The daily union., 1856-04-08

discussing ibe conflict Of laws between independent stts
and nations in book first section second thus states the
rule:
Every nation from comfy admits that the laws OF each
nation Of force within ts territorial limits ought 70 DO
IN force ia all other nations without injury their respective
powers and rights"
This great fundamental principle Of international law
has been fully recognised by the Supreme Court Of the uni
ted States applicable 10 the States Of this confederay
in the Bank OF Augusta IS. Earle 18th Peters, $50. Mr.
Chief Justice Taney in delivering the opinion Of the couit
in that case, states the rule in these words:
'n the silence of any posice rule affirming or denying
aiming the operation foreign laws, Of justice
presume the aot adoption OF them by their govern
men unless they are rePagnan, 70 m pnoy or @ 1
comfy OF the nation, which h administered aud acerained
all other principles Of municipal law ascertaned and
guided"
| have the authority of Mr. Webster upon this point
Ia his correspondence with Lord Ashburton, demand-
ing satisfaction Tor slaves from the British government,
which had been taken into Of the Bahama Islands and
free by the authorities OF that place lie combeted the
idea that mans title to his slave property has extra
territorial operation in the following strong and emphatic
language After referring TO local lac in respect to mar
rages, he continues:
"Did any one ever imagine upon
marriages to annhiate their obligations il the party should
visit country in which marriages must be celebrated in
other form L. may De said IN ueh instances personal re-
espected but that the relation of master and slave not
@ @ & H. Whoever 80 NJ
encounters the authority of the whole body of public law
Gr0tius because instances
which the law itself presumes or implies contracts and
prominent among these instances Is the very relation which
draw mutually oblgaton"- Correspondence
p. l19.
Mr. Nathan Dane whose authority know will not be
questioned in the free States in the sixth volume Of Danes
Abrdgement 4ao, speaking Of the law of nations says
ain the United States in England the law of nations
Is adopted in its full extent by the law and held
to be a part of the tao Of the land"
In Madrazo p, Willis 10Th Eng Com Law Rep, 3l3)
these fundamental principles of international law were
applied to slave property by the court Of Kings
Bench in Great Britain in theyear 1920. Thequeson
upon the following state of facts Spanish subject being
engaged in the African slave trade Span having
tered into treaty stpulaons aboshing that ade) had
purchased three hundred slaves the coast Of Africa and
had them board his vessel her return voyage when
she captured by British cruiser and taken into
of the ports of Great Britain where the slaves by the law
of that kingdom became free The Spaniard brought his
action of troyer in the of Great Britain against the
captain of the British cruiser TO the value Of his
vessel and stores and the value of his three hundred
slaves On the trial before the Lord Chief Jusce he doubt
ed whether, in British court the plaintiff could maintain
his action for the value OF his three hundred slaves and
directed the jury find the damages separately much
for the vessel and stores and much for the three hun
dred savesthe latter constituting much the largest item
On the question being submitted to full bench of
judges, they were unanimously OF the opinion that the
plaintiff entitled TO recover the full value OF his three
hundred slaves we'll the value of bis vessel and ore
and awarded Judgment therefor recognising the validity
of the Spanards title to his slave property, which good
by the laws of his nation in British court The slaves
Britain in violation of her laws but seized upon the
great highway Of nations, upon the empire of the seas
upon common ground where the spaniard had as much
right TO be with his property the Rrgshmsn; and the
principle would have applied with equal force the slaves
had been seized upon territory the joint property
OF Great Britain and Spain The principle is app
cable common territory of the Union which is
mon ground, being the joint property of all the States
where the citizen OF Georgia has much right to be with
his slave property the citizen OF Ohio has TO be there
with his propertyneher violating law Of that terri
tory by going into it with their property When the ct
of an independent State who has title to his property
good and valid by the laws Of that Stae-and have
shown that slaves were recognised as property by
the universal law Of nations, and that the law OF
nations part of the common law-goes into
foreign territory with that property violating law Of
that territory these great fundamental principles OF in
ternaiona law 90 with him they are above him and
arouGd him he nhales them in the very atmosphere which
he breabes they protect his person and his property he
cannot escape their binding influence unless indeed he
beyond the pale of civilization and there the prne
| pies Of international law cease to operate.
Mr. SANDIDGE. Allow me to recall TO the mind OF the
gentleman from Georgia case precisely in point TO eao-
ish that which he is trying establish before the commit
tee II is this noticed It in the newspapers some time
last year gentleman from Brazil went TO Prussia carry
log with him slave II was there attempted to deprive
him Of the services of that slave and the highest tribunal
that country Notwithstanding to the argument Of the
gentleman from Georgia--ths his owner was entitled to
him that the matter should be decided according 70 the
laws OF the country from which the party came, and that
he should have the right TO hold his slave aud 10 carry
him with him from the country at his pleasure The gen
teman from Georgia may have notice OF the case
| Mr. WARNER do not recollect having III but
have no doubt that that is the princpc have no
doubt that II Ia in with the universal law OF
natonswith the great principles Of international law IL
existed In this country and part Of the law OF the
land the time the State Of Georgia and the oser States
entered into the constitutional compact
have endcavored establish the proposition that be-
fore and a the time Of the adoption Of the constitution the
citizens Of the independent State Of Georgia bad the right
according 10 The well-esabhed principles OF information
al law (which constituted part Of the law OF the laud
to their property noany foreign territory where
it's introduction WAS prohibited and to have 1t protect
cd there have endeayored TO show what were the un-
daesa rights Of the people OF that State to their slave
property before and the time Of the adoption OF the fed
| eral constitution.
The next question to be considered H. whether that State
has delegated the power In the constitution 10 this govern
meut 10 deprive her Of those fundamental rgh2 Has she
delegated the power in the constitution to this government
TO deprive her Of the fundamental right which she had
Independent State take her slave property into the
territory Of the Unon there being law In that
territory which would be violated by doing so IL is con-
tended that this has that power by the clause
which declares that
"Cougress shall have power to dispose Of and make all
needfu rules and regulations respecting the territory
other property belonging 70 the United States and nothing
claims Of the United States any part;caIar 5ate
The grant Of power in this clause q in regard 10 5he
territory as property Congress has power to dispose Of 1t
rs property well any other property belonging to
the United States may make "a needful rules ana regu
ations respecting the territory considered as oPery
but who beeve that II was the intention Of the trainers
Of the constitution delegate those great inherent ngh
of property which have been discussing to-day by this
clause Of the constitution Bot suppose we are misSen
In this view of H. and that il was intended by THIS clause
10 delegate the power TO the federal government TO
80 g.. - ~, rukf I'D nfrnl