Anti-slavery bugle. [volume] (New-Lisbon, Ohio) 1845-1861, 1857-12-19
From the New York Tribune.

The decision of the Supreme Court in the Lem,
mon case is precisely such decision as might
have been expected from New York tribunal.
The Court stands steadily by the sovereignty and
humanity of the State, both of which they
place upon nvncible grounds. They hold that
the sct of 1871, by repeating the exceptions con-
taned in the act of 1877, establishes the doctrine
thar no person can be brought into this State or
held here as slave; and that every person
brought into the State, matter for what purpose
or for however short titne, becomes thereby
free.
The idea that any doctrine of comfy can be ap-
piled to OF this sort is very efectually dis
posed of Comfy never can require II State to ex-
tend to strangers anything beyond the rights and
privileges which it allows to its own citizens. The
laws of New York do not allow the citizens of
New York TO employ the territory Of this State as
convenience for carrying on either the foreign or
the domestic siavetrade, or to hold slaves within
this State for the shortest moment of time. No
citizen of New York has the privilege of buying
slaves in the Market of Baltimore or Richmond
and bringing them here for shipment to New Or
leans or Texas not even for tho purpose of stock
ing plantations he may own there. What the
State does not allow its citizens to do, it can
not reasonably be expected to sustain strangers in
doing Nor does the clause in the Constitution of
the United States, which gives to the citizens Of
each State the privileges and immunities OF citi,
zens in all the States, 60 the least step beyond
this reasonable limit.
The point most relied upon by the counsel for
the appellants was that, as the slaves in this
came hither by sea. and were to sail hence for
Texas, they were, dnring their stay here, not with
in the Jurisdiction Of the state of New York, but
within the jurisdiction Of Congress, by virtue of
the commercial power conferred upon it hy the
Federal Constitution. But the Court deny that
this commercial power gives to Congress any au-
thority to determine the status Of persons within
6 ,,Ft thn G. 'kntN ~
ty remains complete and entire 10 the State as
well over persons temporarily passing through it
over those permanently resident in it, This
power to regulate commerce extends, within the
Jurisdiction of any of the States, to merchandise
only. The power of Congress to legislate in
spect to passengers while they are on the high
seas, and out Of the jurisdiction OF any particular
State.
Even on the ground that slaves were merchan-
disc, the power to prohibit their being brought in
to the State would still within that right of
establishing police regulations which is conceded
to the States and the settled legislation of this
State shows that the holding of slaves within the
State for any purpose is regarded as inconsistent
with the public peace and welfare.
From this opinion, concurred in by Judges
Mitchell Clarke, Davies and Peabody, Judge
Roosevelt dissented we shall know one of these
days on what grounds. This decision of the Su
preme Court, however, is but one step toward car
rying this case forward to Washington, where the
State of Virginia, the actual appellant in the case,
has great confidence of getting decision in her
favor.-N. T. Tribune.