New-York daily tribune., 1858-03-20

| scred as an kraelite with Egyptian principles,
lately made an able and ingenious argument TO show
that Slavery in this country is the creature OF the
common law. The legal gentlemen on the Slavery
side have always been in great straits to find legal
constitutional basis for their institution in the Ter
ltorie-. The last effort in this line is that Of Sen
ator BeI jamD, who must have the credit, 10 say
the least, Of novelty in his exposition. Since the
Slavery men have finally concluded TO put aside all
minor scruples and take the bull by the horns, By
declaring, without rhyme or reason, that the Fed
] ersl Constitution, PrOPriO r!gore carries Slavery
into the Territories, il seemed hardly worth wnre
for Senator Benjamin TO exhaust his energies a.d
bis ingenuity on the new theory he has put forth.
| But the fact is that among good lawyers, the dog
ms that the Constitution extends Slavery info the
Territories is very hard to accept 1t goes down
with amazing difficulty. II is doctrine which,
when first broached in the very desperation of the
Slavery party, was ridculed and secuted by such
| men as Webster and Clay, who were supposed to
have some correct perceptions Of constitutional IN
| t.rpretation and was met By the uniform denial OF
all sound legal minds Mr.. Benjamin is unquestion-
sby sn able lawyer, and he has shared the opinions
| Of his class But, apparently determined to come
to the same result With his less scrupuOus coned-
crates, and feeling that Slavery must BE- proved
| to exist in the Territories by some process, he
| has betaken himself upon voyage OF dis
covery: he has spurred up his inventive faculties
to tn, highest activity in the search of ground
work for his predetermined faith.
Setting sside, therefore, the current dogma of
the Slavery extensionists that Slavery exists
in all the Territories by virtue of the force of
the Federal Constitution Mr.. Benjamin pro-
leeds to show that it is there by force Of
The common law. To establish this bold and
novel proposition, Mr. Benjamin resorts to the
Brti.h history Of African Slavery. OF course it is
incumbent on him TO show that slaves were recog.
nized as property in England First, he adduces the
fact that Queen Elizabeth grsated charter to com
pany formed for the purpose Of supplying slaves to
the Spanish American colonies. Next, he alleges that
the Virgin Queen was hersefa Shareholder. Again,
he shows that in 1862, in Charles lis reign,
company was created with authority to carry 5000
slayes per annum to the colonies, which company
long lourished under royal auspices In 16'o, the
British House of Commons resolved that oil the
subjects Of Great Britain should hays liberty to
trade TO Africa for negroes. In the reign of VIII
liam ii. an act passed stating THAI the slave
trade vas beneficial to the kingdom AMI the colo
nies In I1OS the Commons again resolved that
the saye.trade was important and ought to be free
to all British subjects. in ILL., they again resolved
substantially the same thing. In l749 they re-
resolved the slave trade to BE- advantageous and
30 ha In
of State declared that the Government could not
permit the colonies to put stop to the slave
trade Beside. shortly after the treaty of Utrecht,
in l7l3, the British Council called upon the twelve
Judges of the realm to give Judgment as to the legal
character of certain slaves exported under one OF
the Parliamentary charters from Africa to the
Spanish American colonies. Ten Of them answered
o. follows: I'VE do humby certify our opinion
10 be- that negroes sre merchandise. The
question Of property in slaves being further
moOted about this time, some merchants of London
submitted the query, whether they were go, TO the
Solicitor and Attorney General of the kingdom.
They answered that "a slave coming from the
West Indes to England doth not become free,
- but may be legally compelled to return to the
plantations subsequently, in l749, the same
question came before the Lord Chancellor, who had
been the aforementioned Attorney General, snd he
affirmed his previous opinion.
This narrative gives in full the ground npon
which Senator Benjamin places bis deduction that
Slavery was the common law OF the thlr een colo
nes and the mother country, and that 1t rests upon
that foundation in this country now, and the equiv
sent law of France and spain, wherever it has not
been abolished by special statute. This argument,
We Learn was received at the time Of its delivery
With great favor and is considered at " ashington
by the Slavery men ss signal instance OF triumph
ant legal scumen.
In the year l77l Lord Mansfield gave his eee-
brs,ed decision in the Somerset case which has al
usys been understood before Mr.. Benlamin's time,
a. settling what the common law was IN regard to
slavery. That distinguished Judge declared that
slavery was not the common law OF England, and
this was the fret Judicial decision ever made on the
point. and il has never been reversed since. Mr.
BENJAMIN offers nothing whateyer to controvert this
fact be,ond what We have faithfully narrated above.
This seems to be settler; and the query naturally
arises how Mr. Benjamin gets over 1t. de Is re-
ported in the official Journal as follows: :" say
" that in I'LL Lord Mansfield ssjrerted the COM
q. mon law of England in the Somerset case
The groundwork Of Mr. BeDjamins deciarsti"n Is
IN he foInd in the record We have given. lie Claims
,b,t that record shows that Slavery was the com
mon Inv. and that Lord Mansfield failed to recos
,;z, the fact, or recognizing il, denied IT, and so
:. .nbyerted" the law. Thus il will be seer ths: