The star of the north. [volume] (Bloomsburg, Pa.) 1849-1866, 1857-05-27

tribunal which decfeed the Dred Scott case
against The citizenship of the negro. admit
ted the poin, in permitting him to be plain.
+ff in The cases cited This conclusion is
not warranted by The premises, and is found.
ed on an erroneous impression of the powers
aud jurisdiction Of the Court in which The
ersots, complained OF, originated. These
cases were not taken from any United States
court existing within ttie limits of any Of The
severe ign States of This cor fedora but
nrose in United States court, holden in and
for ihe Disiric: OF Columbia, in The county
of Washington. The courts of The United
States, within The limits OF the several States,
are courts of limited jurisdiction. Wnh
some exceptions, not material 10 the cues
lion, in order 10 sustain an action in these
tribunals, il is necessary that the plaintiff
should be citizen of different State from
the one in which the action is brought. II
he be not a clizer of different State, the
State courts have jurisdiction; for the respec.
i've Stales have The general powers of SOW.
Sreignty within their own limits. But tn
Uniled States courts, when sitting within the
District of Columbia, or wilhin any Of the
Territories are courts of unlimited juTlsdic-
lion. No State sovereignty exists there TO
interfere with their jurisdiction. Such Uni.
Ted States couris have, therefore, all the pow
rrs of the Stale courts and The United States
courts combined, subject only TO the Inherent
powers granted TO them by the act Of Con-
press which created them. Ii follows, that
j, is not necessary, in any United States court:
either within the District ol Columbia, or
within any Territory, Tor the plaintiff either
10 aver, or prove, that he is a citizen Of any
Stale, or of the United States. lie may main-
tain his action in such courts without. being
a citizen. A nego may, therefore, maintain
suit in the United States cont for The Dis
,rct OF Columbia. No question Of citizen.
ship can arise to defeat The Jurisdiction. The
cases cited in the majority report, where me-
eross have been permitted to maintain ac
tons nj law, are all from the District OF Co.
lumba. They have, therefore, no applica.
lion, whatever, TO the question. They uiIer-
ly fail to prove the doctrine for which they
are cited. No one, having proper acouainl-
auce with the constitution of our National
and State governments, would present Them
tor The purpose OF proving that a negro is a
citizen of tie United States, competent 10
maintain an action in court where snch
citizenship was necessary 10 give jurisdic-
lion.
After careful examination of The whole
subject, we are forced TO conclude, thai
negro, free or slave, is not ciIlzen OF the I
United States within the intent and meaning !
of the 2d section of tho dth article oI the |
constitution. Guided by the "past hislory"~
Of our government AID enlightened by the
"iudicial preCedens' enumerated, the minor.
i,y OF our committee clearly recognize the |
wisdom and sound policy OF the recent de-
Cision of tho United States Supreme Court in |,
reference TO The first point raised in this is
sue.
. The second question decided by the
Count, is susceptible ol Just as clear aud
logical demonstration. 1t il necessary for Us
at this time, TO enter into nuy examination I
ot the rise and progress OF negro slavery IN I
the Cnired States. How it came here, or !
wha, is i,s moral or political influence upon /
are mattets with which we have |
nothing to do. That ileXisIs 1T tiIieen States .
IN this Union, is an iudispulabIc fact aud .
that the right OF property in slave is recos- /,
uized by The Constitution and guaranteed 10 |
every State, is Just as positively settled and
established. "rhis,n says Chef Justice Ia.
ney, sis in language too PLAN 10 be ni$Gn-
dcrsood."
In taking n historical view ofnis question,
we find that in Ensland, his particular point
engaged the attention OF the courts as far
back as the year l749. at thai period Lord
Chancellor harIwicke, sitting III ahIsh court
Of oh ancery, held, ha,"a slave coming from
the Wes, Indies, either with or without his
master, to Great Britain, doth not hscome
fee, aud iha: his masters property or right
in him, is no, thereby de,eEhined or varied
The next case aindsed in the Enslish courts,
was the celebrated Somerset case, in which
Lord Mansfield delivered the famous opiuion
.ha, has connected his name iusepstsbly with
III at important trial. The iacis in this causes ,
which may be found al length in 20 Howell,
State Trials, i-So, are by no means The
same which occur iu The Dred ScoW issue
Somerset, negro slave, raised in Virginia,
was taken by his master 10 ENGLAND, and
while in London, where black slavery d'd
rot exist, on wui Of kabeas corpus, was Sd;
81 liberty by Lord Mansfield, "His Lord-
ship" says an inleligen, writer upon this
subject discharged hun IN England under
The local Law of Iha, country. As 10 whether /,
Somerse, wouii have been entitled 10 his
discharge il he had Tot been taken from
England in.o slave territory, was not before
tue eonu. He did mol pretend 10 decide
whether slavery, under such circumstances,
wou!d have re-aUached, because that ques-
lion could not be raised upon the iacis."-
a gain, we fiad this poin, reviewed ii The
case Of the slave Grace, before the High Ad.
- i TVt. sd