Anti-slavery bugle. [volume] (New-Lisbon, Ohio) 1845-1861, 1857-10-24
WHOLE NO. 62S.

ed in Virginia by its laws, attend upon the par
ties here they being in trdnsitu, as to furnish
such legal cause for restraint of libertyf
Nothing has, or can claim, the authority Of law
within this State, unless it proceeds from the SOW
eregnty of the State and is found in the Constitu-
tion or Statutes of the State, in it's aawrftten
common Tor customary law or from the Federal
Government, whose Constitution and Statutes have
the force Of law within this State.
But the United States Constitution and Federal
Statutes give no law upon the subject. These
have no concern with domestic institutions, ex-
cept with regard to the ratio of representaton.-
the right of suffrage as a basis of Federal suf-
froge-the securing to citizens of every state, with
in every other the privileges accorded to its own
citzens-and the relation of persons escaping
from service or labor
None of these provisions, in terms 81 BY any in-
tendment, support the right of the saveowner in
his own State or in any other State, except the
last. This by its terms is limited to its special
case, and necessarily excludes Federal interven-
ton in every other. The common law of this
state permits the existence of slavery in no case
within its limits, and the statute law s universal
prohibition Of slavery within the stots.
Third Ioint 1t remains only TO be considered
whether. under the pies Of the Law Of Ma
tions governing the intercourse of friendly
States, and adopted and incorporated into the
administration of our municipal law, comfy re-
quires the recognition and support Of the relston
of slave owner and slave between strangers pass
ing through our territory, Notwithstanding the
absolute policy and comprehensive legislation,
which prohibit that relation and renders the civil
condition Of Slavery impossible in our own So
ciety.
The comfy. it is to be observed, under inquiry,
is of the State and not Of the Court, which latter
has no authority to exercise comfy in behalf o9
the State, but only judicial power of determin-
ing whether the main policy and actual legislation
of the State exhibit the comfy inquired of.
The Court should declare that the main policy
and the actual legislation of this State do not
hibit the comfy inquired of. The principles policy
sentiments public reason and conscience, and
authorative will of the State Sovereignty, such,
have been expressed in the most authentic form
and with the most distinct meaning. that Slavery,
it comes and by whatsoever tram
sent stay shall not be tolerated upon our SOIL
That the particular case of slavery during transit
has not escaped the intent or effect of the legis.
lation on the subject, appears in the express per-
mission once accorded to it, ard the subsequent
abrOgation of such permission.
The status of Slavery is not a natural relation
but is contrary to nature, and at every moment
it subsists it is an and active violation of
the law of nature. 1t originates by lmere predoBi-
nance of social force or municipal aw. Whenev-
er and wherever the physical force in the one
STAGE or the social force of municipal law in the
to rest upon.
To continue and defend the status, then, within
our territory, the stranger must appeal to some
municipal law. He has brought with him no
system of municipal law to be weapon and a
shield to this status he finds such system here.
His appeal to force against nature, to law against
justice, is vain and his captive is free, a comfy
which should recognize status that can subsist
only by force and yet refuse the force to sustain it
is illusory. If we recognize the fragment of Sla-
rta1h h. +hn gkra Oh nd fha
fabric of which it is q fragment and from which
it derives its vitality If the slave be eloigned by
by fraud or force, the owner must have repleyin
for him or trover for his value If the owner die,
the Surrogate must administer the slave assets.
If the slave give birth to offspring, have ma
tive born slave. If the owner, enforcing obeGi-
ence to his caprices main ors lay his slave,we must
admit the status as a plea in bar to the public
Justice. If the slave be tried for crime, upon his
owners complaint, the testimony Of his fellow
slaves must be excluded If the slave be impris-
oned, executed for crime the value taken by tho
State must be made good to the owner, as for
"private property taken for public use" Every
thing or nothing, is the demand from our comfy;
everything or nothing, must be our answer.
The rule of the law Of Nations, which permits
the transit of strangers and their property through
a friendly State, docs require our laws to up
hold the relation of slaveowner and slave between
strangers. By the Law of Nations. men are not
the subject of property The principle Of the Law
of Nations which attributes to the law of the DOM
icle the power to fix the civil status of persons
does not require our laws to uphold, within our
own territory the relation Of slaveowner and slave
between strangers.
This free and sovereign State, in determining to
which of two external laws it will by comfy add
the vigor of its adoption and administration within
its territory viz q foreign municipal law Of force
against right, the law of nations conformed 10
its own domestic policy under the same impulse
which has purged its own system Of the odious and
violent instances Of Slavery. will prefer the Law of
Nations to the law Of Virginia and set the slave
free.
MR., BLUYT's POINTS.
First Point: The state of Slavery is contrary to
natural right and all legal intendment is against
it.
Slavery requires n peculiar system of laws to
enforce the rules of the master, which irrecon-
cilabe with the jurisprudence of States where ID
does not exist. The right to slave is different
from the right to other property
Second Point: The law of Slavery is local, and
does not operate beyond the territories of the State
where it is established
When the slave is carried or escapes beyond it's
jurisdiction, he becomes free, and the State to
which he resorts is under no obligation to restore
him, except by virtue of expess stipulation.
In 1881, the Supreme Court at Mechlin rejected
an application for sprrendering fugitive slave
from Spain. So of the Sommerset case in Eng.
land, and numerous others in differ ent European
countries
In 1920, the Court of Appeals in Kentucky held.
that where a slave born in Kentucky had been taksa
into Indiana under the territorial laws, allowing
the introduction Of slaves without there becoming
free, and afterwards brought to Kentucky she be-
came free.
The Court said, that "in deciding this question,
we disclaim the influence of the general principles
of liberty which we all admire, and conceive it
ought to be deeidod by the law it is, and not rs
it ought to be. Slavery is sanctioned by the laws
of this State, and the right to hold them under our
municipal regulations is unquestionabe." But
of municipal character, without foundation ia
the law of nature or the unwritten aud common
law"
Before the act of 1916, the Court of louisiana
always held, that slave taken into Free State
became free and that he did not become q slave
upon being brought back. The Supreme Court
of Missouri held, that the actual residence of a
slave in Illinois is sufficient evidence of freedom