The national era. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1847-1860, 1854-02-09
For the National Err,
THE LEGAL TENURE OF SLAVERY.
LETTER Y

LETTER x
COLONIAL AND SUBSEQUENT LEGISLATION
FAILED TO LEGALIZE SLAvERY-TESTI-
MoNY OF SLAyEHoLDING JURISTS.
To the Friends of american Liberty:
have now shown the illegality of the Afri-
can slave trade aud examined the legal tenure
Of Slavery, a. derived from that origin | have
shown that the Slavery thus illegally intro
duced, commenced and grew up in opposition
to English common law, and without any legs-
lative enactments creating it.
| have further testimony to adduce on that
subject. But, before doing this it may be proper
to add that, in GEORGIA, the introduction of
Slavery was in direct violation Of the munich
| pal local law, which expressly forbade it.
The settlement of Georgia was commenced
by Gen. James Oglcthorpe, in 1888 Tho trus-
| tees, to whom was committed the authority Of
civil govern mant under the charter, strictly
prohibited Slavery, and declared it to be not
only immoral but contrary to the laws of
England."* Slaves were, nevertheless, intro
duced, first under pretence of hiring them for
" shorts periods, then for hundred years or
during life, and som, equal to the value of
the negro, paid in advance and finally, slaves
from Africa sailed directly to Savannah, and
| Georgia like Carolina, became a planting State.
with slave labor Gen Oglethorpe therefore
abandoned the Colony in disgust and was after
wards acoadjutor of Granville Sharp, and wrote
against Slavery, giving an account of the Illegal
introduction of Slavery into Georgia.
repeat the inquiry-when, where, how, and
by whom, YVES American Slavery legalzsd
Il will be remem beI cd that in the early part
Of this discussion Letter ID it was proved that,
according to numerous decisions, even of South
ern judges, there can be no legal Slavery, ex-
cept by force Of local municipal law, insomuch
that when slave was, by the consent of his
master, taken out FROM under the jurisdiction
of the local municipal law that enslaved him,
it was held that he became legally free, and
could not, if brought back, be held as a slave
Thus, in the case of Lunsford Us Coquilon
| May Term, 1924 IA Martins Louisiana Rep,
4Ol; Wheeler, p. 1851 Judge Martin said
"The relation of owner and slave is, in the
States Of this Union, in which it has LEGAL
| existence, the creature of MUNICIPAL lawHD
In the case of Marie Louise Us. Marriott Ell
di, in which the slave had been taken to
France by her master, and brought back to
Louisiana, Judge Matthews said Being free
for one moment in France, it was not in the
power of her former owner to reduce her again
to Slavery" Wheeler's Law of Slavery, p. 349
Slave Code, p. 1852 Also in the case of Har-
vey and others, Us. Decker and Hopkins, June
Term, walkers Mississippi Reports, 3d. the
court Faid: "Stdrery IS condemned by reason
and The lars of nature. II eriSts and cas, ONLY
eIiSt, through municipal regulations" Wheel
er's Law of Slavery, PIP. 500
There have been similar decisions in Geor-
gia. ("American Slave Code" p. 1922 Yet
| Slavery, as we have seen, was introduced into
| Georgia in direct violation and open defiance
of municipal law forbidding it.
Henry Clay expressly predicated the Legal
| Tenure of Slavery on the same basis when he
said "That as property which the law declares
to be property" In what followed, he repeated
and explained the same principle, though the
alleged historical fact as We have seen, lacks
confirmation. 1.-TWO hundred years Of legtSid-
| tton have sanctioned and sanctited negro slaves
| as property" Nothing but express Legislation,
according TO MIR. Clay, was the basis Of legal
lied Slavery, and he assumed that there had
been laid such basis by express legislation
But this is an unfounded assumption. There
has been legislation enough, to be sure cruel,
wicked, bloody, cowardly legislation, IT in aid
of the stakeholder, and against the slave. But
this has been only in a way of regulation or
| enforcement Of relation assumed. or taken
for granted, as having been previously legal
ICED, when no such event had taken place.
In proof of this, now bring forward The
testimony of slaveholding iurists. a nd the, first
witness shall put on tn ~ r1s t8tfange as it
may seem,) is the identica Judge Matthews, of
Louisiana, whom have just now cited as af:
6rming the doctrine that Slavery can exist only
by municipal law, and applying the doctrine
for the liberation of the slave.
| In the case of Seville vs Chretan, Septem-
tember Term, 1917, IS Martins Louisiana Re-
ports, 275; Wheeler's Law of Slavery, p. Is
American Slave Code, p. 264 J ddge Matthews
| admits " the absence Of any leg Statue act Of
European PowerS for the antr0duction of STA
| rsru into their american donlinlOnsn He
adds: " IF the record of any such act exists, zoe
hare not been able TO find any trace of it."
| After tracing the historical origin and progress
| IF the African slave trade, from Charles and
his patent to one Of his Flemish subjects down
90 the landing of the cargo of the Dutch ship
On James river, he proceeds: This is the first
origin of the Slavery of the blacks in the British
American provinces. About twenty years after,
slaves were introduced into New England, and
it is believed that Indians were at the same
time, or before held in bondage. The ABSENCE
| Of any act or instrument Of GOVERNMENT
under lch'ch their Stauery ORIGINATED as
not m1tter of greater surprise than that there
| should have been NONE FOUND AUTHORIZING
| THE SLAVERY OF THE BLACKS" X y cit
is an admitted principle that Slavery has been
| tolerated In all the Colonies established in
| America by the mother oountry-not only of
| Africans, but also of Indians. No LEGIsLA-
TIVE ACT OF THE COLONIES CAN BE FOUND IN
| RELATION TO IT."
This is certainly very remarkable language
| from the lips of Judge who was about deci-
| ding a case against claimant for freedOm-a
Judge too, who has declared that Slavery can
exist only by the force of municipal law; and
in State in which it has also been decided
that prescription" Tor lapse of time) ''is never
pleadable to claim for freedom" and that a
man cannot be reduced to Slavery, an any man
ner qchateuer, on account of he length of TIME
he may haze been held an SerUitctde"** Putting
these three concessions together-vi2 /, the
impossibiiity of legazing Slavery without local
positive law; 2, tie absence of any such law ;
and, 3, the impossibility of legalizing Slavery
by the length OF time in which its victims may
have been held In servitude-the absolute IL
legality of American Slavery follows, Of course.
Judge Matthews evidently felt himself pressed
with the difficulty, and labored hard for found
| alton to stand upon, while giving judgment
against claim to freedom. In the case before
cited, ne liberated a slave. 1t is charitable to
oeileve that be would have willingly liberated
In this case Gkewise. But he was in com
munlty OF aveholders-probably STAKEHOLDER
himself What could he do? The case of Ma
RE Louise he could dispose Of by her Liberation,
without affirming the absolute illegality of
Slavery. Not SO in the present case. Yet CON
| science and self-consstency were pressing hard
upon him. How could he decide that anu per-
son was legally slave! On that point his
mind evidently labored. And how did he dis
pose Of it?
Was it by openly recsnting his opinion that
Slavery could originate only in positive law
No. Did he call in question the decision that