Daily Nashville patriot. [volume] (Nashville, Tenn.) 1860-1862, 1861-04-06
SPEECH OF
HON. G. w. SUMMERS,
IN THE VIRGINIA 90,
rcosrINuED.l

| whether il came there properly or not. How
/ are the rights of the master to be protected!
The very recognition of the relation of mas
| ter and slave invests the master with all the
| rights of that relation; but he has an ample
code embodying protection to that relation
and the rights springing from it-these right:
cannot be impaired or abridged by withdraw.
ing that protection.
| How are these rights to be awarded him
when withheld, or indicated when assailed!
They are to be subject to judicisl cogni-
zanee in the federal courts, according to the
course of the common law" -
Now, Mr.. President. 1 beg leave to say
that very many seem to mistake the import
| of this portion of the adjustment. The Com
| mon Law is not here referred TO as confer
| ring the rioIt of the master to his slave, but
is referred to solely as furnishing the remedies
to enforce those rights. The right is given
/ In the proposed amendment itself. Slavery,
| as a present, existing condition, is admitted
and recognized-this condition is not to be
| changed-the right to carry slaves to the
territory is not to be hindered or prevented
the rights arising from the relation of slavery
are not to be impaired. Then comes the
clause which places these rights under judi
cial cognizance, to be awarded. Vindicated.
executed and protected according to the
course of the common law" That mallea-
BILE, flexible and expansive system of juris-
/
pointed to, not as the source of the rights of
the master, but as the abOunding field, fur
nishing all proper and needful remedies for the
| assertion of those rights. 1t is the proud and
just boast of the Common Law, that it knows
| no right without an action, no wrong with
| out remedy.
/ The celebrated case decided by Lord Mans
field mean the Somerset case-in which
it was said that slavery was unknown to the
i n tory hoe lott hot n
| the question under consideration. and would
| have no basis to stand on, in a case arising
| in our Territories under the proposed amend
| ment. Neither that decision, nor any prin-
| cIple deducible from il, has any application
| to this proposition as agreed upon by the
Peace Conference; none whatever. That de-
| cision went upon the ground that no statute
| of England recognized slavery; that it was
| condition unknown to the Parliamentary
| code, unknown to statutory or Constitutional
| provisions or recognition, and that the COM
| mon law, and the common law alone, was to
| be looked to, both for the right and the rem
| edy. a master from one of the Islands, seek
| ing to recover his slave on the soil of Eng
land, was met by the objection that no stat
| ute declared his right to recover the slave,
| or recognized the relation of master and
| slave and ne was RENTED and restricted to
| the common law for redress. Here the Con-
| stitution itself--for it is proposed to embody
/ this proposition in the CoOstitulon-here
| the Constitution, the organic law, recognizes
| the right-declares that the right shall never
be impaired; that no law shall be passed by
Congress, or the Territorial Legislature, to
hinder or prevent the carrying of slaves from
any of the States of this Union into the Ter
ritories. or to impair the rights arising from
such relation. That relation is admitted and
sanctioned in the most solemn and most per-
feet form by the fundamental law itself, &C
cording to the proposition now under ex-
animation. After the right has been recog-
niZed and confirmed; after the relation has
been created and sanctioned; then the dscla-
ration is that the Courts shall take Judicial
cOgnizance of that relation according to the
rules, remedies and practice of the common
law.
And, Mr.. President, need not ask you.
versed as you are known to be, in jurispru-
dence-I need not ask the professional gen.
tlemen of this body, what more ample and
abundant remedies could be afforded than
those which are to be drawn from the COM
mon law? The action of "detinue," where
you desire the possession of specific chattel,
is furnished by the common law. The action
of ''trover," if you waive the question Of
specific property. and are content with DANA
ges, is furnished by the common law. The
action of "trespass," the action of .'replevin,"
all actions that are needful, are furnished by
this system.
Old as it is, in our own Commonwealth,
you will find no act in the statute law of Vir-
ginia, in SO many words, establishing slavery
in this Commonwealth. Go back to the
foundation of the Colony, and you will find
no law establishing that relation, or creating
slavery. In 1920, believe it was. some
twenty African barbarianS were landed at
jamestown, from a Dutch ship, and sold as
slaves. From that period slavery has existed
in Virginia. The relation has been recog-
nized and protected by various laws, and by
usage, for more than two hundred years in
Virginia. and has become interviewer with
our social and industrial system as also with
our legislative history.
Now, what are the remedies most familiar
in Virginia, and which are constantly resort
ed to for the vindication of the rights of the
master?
The common law of England belonged to
us when colony. 1t was afterwards adopt
ed as part of our jurisprudence and is now
incorporated, by statute, into our legal system
except so far as it may be modified by Iegis-
lative enactmentS. We are in O constant
habit OF resorting to common law remedies
in Virginia, to enforce and protect the rights
arising out of the condition of slavery. Yet
the common law in Virginia, no more than
the common law in England or in terrific
~, of itself, recognizes slavery, or cOnfers
the right of the master in his slave. That
right in Virginia, is derived frompsages and
legislative recognition. 1t is recognized by
the Constitution of the State and protected
by law. Being so recognized and protected.
the common law furnishes its remedies to
carry out and vindicate the rights which
spring from the relation.
The action of detinue, the action of trover,
the action of trespass, are all common law
remedies, applied, daily, to slave property,
or to any other property. The right being
conferred, the common law, with its plastic
hand, moulds the remedy by which the right
is to be asserted.
And so in territory. When the condi- |
ton OF slavery shall have been acknowledged
to exist, as it is acknowledged by the amend |
ment under consideration-existing under |
full protection, by the law of New Mexico; |
and when it shall have been declared, as |
proposed, that 1.-The rights arising from said |
relations shall not be impaired" coupled |
with the provision that these rights are sub |
ject to judicial cogniZance, according to the
course of the common law, can any legal |
mind doubt, that the common law would |
take hold OF. those rights aud supply all
needful remidies for their enforcement
Here the common law jurisdiction is express |
ly conferred on the Federal courts, and these |
courts are directed 10 proceed under the |
remedies and practice of that system.
But it has been objected to this section, |
that it does not, as Mr.. Crittenden's PROPOSE |
ton does, use the term '.s,ave" and slavery" |
and AFRICAN slavery" that it does not, as
the Crittendea proposition, require slaves to
be protected as property by all branches Of
the territorial government.
We'll now sir, is there, in reality any differ |
ence between the rights of the master under |
one form of language and the other! / can |
conceive of none. l am utterly incapable |
of conceiving how the rights of the |
master may be affected by the absence |
or the presence of these terms of phraseolo- |
gy. L regard the terms in the one case as |
fully and distinctly embodying recognition |
of slavery as in the other.
The introduction of new terms of descrip- |
ton into any amendment Of the Consultation |
different from the DESCRIPTION of the same |
thinn as given in the Constitution itsalf ia