New-York daily tribune. [volume] (New-York [N.Y.]) 1842-1866, 1859-11-05
Slaves from dive State into Territory OF tne
Upitrd states Mr. Black insists upon what be
III A.. a. . ,;n,n Ate ur;n~ipIe of prbIic law" that


Uptrd states Mr. Black insists upon what be
calls the " automatic principle Of public law" tha'
n man going from one country into another. retains
in the latter, Of there b. conflicting law, all the
rights Of property which he had IN the former.
stakeholder, therefor, going from 9 Slave STATE
ard taking his slave with him into Territory oil
the United States. retains The right n to, and
over the slave which be had AZ home. To tbs DIT
Dougla. replies that TIL. " automatic principle OF
public law" does lot apply to property In slaves
except in cases where the slave Is taken INTO
country iD which slavery !. ALREADY acknowledged
ard established by Law, and be quotes
s,ory on the conflict OF laws" a. au-
thorty for this doctrine Attorney -General
Black denies tia, the authority quoted by Mr.
Douglas. or tbo-e upon which Story himself relies
have any application, except to cases IN which The
slave il taken into countries n which Slavery II al
resdy prohibited by aw, whence he cdnciudes tha''
falling law prohibiting Slavery, which, accord
ing 10 the bred Scott decson neither Congress nor
the Territorial Legislatures have any power to en-
act the title Of the Virginia master Is just as good
in Kansas as il was in Virginia.
But let u see q little about that. The great au-
tborty upon this question, at least wherever the
common law prevails, l. the ease Of Somerset, de-
c.ded by Lord Mansfield. Somerset was an AiH-
can Sy birth: be was carried TO Virginia as slave,
and was there purchased BY one james Stewart
who Nerward brought him TO England. In this
case 70 question was raised u to the legal
ity of Slavery in Virginia. That was
admitted on both sides. The only question was
whether, having been a slave in Virginia, his mas
Ter. by bringing him 10 England, had not lost his
right OYER him Now, according to Judge Black
hi. vas clear case, ard Somerset ought to have
been delivered back to the man who claimed him "a
slave. There was no act of Parliament, there
was no decision of the Courts denying the night 70
hold negroe. as slaves. So far as practice went,
they had been 80 held for many years past, and 1t
va. mentioned in Lord Mansfield opinion that the
number 80 held in England at that very moment
was estimated at fourteen or fifteen thousand, in
yolying, as Mr. Black would say, the conhscation
of property-in ease such holding should not be
sustained-of not less than three and half millions
Of dollars. But Judge Mansfield did not agree
with Attorney General Black, that to give
validity to the Virginia title in England, 1t
was enough that there was no enactment against
it. On the other hand he held expressly that $50
high on act of dominion" az the claim of one man
TO control the actions and dispose of the person
of another, must be recognized by the law OF
the country where il is used" 1.-The state Of
Slavery il Of such nature that it is incapable Of
" being introduced on any reasons, moral or pot'-
q" cai, bu, only by posiiire lac" 1T is so odious
ga thing, that nothing support it but positive
"law." So in the cases referred to by Judge
Story decided in France and Scotland. There
had never been any legislation in those countries
prohibiting or abolishing Slavery 1t was
not on tho ground that Slavery had
been expressly prohibited or abolished there,
that persons slaves abroad were held to be free
being brought to Scotland or France. 1t was be-
cause there was no law in Scotland or France
which authorized Slavery, and because in defect Of
such positive law it was impossible to recognize
claim SO contrary to natural justice. Wherever
there il no human law authorizing Slavery, the law
of nature, the dictates of natural justice forbid it..
Kansas stands on precisely the same ground. In
defect of some positive law to sustain it, Slavery
cannot exist there.
Quite independently Of any express prohibitory
enactment the ordinary laws of the land amount to
a prohibition of Slavery, unless it be sustained BY
express laws in its favor This was, indeed, one OF
the positions taken By Lord Mansfield in the Som
erset case. THE difficulty" he said, ''Of adopt
sing this relation, without adopting all its conse-
..quences is indeed extreme; yet many OF these
consequences are absolutely contrary TO the mu-
"nicipal law of England" So, many of the consc-
duences of Slavery are absolutely contrary to the
municipal laws of the TerritOres-such as those,
for instance, which punish false imprisonment and
assault and battery, and give TO every laborer an
action to recover so much his services may be
worth To except any man from the operation OF
these laws some express enactment is needed in his
favor.
But automatic principles Of public law are not
confined in their operation TO the case OF Virginia
shareholders. Suppose Turk from CONSTANT
nople were to emirate to Kansas with dozen
Circassian slaves. What would Mr.. Attorney
General say to that case' Would his famous
"axiomatic principle of public law make that
title good in Kansas which had been good in Fur-
key'
u