The New York herald. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1840-1920, 1860-12-23


try TO the other.
The Decision In the Toronto Fugitive
slave Case.
We have received full reports of the
opinion Of the judges in the celebrated case
of the slave Anderson, whose extradition from
Canada is demanded by the United States au-
thorities under the Ashburton treaty The final
Judgment in this case was rendered by Sir j. B.
Robinson, Bart, Chief Justice of the Court of
Queens Bench, sitting at Toronto, December
Is. The learned Chief Justice and Mr. Justice
Burns, majority of the court, decided that tie
case Of Anderson comes within the provisions
of the treaty, and that he must be sent back.
The counsel for the prisoner asked for the pri-
vilege of appeal to the Court of Errors and APP
peals. Pending the decision of the Court as TO
whether or not the case was proper one for
appeal, the prisoner was remanded till Satur-
day, I'D instant. The colored population of
Toronto was naturally much excited in re-
gard to this case, and the authorities made every
the prisoner large body of regular troops
were marched to within FIVE minutes walk Of
the place where the court sat- The police were
armed with bayoneted rifles and eleven rounds
Of ball cartridge TO each man. These proceed
ings show determination to uphold the ma
jesty of the law, which might be initiated
with profit upon this side Of the border.
We have already alluded to the facts in this in
ieresting case, and cite them again in order
that our readers may fully understand its
merits. The slave Anderson was owned by
one Moses Burton. of Howard county Missouri
In september, 1898, Burton sold Anderson to
man named Mcdonald, who lived some thirty
miles away. by this operation Anderson was
separated from his wife, and he resolved to run
away. hoping that she would be able to join
him in Canada. Anderson, while endeavoring
to effect his escape, was encountered by a
planter named Diggcs, who had clear right
to arrest any negro without pass, and Ander-
son was in that case. Driven into a corner,
Anderson turned upon Digges and stabbed
him. Digges tried to run away from the negro,
but stumbled and fell to the ground While
lying there, Anderson stabbed Digges in the
back, and from that wound he died. Anderson
escaped to Canada, where he was recognized
and apprehended in 1860. The evidence being
clear against him, Anderson was committed TO
jail upon the warrant Of three magistrates OF
Brantford, and has there remained since the
18th Of September last On the 10th Of Novem-
Der the Court of Queens Bench granted q writ
Of habcas corpus, and II was attempted to be
shown that Anderson was illegally de-
tained-flrst, on account of the deficiency of evil
dence that he was guilty of the murder of
Digges; and, second that II the act had been
committed in Canada it would have been q
justifable one, on that principle Of common law
which provides that man may use all neces-
sary force to preserve his life and liberty when
they are illegally put in jeopardy. The Chief
Justice held that the Court was bound by the
treaty to respect the law Of Missouri, and that
the proof was sufficient for the finding of an
indictment against the prisoner. In the course
of very lucid exposition Of the law and the
facts, the Chief Justice declared that the Judges
must conform to what the law requires, and
are not at liberty to act upon considerations Of
policy, or even Of compassion, where a duty Is
prescribed Mr.. Justice Burns said that while
II was the fact that the moment slave put his
foot upon Canadian soil he was free, yet
"the British government never contemplated
that be should also be free from the charges Of
murder piracy or arson, though the crime was
committed in the endeavor 70 obtain freedom
Mr.. Justice Mclean dissented from these views
This case il an important one In many re-
spects II proves that the Canadians them
selves are not so extreme In their
anti-slavery feelings as many Of the
radical sboli,ionis,s OF New England, who hold
,ha, II Is the duty Of the slaves to rise and slay
their masters, and that white men are bound TO
protect them, law or no law, In so doing. The
Canadian Judges might easily have eyaded the
question as TO whether or not the case came
within the provisions Of the treaty on liz merits,
by agreeing that the evidence, part Of which
wac contained In afRdavis sworn on informa
ton and belief, was not sufacient to warrant
the putting OF the accused on bis trial for
murder But they did their whole duty, met
the facts firmly, and decided the case fairly
The decision ia, Of course, unpalatable TO many
Of the people Of Toronto; but II was received
quietly. year or two ago we opine that
there would have been q terrible row; but
there are potent signs that q revolution in
public sentimeos . V slavery 10 going on both
st home and abroad IN England, the leading
Journal declares that the great British uarss