The national era. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1847-1860, 1858-03-18
SPEECH OF ER BENJAMIN IN THE SEN.
ATE-LAW IN RELATION TO SLAVERY.

| SPEECH OF ER. BENJAMIN IN THE SEN
ATE-LAW IN RELATION TO SLAVERY.
The speech delivered by Mr.. BENJAMIN of
Louisiana, in the Senate, last Thursday, was
mainly discussion of the Law in relation to
Slavery. By those who hold that it ia compe
tent for Congress- to exclude that system from
the Territories of the Union, it is maintained
that Slavery depends for its existence upon the
statute laws of States where it is established ::
that that law has no extra-territorial force /;
and that the Constitution of the United States
does not recognise or protect slaves as prop.
erty.
at seems to me-" says Mr.. BENJAMIN, "that
the radical, fundamental error which underlies
the argument in affirmation of this power, is
the assumption that Slavery is the creature of
the statute law of the several States where it ia
established; that it has no existence outside of
the limits OF those States; that slaves are not
property beyond those limits; and that property
in slaves is neither recognised nor protected by
the Constitution of the United States, nor by
international law. l controvert all these prop.
ositions, and shall proceed at once to nv ar.
gument.
Assuming, what we admit, that Great Brit
ain possessed and exercised sovereignty over
the Colonies before their declaration of indie
pendence in 1875, he proceeds:
off can show, as hope to be able to estab
lish to the satisfaction of the Senate, that the
nation thus exercising sovereign power over
these thirteen colonies did establish Slavery in
them, did maintain and protect the institution.
did originate and carry on the slave trade, did
support and foster that trade, that it forbade
the colonies permission either to emancipate
or export their slaves, that it prohibited them
from inaugurating any legislation in diminution
or encouragement of the institution-nay. sir.
more, if at the date of our Revolution / can
show that African Slavery existed in England
as 1t did on this continent, if can show that
slaves were sold upon the slave mart, in the Ex
change and other public places of resort in the
city OF London as they we're on this continent,
then shall not hazard too much in the asser.
ton that Slavery was the common law of the thir.
teen States Ct the Confederacy at the time thew
burst the boiids that united them to the motber
country"
If by the phrase "the common law of the
thirteen Sts:es," he means only system or
practice in the thirteen States, introduced and
established by Great Britain, and protected BY
positive law, he hazards no more in making
the assertion, than we do, in admitting it.
Undoubtedly it was a practice introduced by
Great Britain, established by the Joint action
of the Crown, Parliament, and Colonial Lepis-
lation, and maintained by positive law. But,
which of the propositions controverted by Mr..
Benjamin, is disproved by this exhibition and
assertion of facts ? 1t can have no bearing
upon any one of them, except the first, which
assumes that Slavery is the creature of the
statute law of States where it is estab.
lished, but this proposition it confirms; for,
by his own showing, Slavery was established,
maintained, and protected in the Colonies, by
"the statute law of England" up to the time
when they became independent, and must have
been continued in them, after independence,
in virtue of that law, which did not cease by
the mere transfer of sovereign power from
England to the States. After a recital of the
acts of the Sovereign Power of England, in re.
gard to Slavery and the slave trade, he repeats
I" say, then, that down to the very moment
when our independence was won, Slavery, by
the statute laW of England, was the common
law of the sid thirteen Colonies"
Recollef, our assumption is, that Slavery is
the creatu' of positive law or statute. This
he pronour ces radical and fundamental error;
and to pro 'e it this, appeals to the acts of the
British Or swn and Parliament, to show that
Slavery wss established, maintained, and pro-
tected in the Colonies, by " the statute lao of
England"
1t is difficult to understand how 50 acute
reasoner "a Mr.. Benjamin could have fallen into
80 palpable contradiction; but it is less diff
cult to understand what impression he means
to convey by his cunning use of the phrase
"common law" in application to Slavery. The
common law is the unwritten law of England
clear, settled, and obligatory-dating 90 far
back that the memory of man runneth not to
the contrAry-to be set aside only by the force
of positive law. What the Common Law is to
England, Slavery, Mr.. Benjamin would main
tain, is to the United States custom or usage,
general, perpetual, having all the force of law.
the phrase common law" The facts he quotes
in his historical recital authorize the conclusion
that Slavery was a common institution of the
old thirteen colonies at the time of the war of
1ndependence-asy system existing in all of them,
and protected in each by its Lawsuit he has
no right to say that it was the common Law"
of the Colonies, for that phrase has specific,
wellde6ned meaning, designating an unwritten
code OF laws, deriving its authority from i'm