The south-western. [volume] (Shreveport, La.) 1852-1870, 1859-06-22

Tea DldLSS at 1blCtliiiOLldy ' -
posed of Judge fancy. the chief justice Of the
supreme court of the United States. and Judge
HaIyburton, the district Judge for the district
The prisoner was a female slave, indicted tol
taking a letter out of the post office, and steal
ing the money which it contained.
The counsel prayed the court to instruct the
Jury, that being a slave, the accused was not
person, in the meaning of the law OF congress
bat property, and could not be held liable to the
penalties imposed by congress on persons gull
ty of violation of lis laws. 1t was argued thai
fine and Imprisonment could not be imposed
on slaves. They have no property and can pay
no fine, and TO imprison them is to punish the
master by ~privation OF his property.
The court overruled the plea, and the prs
oner was convicted. A motion was made Tor q
new trial. which has been refused. Judge fancy
delivered The judgment of the court In an eiab-
crate opinion.
He holds that slaves are recognised by the
constitution Of the United States as persons as
well as property. Indeed. they are designated
only by the names of 'persons'-thus always
conveying the idea of their mixed character
In their character as property, the rights OF the
owners are entitled to the protection OF the law.
AS a person, the slave is bound to obey the
law, and may, like any other person, be pun
ished if he offend against it,
The Judge admits the slave cannot be prop
erlV made the subject of a fine, because the
slave cannot hold property or make contracts,
and an imprisonment, as penalty for not paying
a fine, would be, in effect, Ievying the fine up
on the master, which would be unjust. But
the slave mag be punished By Imprisonment as
a direct Judgment for the crime, and the master
must take tie loss as one OF the inevitable Incl
dents Of that species OF property.
In this the court drew a line of marked dis
~tinction between slaves taken as persons and
imprisoned for crime, and slaves taken as prop
erly, for public use, in the service OF govern
ment. When a slave is taken as a teamster or
laborer, or otherwise for the use of govern
ment, it is liable for his value as property.
The court would not give an opinion, whether
congress ought not, in justice, to make compen-
sation to a master, for the loss of service of a
slave, while imprisoned for a crime. The law
makes no such provision; therefore, there can
be no compensation. 1t is for the political de
partment Of the government to decide, whether
such provision ought to be made. Various
rules prevail, in that respect, in the slavehold-
ing States.
The court, in conclusion. suggested that, as
the money letter was stolen in Virginia. the Of
fence could be punished as larceny by theVir-
ginia courts, in which case there would have
been no necessity for proceedings in the courts
Of the United States.
In the Richmond Enquirer this decision Of
fancy is hailed with much enthusiasm
as a judgment in favor of the right of protec-
ton, by law, for slave property in the terrific
ries; but it does not seem to US to touch the
point of the controversy involved in the dispute
about the territories. The point there's, whether
congress should pass laws to protect slave
rights in the territories, in the absence of any
adequate protection by the territorial authori-
ties. All that judge Taney decides is, that
slaves may be embraced, for punishment or
protection, in the term of a law Of congress
which treats generally Of persons
Besides, the opinion Of Judge fancy in the
circuit court, although it makes a decision
and has great weight from his position,
character, and learning, is only the opinion Of
one Of the nine judges who make the supreme
court. 1t is a favorable token of what they
may decide, but it does not make the law until
they have also considered and enunciated it.
CAPITAL PUNIsHMENT.-The recent trial of
HE negro Alfred. for the crime of murder,
sussest tiIe subject of capital punishment to
Inc writer. We have no common place plati.
udes to offer on this theme, and only mention
t to note a few peculiarities in the people of the
west, in regard to carrying into effect the crimi
lal code. One peculiarly, is the readiness with
they resort to lynch-law. By the first
blast of indignation they are frequently hurried
TO deprive a feIlow-man of Efe without
and without a trial, but let their pas
,ions subSide. and the case must be very aggra-
'ated in which they will sanction capital punish
shment. Reason would seem to dictate a diff
erent course. Hardy, pioneer habits would be
expected to beget infexible ideas of justice, and
sterness in the administration of the law un-
inown in the older States, while at the same
the criminal code would be expected to be
more strict in order TO meet the requirements
# a lawless population. Such should be the
.ase. One good result would folIow-despera-
loes would then be certain of stern Justice,
where as now they frequently trust to the posi-
dislike which persons manifest for executing
he law, as well AS 10 the laxity of the law itself.
Erue the penitentiary is often brought in requisi-
ion, but penitenliaries in the west are some
What like the jaiis-liable to tricks of witch
raft and not uhfrequently open to some mys-
erious SESAME"
Another thought subjects itself-were the
laws more strictly executed, we would
rave fewer legal indictments for carrying con
called weapons, for where the court voluntarily
elinquishes the punitive power or carries it out
nadequattly, every individual feels authorised
0 become his own protector and, too frequently,
lis own avenger. 1t was to prevent this that
aw WAS first established, and just in proportion
0 its ineffciency will be the lawlessness of in
lividuals.
We hope the day is not far distant when the
of the law will be acknowledged, and
ures will regard it not not only a serious re-
possibility to take the life of a fellow man, but
a serious matter to suffer the guilty to
70 "%unwhipt of justice" and to jeopardise the
Of good and worthy citizens by iallacious
IDEAS of right and erroneous notions of what is
haritable and merciful
The above remarks are made with no refer
nee TO any special case, but we believe will be
ound personally applicable. Ark. Democrat.
Several of our capitalists are about to en-
age extensively in the manufacture of leather
nd shoes in Marshall county. A gentleman