New-York daily tribune. [volume] (New-York [N.Y.]) 1842-1866, 1858-02-26

case uds uccu itCCutiJ uCCiucu III thc hNulu0hy
Court of Appeals in way which we think by no
means creditable or worthy of the ancient Judicial
reputation of that State. A plain statement Of the
facts will enable the reader to comprehend the
nature Of this case, and to estimate the weight of
the decision. Stephen Kyler, negro slave, was
emancipsted by his master Joseph Kyler, in the
year 1913. For many years. prior to his emancipa-
ton he bad, so far as he could be by the laws of
Kentucky, been the husband of Cynthia, the slave
of one Taylor. Joseph Kyler, benevoleutly desir-
ing to secure to his emancipated slave this wife,
bought her of Taylor. He would at once have
made her free. but the Kentucky Constitution Of
1850 provides that no slave can be emancipated
unless he or she shall emigrate from the State.
Under these circumstances, and following legal
advice, joseph Kyler had recourse to statute Of
Kentucky which provides 4" that no free negro shall
" be capable of acquiring in fee, or holding for any
length of time, a. hirer or otherwise, any slave,
"other than the husband, wife, parent or descend
"ant of such free negro" Under this provision
Cynthia was conveyed to her husband. 1t proper
here to remark that this conveyance was upon its
face absolute. This we think to have been
unfortunate, because if in that conveyance it
had been expressly stated that Cynthia was con.
vtyed Is Stephen as his wife, in accordance with
the statute above cited, the terms of which might
have been repeated in the instrument, We cannot
conceive how any Court, however biased, could
have come to the conclusion which We shall pres
emily refer TO.
Before the sale, which was for merely nominal
consideration, of Cynthia to her husband, one Dun
lap had recovered two judgments against Stephen.
Eight years afterwards, in 1857, he sued out wrts
of f. fac. upon his judgments, and levied on Gym
thia, as the property of Stephen, and was pro.
ceeding to sell her as slave. Stephen joining with
his wife, brought this action, asking the Circuit
Court to declare that the woman was the wife and
not the property of the man. This Court, how.
ever decided sgainst the plaintiffs, aud the case
went up TO the Court of Appeals. Wheat c. J.
affirmed the decision Of the Court below
Now, this We hold to be decision against law,
reason and equity. Judge Wheat refused to regard
any psrol testimony concerning the transaction, or
in explanation of the intention of Joseph Kyer in
conveying Cynthia to her husband. He saw fit to
consider markedly the bill of sale to Stephen; and in
so doing made most egregous and discreditable
blunder. Because if the bill was to be literally in.
terpreted, Stephen Kyler could have taken no inter.
est in Cynthia, and Joseph Kyer, her vendor, could
have passed none; so that to all intents and pur-
poses Cynthia remained the slave of Joseph Kyler,
and could not be attached for the indebtedness of
another. The statute of Kentucky, as above cited,
is upon this point explicit. Stephen could not ac-
quire property in Cynthia as slave; and therefore
she could not be attached to satisfy judgment
sgainst him. The conveyance was void aJ initio
for ilegaty, and il the case had been decided prop
erly, all evidence Of sale from Joseph Kyler to
Stephen Kyler would have been at once ruled out,
and summary judgment have been rendered for the
plaintiffs.
The Legislature of Kentucky, sctuated no doubt
By humane sprit, has provided that free negro
msy acquire fee III his wife. Where the words Of
statute are of dubious character, the just and
proper course of the law to inquire into the aen-
ton Of tie Legislature and to interpret the statute
"a Yearly as possible in conformity with the causes
of its origin. In this case forcibly urged by
Mr. BuI.aOf counsel for the sppear t. the Legisla.
ture INTENDED an d.d make g departure from the
genera. policy Of The State in regard TO he inst.
:4.ol {. .>.s7erJ I. intended - e,abGsh