and CIVILIANS On the ground Of
original or natural right Such u foundation
for the right Of sIaveholding is never claimed
by sane men. There is good reason why it
j. not claimed II would be set-subversive
and fatal one to the claimant. The moment
he should claim his neighbor as his slave on
the ground Of natural right, the said neighbor,
Whatever his color might he, could turn round
and claim him as has slave, on the same ground
Of natural right. For nature and natural law
could not decide which man ID the master and
which is the slave. And, just here, let it be
noted, Us We pass along, that any law 10y
statute or otherwisc) for originating the right
10 hold slaves, MUST designate which are To be
the masters and which tho slaves Otherwise
the Law establishing Slavery, like natural law,
in such case, would establish the right Of
every man 10 make slave Of bis neighbor.
Sub legal tenure Of slave property would
fDd little Iavor, even in our slave States ID IL
accordingly held by the courts, in all our slave
States, tina: Slavery 10 the creature Of munsei-