Green-Mountain freeman. [volume] (Montpelier, Vt.) 1844-1884, 1857-04-09

virginia, III L0ulSlaha, lOTWeilJ III ASutuO"y'
Maryland and in other states.
The law where contract is made and is
to be executed, governs it. This does not
depend upon comfy, but upon the law of the
contract. And If, in the language OF the
Supreme Court of Missouri, the master by
taking his slave to Illinois and employing
him there as IA slave, emancipates him as Ell
icctually as bya deed Of emancipation, is 1t
possible that such an act is not matter for
adjudication in any slave state where the
master may take him Does not the master
assent to the law when he places himself I'M
der it in free state T!
The States of Missouri and Illinois are
bounded by a common line. The one prohib-
its Slavery, the other admits it. This has
been done by the exercise of that sovereign
power which appertains to each. We are
bound to respect the institutions of each, as
emanating from the voluntary action Of the
people. Have the people of either any right
to disturb the relations of the other? Each
state rests upon the basis of its own sover-
eighty, protected blythe Constitution. Our
Union has been the foundation of our pros
pretty and national glory. Shall we not
cherish and maintain it? This can only be
done by respecting the legal rights of each
state.
1t a citizen of free state shall entice Or
enable a slave to escape from the service OF
his master, the law-aolds him responsible not
only for the loss65svale slave, but he is liable
to be indicted and fned for the misdemeanor.
And am bound here to say that have new
er found a jury in the four states which con-
stitutes my circuit, which have not sustained
this law where the evidence required them to
sustain it. And it is proper that | should
also say that more cases have arisen in my
circuit, by reason Of its extent and locality,
than in all other parts of the Union. This
has been done to vindicate the sovereign
rights of the southern states, and protect the
legal interests of our brethren of the South.
Let these facts be coatrasted with the case
now before the court. Illinois has declared
in the most solemn and impressive form that
there shall be neither slavery nor involuntary
servitudc in that state and that any slave
brought into it, with view of becoming a
resident, shall be emancipated. And effect
has been given to this provision Of the Consti
tuition by the decision Of the Supreme Court
Of that state. With full knowledge o.
these facts, slave is brought from Missouri
to Rock Island, in the state of Illinois, anc
is retained there as a Save for two years, ant
then taken to Fort Smelling, where slavery il
prohibited by the Missouri Compromise act
and there he il Detained two years longer IL
a state Of slavery. \ Harriet his vile, was
also kept at the same place four years as ;
slave, having been purch lsel in Missouri
They were tlen remDgel to the state Of MIS-
souri, and sold as slaves ana in the action be-
fore us they are not only claimed as slaves
but a majority Of ny brethren have held tina
on their being returned to Missouri the statu
of slavery attached to them.
am not able to reconcile this result witt
the respect due to thestatc Of Illinois Hav
ing the same rights Of sovereignty as thu
state Of Missouri in adopting Constitution
| can perceive no reason why the institution
of Illinois should not receive the same con
sideration as. those Of Missouri. Allowing t.
my brethren the some right Of jud gment TIA
| exercise myself must be permitted'to 81,
that it seems to me the, principle laid dow
will enable the people 0la slave state to in
4 trodase slavery iuto III state. for long
or shorter time, as may Salt the,l convenience
and by returning the slave to the state whene
he was brought, by force or otherwise, tn
status of slavery attaches, and protects tn
rights Of the master, and deies the sovereign
ty of the free state There is no evidene
before us that Drel Scott and his family re
turned to Missouri voluntarily. The contrar.
is iuferable from the agreed case: "ln tn
year 1888, DR., Emerson removed the plain
tiff and said Harriet. and their daughter Ell
IA from Fort Smelling to the state Of Nilsson
ri, where they have ever since resdel.'-
This is the agreed case and can it be infer
red from this that Scott and family returne
to Missouri voluntarily? He was removed
} which shows that he was passive, as slave
having exercised no yJ;ion ON the subject
J He did not resist the muster by abscondin
f Or force. But that was not sufficient to brin
, him within Lord Stowels decision; he mus
have acted voluntarily. 1t would be
mockery Of law and an outrage on his right
, to coerce his return, and then claim that
} was voluntary, and on that ground that h
, former status Of slavery attached.
f If the decision be placed on this groun(
} it is fact for jury to decide whether tn
t return was voluntary, or else the fact shout
, be distinctly admitted A presumptic
, against the plaintiff in this respect, sa
, with confidence, is not authorized from tt
facts admitted.
. In coming to the conclusion that volul
tary return by grace to her former donnie
S slavery attached, Lord Stowel took gree
pains to show that England forced SLAYER
, upon her colonies and that it was maintaine
Q by numerous acts Of parliament and publ
: policy, and in short that the system of slav
, ry was not only established by Great Brita
: in he West Indian colonies, but that it WI
a popular and profitable to manyof the wealth
t and influential people Of England who e
S gagged in trade or owned and cultivated pa
f tations in the colonies. No one can read h
: elaborate views and not be struck with Il
a great difference between England and HI
Y colonies, and the free and slave states of tn
e Union. While slavery in the colonies
c England is subject to the power of the mot
t or country, our states, especially, in regard
i slavery, are independent, resting upon the
own sovereignties, and subject Gully to int
r national laws which apply to independe
O states
0 In the case of Williams who was slaN
in Granada, having run away, came to En-
e land, Lord Stowell said "The four judg
all concur in this-that he was a slave
: Granada, though free man in England, a,
he would have continued free man in
il other parts of the world excepting Granada
# Stroder at. Graham, 10 Howard and