The national era. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1847-1860, 1855-04-05
CONFLICT OF PRINCIPLES.


count Of the action Of Judge Storer, Of Gin
cinnati, in the case of two eolored, persons,
carried into the State of Ohio by their so
called owners, with the intention of transit
through-a portion Of the State, taken out of
his hands on writ Of hdbeas corpus, and
brought before the Court. The simple question
presented was, does person, held as a slave
under the laws of one State, become free on en-
tering the State Of Ohio, by the act or with the
consent Of his master Does the provision of
the Federal Constitution, in regard TO fugitiyes
from service or labor, apply to any person un-
less, being held TO service or labor under the
laws Of one State he escapes from it into an
other? ,.,.t
The case was a. plain one The slaves, SO
called, were not fugitive = they had not escaped
from one State into another; they had been
brought by the master into Ohio, and no pro-
vision of, the Federal Constitution, in terms
or. by implication, embraced them. Hav-
ing been conveyed beyond the jurisdiction
of the State in which they were held to service.
by the master, and by him brought within the
jurisdiction of another State, which not only
recognises no such SERVICE but absolutely pro-
hibits Slavery, they were free the moment their
feet touched the soil of Ohio, and not the
slightest pretext remained for restraining their
liberty. The principle, determining such cases,
had been settled in Ohio, by the decisions of
Chief Justice Lane, by Judge Reed, of Cincin.
natl, afterwards Chief Justice of the State,
and by other high judicial decisions. 1t was
regarded as settled beyond all controversy
The weight of such authority should have been
conclusive with Judge Storer, even were he
wanting in the capacity for an independent
judgment; but for certain reasons inscrutabe
to us, unless, as is limited by one of our cores
pondents, he has fallen under the domination
of Know Nothingism, he shamefully lodged
the real issue, shamefully declined to re-aifirm
the settled laws of the State, and attempted to
screen himself from all responsibility, by con-
sulting the two colored persons as to their
wishes. Ignorant of their rights, knowing
what they might expect should they manifest
an anxiety for freedom, and then be remanded
to the keeping of their so-called owner, they
said they would go with him; and then the
Judge said, they might be free, if they chose
Such conduct disgraces the bench His bust
ness was, not to institute a confessional for
slaves, but to declare the laws of Ohio not to
inquire into their preferences, but to decide
upon their rights. Free if they chosel" They
Freedom in Ohio depends, not upon what is
the will of an individual, but upon what is the
law of the State. Judge Storer had no bust
ness with the former-his duty was to affirm
the latter. n
1t was probably his official cowardice that
emboldened the Rev. Mr. Dennison to renew
the attempt to re-enslave the girl Rosetta. Our
readers will better understand this case from
the following account in the Cincinnati Co.
lumbar of March 9th:
REV. HENRY DENNISON'S SLAVE GIRL.
From the Cincinnati Columbian, March 81
The case of Rosetta Dennison, who is claim
ed as fugitive slave by the Rev. Henry NJ. Den
nison, Of Louisville, KY, in now exciting much
attention in our city. The circumstances of this
case are briefly these Mr.. Dennison is Prot
estant Episcopal clergyman, born in Pennsylva-
slave girl from his father-in-law, to be an attend
ant on Mr.. Dennisons wife. Mr.. Dennison took
his family to Louisville, where he breaches the
Gospel and where, some two or three years
afterwards, his wife died.
In June last, Mr. Dennison took a little
daughter to Virginia, for nurture with her
mothers relatives, and, two months after his re-
turn to Louisville, determined to send the slave
girl, Rosetta, to Virginia, to serve his daugh-
ter. For this purpose, he gave Rosetta in charge
of friend, to take on for him. This friend on
reaching Cincinnati, tried to cross the State of
Ohio, with this slave girl in his charge, over the
Little Miami Railroad; but, being detained
over Sunday at Columbus, was stopped by a
writ of habeas corpus; and, upon a trial before
Judge Jamison, the girl was declared free and
a guardian, named Mr.. Van Seight, was ap
pointed to take care of Rosetta.
Recently the reverned claimant got out a
warrant for Rosettas arrest as fugitive slave.
making affidavit that she had escaped from
Kentucky. This warrant was issued by United
States Commissioner Pendery and served by
Deputy United States Marshal Bennett, and a
man named Couch, who brought her to this
city, as we noticed several days since A writ
of hdbeGS corpus was served on the Marshal.
who brought her, as this writ required, before
Judge Parker, of the Court of Common Pleas.
Rosetta is about sixteen years of age, small
size, rather corpulent, and dark mulatto.
Upon the case coming before Judge Parker,
Mr.. Chambers, for the claimant, asked eontin-
uance until Tuesday morning, as the Rev. Mr..
Dennison had gone to Louisville for testimony,
and for an attorney of that city to assist in the
case
Mr.. Chase on behalf of Rosetta consented to
the continuance, but wished the girl placed in
her guardians hands, and bonds would be Civ
en- for her appearance.
The Court doubted its power to take the GIRL
out of the Marshals hands, but ordered her to
be well taken care of in some place other than
in jail, with criminals, and then continued the
case.
AS this case involves the same principle as
that argued recently before Judge Storer, but
not decided, there is much interest felt in it.
The point seems to be, whether the master is
bound by the act of his agent, and if the act of
the agent of the master, in voluntarily bringing
the slave into Ohio for the purpose of transit,
emancipates the slave. Mr.. Chambers. for
claimant, will be assisted by counsel from Lou
isville
On behalf of Rosetta, the attorneys will be
Messrs. Chase, Ball, Hoadley, and GitcheIl.
Judge Parker's court room was, this morn
ing, crowded with colored persons and others
interested in the case.
A telegraphic despatch of the 18th March
announces the decision:
Cincinnati, March pa colored girl
named Rosetta, brought here from Kentucky
by an agent Of her master, and who was declar-
ed free by the State court at Columbus. has
since been arrested under the Fugitive Slave
Law; but Judge Parker decided that whenev-
er slave by consent of the owner sets foot
on Ohio soil, he is free and therefore he de,