The Kansas herald of freedom., 1855-05-12
slavery in Ransaz

cussed this question at length in former
numbers OF the HERALD. and have offered
the advocates of the affirmative place
in our columns to defend their position.
Ne one has yet volunteered his services
for that purpose; We therefore renew our
assertion that slavery does not and can
not exist in the Territory, other than by
the law of might; and offer the following
facts in evidence of the truthfulness of
our proposition
If we have any law in force in Kansas
it is the common law of England. The
civil code, brought here by the French.
so far as relates to slavery, was repealed
BY the compromise of 1890. The Kan
sas bill of 1854, in repealing the COM
promise of 1920, expressly, enacted that
no law touching the subject of slavery
was revived in consequence of the repeal
| of the 9th section of the Missouri com
promise.
We are then in Kansas without posi-
tive enactment upon the subject. Do
the principles of the common law prevail
here ? We claim they do, and that if
applied to the few slaves now held in the
Territory, it would emancipate them at
once. The same rules govern us that
governed England in the famous SOM
mersett case, which was on trial, and de-
cided by LORD MANSFIELD on the 22d of
June, 1772. James Somerset was a
negro, and native of Africa. He was
carried in the course of trade to Fir-
ginia, and there sold rs slave to Charles
Stuart, who took him to London, where
1 he fed from his master, was arrested and
confined in irons on board a ship bound
for Jamaica, with view of selling him
there as a slave. He was brought up on
a writ of hobeas corpus. The question
before the Court was whether the master
had just cause of detainer; or, in the
words of Lord Mansfield, "The question
now is, whether any dominion, authority,
or coercion can be exercised in England
on slave according to the American
laws. The unanimous opinion of the
Court set Somerset at liberty, and de-
clared that Slavery was inconsistent with,
and unsupported and forbidden by the
principles of the Common Law" The
legal student who wishes to examine this
very interesting case at length is referred
to Howell's State Trials, Vol. Xxx, page
8e, where the learned Judge says in con-
clusion =
"The only question before us is,
whether the cause on the return is suffi-
cient-if it is, the negro must be remand
ed if it is not, he must be discharged.
The return states that the slave departed
and refused to serve, whereupon he was
seized to be sold abroad. So high an act
of dominion must be recognized by the
law of the country where it is used
The power of the master over his slave
has been exceedingly different in differ
ent countries. The state of slavery is of
such nature that it is incapable of being
introduced on any reasons, moral or po-
litica!, but only BY positive law, which
preserves its force long after the reasons,
occasion, and time itself from whence it
was created, is erased from memory.
II is so odious; that nothing can be suffered
to support it but positive iar. Whatever
inconveniencies, therefore, may follow
from the decision, cannot say this case
is allowed or approved by the law of
England; and therefore the black must
be discharged"
By this decision, says another, not
only was Somerset discharged and ad-
Judged to bea free man, but some 1000
or / 5000 other persons, according to the
estimate of the counsel for the master,
before held in slavery in England, were
made free persons, whose value, at the
estimate of E 80 each, involved an amount
| of "incenyeniences," or of loss to the
holders, of nearly four millions of dol
lars. By this decision, as far as the
jurisdiction of the Court of the Kings
Bench extended, that is, all over Eng
and,-slavery was actually abolished
and the principle of freedom, as part
of the common law, and Of the English
Constitution, was established throughout
the British dominions, including the then
British Colonies in North America, now
the United States of America, as we'll as,
all other British possessions, and was
also equally applicable TO all possessions
afterwards attached to the crown of Great
Britain. From that time, says Cowper,
..Slaves cannot breathe in England; if their lungs
Receive our air, that moment they are Tree;
They touch our country, and their shaekles fall.
By decision of the Court of Sessions,
slavery was actually abolished in Scot
land, in 1778, and the principle Of free
dom confirmed as part of the common
law and of the British Constitution. and
was also made part of the positive or
local law of that part of the realm.
That decision of Lord Mansfield is as
good law in Kansas as in England. and
when practically applied will result
equally gloriously for freedom We have
decision of the Supreme Court of the
United States, in the case of Priggs as.
Pennsylvania, in which the same opinion
is enunciated, though not to so great
length.
H 1t is reported that the Sioux
Indians have been committing new out
RACES, and have actually taken Fort Lara
\ II