The weekly Mississippian. [volume] (Jackson, Miss.) 1859-1864, 1860-05-02
FTos the True Delta.
Slave Trade. Legalized


The Circuit Court Of the United States, for
the Southern District of Alabama, sitting IN
Mobile, has recently through its presiding
officer, Hon. VIM. G. Jones recorded deci-
sion which is likely to produce q very great
sensation in the country, q wen s a. , n,y
great effect on the present tafic IN slaves, now
being maintained with the coast Oh Alric@
for consumption in this regpn.
In this case one Horatio r. Gould was in
dicted under three counts, one that he held
negress unlawfully brought within the limits
of the United States. and the second that he
sold the same, and the third that he did dis
pose Of her otherwise than by selling her.
The objections urged against the indict-
meut are list. That it is too vague and 6ncer-
tain. in this. that it does not state the name Of
the negro, or any description oil her, except
that II IS a female. nor the names or description
of the foreign place from which, or persons by
whom she IS alleged to have been unlawfully
brought in. I'd That it does not show that
Gould had any participation whatever IN the
importation ofthe negro and that the law APP
plies only to the importers, their agents or
employees 3d. That if the hw was intended
to apply to other persons than the importers,
their agents or employees, it's TO that extent
unconstitutional.
The opinion of the court in the case and the
law applicable to it, is lengthy and elaborate,
sustaining the demurrer to the indictment and
giving Judgment for the defendant upon the
ground that the same rule of law is applicable
equally to persons as to property; that is, says
Judge Jones, until the commercial transac-
tian of importation is campIete and ended,
they are subject to the commercial power and
laws of the United States; but Wben the COM
| nserciaI transaction Of importation is complete
and ended, and the goods become mingled Nth
| the property, oad the gersons nth the people of
State, they both of them become subject to the
State jurisdiction and Stats latps. 1t obvious
| " makes no difference that the persons are
negroes, and intended by the importer ofslayes.
Whether they are to be considered as slaves
or free, as chattels or persons--tac same prin-
| ciple applies to them. The cases referred to
show the extent and limit of this power over
| foreign commerce. 1t covers and extends to
the whole commercial transaction of importa-
ton; and, in respect to negroes unlawfully
| imported as slaves, to their removal out Of the
country. This is its extent and its limit In
my opinion it never was the intention of the
famers of the Constitution that the several
States should surrender to general govern
ment this power to fix the status, prescrbes
the rights and provide for the protection Of
free negroes, or any other inhabitants ola State.
Suppose that negro, unlawfully imported, is
1 residing in Alabama, either as a free man, or
wrongfully held as slave, and that any per-
son should beat main, or murder such ne
gro. in Alabama, what law would be violated,
and under what law could the offender be tn
ed and punished? Most unquestionably the
State law. So, too, if he is wrongfully de-
| prived of his freedom, it is the State law which
is violated, and the State law under which the
offender is to be punished. Such an offence
has no Connection with, or relation to, foreign
commerce, and is entirely without and beyond
of foreign commerce.
Looking. then, to the mischief intended K
be remedied, AMI to the nature, extent, and
limits of the constitutional grant of pOwel
over this subject, l think the proper construc
ton of the law is, that it embraces and provide
for the punishment of every person, who, il
any manner, directly or indirectly participate
aids OF abets in the importation Of negroes a
slaves. The capitalists who furnishes tn
money-the agents who build, charter or Fl
out q slaveship-the officers and crew VIII
navigate it-those who procure the cargo, o
nv them into the interior, or bold, sell, o
otherwise dispose of them there, for the i'm
porter-are all participants in the unlawful
importation, and guilty of an offence against tn
constitutional laws of the United States, anC
punishable under those laws. But after sucl
a Negro has passed out of the possession o
I control of the importer and his agents anC
EMPLOYEES, and has become mingled with tn,
| = &c .f hanf
murders or otherwise criminally violates hi
rights, in this State, the offender is liable t.
Indictment under the State lay, and befort
the State tribunals alone. Whilst as Judg
of this court, shall always be ready and vii
ling to maintain and enforce this, and all othe
constitutional powers and laws Of the Genera
Governmet, it is equally my duty not to g
beyond the limits of tie Constitution, or u
encroach in the slightest degree, upon tn
rights and Jurisdictions of the States.
Under the construction which give to tn
law, the Indictment in this case is not main
tainable. 1t does not allege that the accuses
had any connection whatever with the unlaw
full importation; nor does it allege any fact
from which this conld be legally inss~yed- i
simply alleges that the accused knowingly
held, as slave, in Alabama, negro, who hat
previously been unlawfully imported, BY som
other unknown person. This, think is no
an indictable offence under the laws Of tn
United States.
1t follows from this decision, that the au
thority of the United States is limited to tn
commercial transaction Of importation, anC
when this is complete and ended and tn,
goods become mingled with the property, ant
the persons with the people Of State. they
both become exclusively subject to the Sat-
jurisdiction and the State laws.
Then if the State into which the importa
ton of the persons Slaves takes place fails Il
stigmatize the traffic in such imported person
or to enact laws for its punishment and sup
preston, it thenceforth becomes tacitly au
thorized, and parties purchasing otherwis,
than as importers will be discharged of al
penalties. The risk in this trade is confineC
to the importation ofthe persons, not to thei
purchase and distribution when they are ono,
here. Our readers will find in this conclusion
as much matter for serious reflection as W,
} have done, and both of US ought to take prope
, time fully to estimate its consequences befor
! passing judgment on its expediency, legalit,
} and binding force.