The Washington union. [volume] (City of Washington [D.C.]) 1857-1859, 1859-02-26

tho South that the constitution carried slavery into
the common territories inasmucll as i recognised
the right Of the citizens Of every Safe To emigrate to
them with every species Of property recognised as
such in amy Of the States Of the Union. This princ
pie is recognised and enforced as law by the bred
Scott decision.
Il follows, then, that in all those territories ae-
qured by conquest and cesson from Mexico if there
were existing at the time any laws inhbting slavery,
they abrogated by the constitution Of the
United States the momont the treaty of Guadaloupe
Hidalgo was ratified by the Senate.
The law in relation to the nature and tenure Of the
property would, of course be that Of the new SOW
ereign; but, if the sovereign did not change or
alter the rules Of proceeding ia the courts, then the
remedies would be those existing at the time of the
acquisition. This would leave in force the RENE
dies existing in the body Of the civil and Spanish
law for the rec very of slaves, and they were
ample. Nothing stood opposed to them but the
Mexican decree inhibting slavery, and that was alb
rogated by the constitution Of the United States,
to the common territories.
No lawyer can for moment suppose that when
the courts were organized in New Mexico they were
without rules Of proceeding until code of practice
was framed. They found them existing, ready made
at their hands, in the civil and Spanish law. The
organic act for that Territory declares that g the
said supreme and district courts, respectively. shall
possess cllancery as well as common-law jurisdic-
ton" Inreguating appeals and writs of error it de-
clares except only hat in all cases involving titles
to slaves, the said wrls of error appeals shall be
allowed and decidedly the said supreme court, with
out regard 10 the yahe Of the matter, property or
title in controversy" The provisions in relation TO
this subject in the organic acts for Utah, Kansas, and
Nebraska are the same, and they recognise the ex
istence of remedies for the recovery of slaves ifnot
the existence Of slavery in all these Territories Ii
is fair to say that, as to all proceedings IN court
these organic acts recognise the existence of prop
ery aud 'falen in slaves, and require the courts 10
entertain jurisdiction on that hypothesis. How, then,
is it to be doubted that the remedies Of the civil law
would apply? How is il to be questioned that the
common law and chancery remedies would apply, so
far as they exist as general rules in reference to this
class of property in the States, from which it has
been introduced into the Territories?
There is no doubt that slavery existed in England
ut common law. "rhe condition of the Saxon slave
was that Of puro slavery" Cobb Hapeyy, CT.
sh .'The slaves were conveyed both By deed and
by will, and in juxiapostion with cattle aud other
personally" "Fhcy purchased for
expectation, until that forbidden; and Henry
states that at Bristol brisk slave trade carried
on in purchasing Englislmen aud exporting them to
Ireland for sale III Sin 1853 we are
informed BY Hakeuyt "a negro slaves were
brought to England from the coast Of Africa"
'rhe Introduction of negro slaves into that country
continued without question 10 its legality, until
tie lrla the celebrated 5omersett in l7Il."
10. Slavery not only existed at common law, but
was authorized and commanded by English statutes.
II is known that the previous TO SOMERSET re-
cognsc negro slavery In Gelly Cerc, / Id
Raymond p 147, il was held that strover will lie for
a negro boy''-p. LAT.
The argument in Somersett's case admits that sla-
very exists in America both by tue customary law
and positive enactment The judgment discharged
the slave on the ground that there was no law to
hold him in Engl,dd. The Judgment went on the
ground that there right The case shows
that if there had been right to hold him. no would
have been restored TO his master. The other Eng
fish prove that, admitting the right trover and
other remedies for the recovery of personal property
would lie for a slave.
In the Territories the right is established by the
constitution, and the remedy necessarily follows, as
it exists at common law and in chancery in the slave
States. If the common law furnished no remedy
then The civil law, it existed in France and Spain
would TO the AID of tile right in the country ac
CURED from France and Spain, Mexico. The two
systems would exist together far as not in conflict
although it may be true that, under the organic acts
the common-law remedies they obtain in the slave
States would prevail over those of the civil law.
Again: the common-law remedies Of England
would be ample under tho rigM existing, as sx-
pounded by the bred Scott case and it is not in the
power of Congress territorial legislature to with
draw all remedy rs means of excluding slavery.
SHIPMENT SEEDS CmlSA.--We learn that de
spaches have been received by the Commissioner of
Patents from Mr. Robert Fortune bearing date at Shang