The national era. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1847-1860, 1853-12-15

admit murderer and robber His avowed
purpose IN sailing to Guinea was to take, by
stratagem or force, and carry away the unsus-
peetng natives in the view Of selling them as
slaves to the people of Hispaniols. In this pur-
SUIT his object was present profit and his EN-.
ployment and pastime, devastation and muir
der0S
IL has been common to plead for the legality
OF British Colonial Slavery, and consequently,
OF American Slavery, on the ground of the sup
posed former legality Of the African slave
trade; and it is not easy to see how slauehoId-
ing could have become legal, unless the traffic
by which the shareholders were in the first
place supplied, had been legal 1t was, ac-
cordlngy, on this ground, we know, that the
West India planters few years since, set up
their claim 70 vested right" in slave prop
erty, and demanded compensation from
the British Government, when the act of eman-
clpatlon Yves under discussion. And on the
same ground the same claims and demands are
set up by American shareholders now 1t is
pretended that the African slave trade was not
only legalized, but forced upon US, by the Brit
lsh GQyernment, without our consent, and,
therefore, (for this il the inference the slave
holders have An updisputed right to their slaves.
1t is admitted, to be sure, that the African slave
trade is not now legal. But it is claimed that
| it was formerly legal, and that this fact settles
the question of the legality Of American slave
holding, from the beginning of the practice to
the present time.
The tenure of slave property is represented
as an "inheTitedD tenure, transmitted from
father to son, from the landing of the first slave
cargo on our shores to the present moment
The right of the present STAKEHOLDER is the right
of his father. His fathers right was the right
of his father, and grandfather, and so on, back
to the beginning OF Slavery, under sanction Of
the then existing African slave trade, which il
assumed to have been legal
But if this assumption be unlounded the en-.
tire superstructure oflegal Slavery resting upon
it falls to the ground. "Where the foundation
is weak" says the common law, the structure
falls" "What is invalid from the beginning
cannot be made valid by length of time u
Prescription is never pleadable to claim
for freedom" So said Judge Porter, of Louisi
ana in a case where, by an application of the
maxim, he declared On enslaved woman Free Il
The principle is righteous one, and should be
applied if it frees every American slave And
the "laboring car" belongs to the stakeholder
Where then, zoe demand, tDhen, and bp uhom
pas The african slaue trade made iegats Wa.
it by Queen Elizabeth? By John Hawkins the
murderer and robber?" Or was it by both
of them combined? shall hazard nothing in
affirming that there was no isgataed African
slave trade, and, consequently no legalissd Brit
ish Colonial Slavery, in Queen Elizabeth's time
Did they become legalized afterwards A
vague impression that they did, very generally
prevails | shall endeavor to examine the mat
ter In the mean time, let it be remembered
that the first beginning of the African SLAVE
trade, by Englishmen was illegai--the unau
thorized and criminal act of murderer anc
robber" This much have already proved
WILLIAM GooDELL.
Clarksons Hist, p 80.
| Clarksons Hist p 80
Hills Naval History, quoted by GARRISON p. 80
( EdwMds's History Of the West Indies vol. 2 PIP
| 43, Al.
| Noyess Msxins
4 Dcpbine vs Devise, IA Martins Louisiana Re
| ports, $50 Soc Goodell's American Slave Code, PIP
| 265, 266
ITO BE CONTINurDl