New-York daily tribune. [volume] (New-York [N.Y.]) 1842-1866, 1855-10-24
JUDGE KANE on PROPERTY AND TIE
Law OF Ma TIONS.
To ire Editor Of TIE n. Y. Tribune

To ire Editor Of TIE " u Tribune
SIR: The opinion of Judge Kane in regard to the
tition of Jane Johnson in the of Passmore Wit
hanson, coming as it does from judge OF United
States court is entitled TO respectful notice. In
giving it such notice ii is unnecessary t,wado through
bis tiresome history of the case Of Williamson aud
expose the colorpg he has given it with view ofJus-
tifyrp his conduct and saving his reputation in the
estimation of the world
II will suffice to expose the sophistry by which he
attempts to sustain the principal positions he assumes,
and by which he attempts to revere the current o.
judicial authority by which il has been held that
Slavery can only be established by municipal laws,
and that when slaves are CARR VI by their masters 70
Free States or permitted by their m~sters 10 20 70
Free States, they thereby become free.
The Judge assumes that slaves are property, and
that the right of transi, for person and property
through the territory of friendly state Is recos-
nized by the Law OF nations. -
The error of the Judges conclusion arises trom HIS
assuming error eous premises The truth is that human
beings are not recognized property by the law OIL
nations Some Of the United States do recognize them
as propertyso does Spain and some few ether govern
mebis But most of the nations OF the earth DO not
On the contrary most civilized states throughout tho
world repudiate the idea that hold his fellow
man as property.
What il proper,yl q embraces the things OF the
earth over which God in the beginning gave man do
"eartb and over the fish OF the sea- and over the fowl
of the air. and over every living thing that Inoveth
"upon the earth" This" says Bac kstone, Is mo
"only true and solid foundation OF mans common
"Oycr external things, Whatever airy metaphysics
"potioIs may have been started by faDcnul writers
upon this subject." Hence see they are tho
fkisgs OF the earth and the OF the earth ovsr
which God gave man dominion; and they are tho
things Of the earth aud not that civilized nations
and States have recognized as the property of nan.
II il true that many States earth have IN time past,
and some still do recognize "a the property ot ns
fellow. But they exceptions TO the general rules
ard wherever they do 4 ny municipal regulations 70
which the msio ity Of civilized nations or States have
not sss ptcd ard such regulations have entered
into the lew of nations Therefore, TO ssy that what
Was ever given into the dominion OF man by his
Creator and what the majority Of civilized nations
have declared be the property of mao, prop
cry because single State or few States have do
claIed that may be and that it has the right Of tram
sit every vi ere, is an absurd premise watch would
naturally lead TO an erroneous CONCLUSION.
Suppose Judge Kane has two and the legisla-
ture oil Pennsyy ania should by law enact that tho
younger OF the two and hls ssue forever should be hs
slaves and property Of the elder and his heirs forever
would the law of nations recognize property assumed
TO be created by such legislation And should Judge
Kane two sons come TO New York, by consent OF the
elder WHERE by laws OF the latter State, they would
be az men and not property, could the elder
asert and maintain bis right 10 the younger ~ his
prouerty by virtue of the statute Of Pennsylvania
Arepsrusal Of Blackstone the rights of persons and
rights OF things is commended to Judge Kane by
JUSTICE.