The daily union. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1845-1857, 1855-08-02


Sd In making the return to the habeas corpus Mr. VIII
Hanson has taken oath which is clearly against the
facts Of the case For this should ever by proper pur
CATION relieve himself from the contempt he will undoubt
eddy be indicted in the district Of the United States
In these three points the question Of property cannot as
at present situated, arise
4th An action the for the value of the property
taken and for exemplary damages for the outrage
mtted the person of Mr. Wheeler and for bis detention
from the discharge important public duties That Mr.
Williamson is liable in such action cannot be ques-
toned on either of two grounds fret the general implied
obligation that which he has forcibly taken
second the express promise made the time that he would
be responsible to Mr. Wheeler for all claims He is also
undoubtedly liable damages for trespass in laying
violent bands upon the person Of Mr. Wheeler Or this
suit the circuit court of the United States has ursdicon
it being between citizens of different States This will diff
fer from the other proceedings in important point-to
wit the question Of Mr. Wheelers right of property.
few of the abolitionists in Pennsylvania supported
by local presses who appear have been governed
more by their mawish sensbiltes and prejudces than
by any knowledge of the great principle of international
law have conended that whenever negro held slavery
by the laws of any other nation of the conederay is vol
unfairly brought into that Commonwealth by his MASTER
upon the SOIL
If this doctrine true in the MAN, do not the
applicability in its general principle the of Mr.
Wheeler for hold that the slave if manumitted,
alone exercise for himself that privilege II is personal
privilege, and cannot be claimed by third party.
The negro mob them had right, in opposition to The
wishes Mr. Wheeers servants to insist upon carrying
them away by force absence of any proof that the
e 4t.... IL. r
freedom if it existed If such the law of the land
then any stranger might upon the same principle claim to
the property another because he finds that prop
erty in the possession Of person who does not own it
and by virtue of such claim attempt justification 0! VIC
ence in order get possession thereof This point is
conceive conclusive reply to the position taken by the
abolitionss in the Wheeler case without entering into
discussion OF the question of presumpve constructive
manumisson
But upon what grounds is this doctrine of constructive
anumsson placed 1t is commended that by the law of
nations slavery exist and that therefore person
held to labor by nation taken voluntarily by his
within the borders of nation recognising this cond
ton the negro is tanamoun by implication law TO
consent to freedom, and that obligation exists the
part Of the free nation to deliver up the slave held by the
citizen Of the other 1t is not necessary TO inquire what
would be the duty of any European Asiac nation
this subject in relation slave voluntarily taken by
minister of the United States, private citizen,
within the borders of their territory, although would
not be at loss for instances where nations denying the
obligations of slave to his master have paid for such
property after it had been wresed from American citizens
within their territory But contend that such is not
the law of nations it exists by express agreement and by
opgestabshed between the various nations form
ing our blessed confederacy.
The law Of nations is Of two kinds
First That natural law Of nations, which consists in
those principles of natural law applied to nations if
they were individuals in state of nature.
Second. The positive law of nations which consists Of
three divisions, TO wit; The voluntary law composed of
decisions aud rules of natural Jurisprudence modified from
time in reference TO the character of the subject
which they to be applied the customary law, which
derives its force and character from longesabshed
usage and lastly that law of nations which flows from
express agreement known under the general head of
ventional, express, or particular law of nations.
1t will be pretended that the time Of the forma
ton Of the constitution of the United States which is
nothing else than the express conventional law of these
nations the right of ranstu existed in every State of the
Union Indeed it had been questioned and State
which questioned it could have taken part the making
that noblest of all instruments.
Such right had existed to degree that it had be-
in fact the customary law Of the colonies and
denied by any article of the treaty known the
stitution of the United States and the moment those col
onies formed their independent national governments
and combined together certain specific purposes with
in any way changing altering this customary law
they ratified it as the law Of these nations.
Now the positive law of nations, wherever it conflicts is
supreme to the natural law of nations and whatever
might have been the rude and natural law of society
such doctrine that which the abolitioniss contend for
be maintained under the constitution of the United
States
But il is further commended that tho local law of the
State has established this principle of constructive
mission by the Of transu. As have already
said does not do far that law acquires its force
from custom for such custom has could,
under the federal constitution have been established in
the State How then stands the statute written law
Prior l7s0 the doctrine in this State the in
| the other slavehoding colonies.
On the is day Of March, 1880 the general assembly of
Pennsy vana enaced law for the gradual abolition OF
| slavery The 10th seci,on provides;
ssThai of any nation or COLOR except
the negroes mulatoes, who shall be registered aore
sad shall any time hereafter be deemed sdjudged
holden within the territories Of this Commonwealth
hpas nd