Rutland weekly herald. [volume] (Rutland, Vt.) 1859-1877, 1861-12-12
The Rntlana 4eraid.
THURSDAY, DECEMBER -.
CONFTSCATION OF SLAVES.

CONFISCAIlON OF SLAVES.
By the well settled principles of the COM
mon law, property in man is not recognized
The idea of such property is called guilty
phantasv. Such is the law of England. In
this country, though slavery is recognized as
an existing institution, the United States Su-
preme Court, as well as many of the courts
of the southern States, have frequently held
that this peculiar species of property exists
only by force of local, or statute ia,C, and that
it is in derogation Of both the natural and
common law And this is the view which has
been entertained by American juristS and
statesmen since the foundation Of the Govern
ment 1t has the sanction of such names as
Marshall, Story, Mclean, Webster, Clay,
and it is the true doctrine.
But within the past few years the disciples
of John G. Calhoun have asserted the dogma
that property in negro is of precisely the
same character as property IN any species Of
property whatever. Such was the idea
of Yancey when he complained that the
North were allowed TO import jackasses from
Malta, while the South were prohibited from
importing negroes from Africa. He placed
the negro upon the same property level with
the brute jackass.
Our purpose is not to demonstrate the fall
sity and injustice Of such monstrous notion.
Itneeds no refutation.
But the claim OF the rebels that property
IN negroes is by the common and natural law
the same as all brute and inanimate proper
tv. Is suggestive of some important interen-
ces among which are, first that if such be
the nature of the property, it is clearly sub
iect TO the laws of confscation ae # W.T.,
the -amr rs property in horses and mules.
Second, that it is subject TO taxation, not
merely under the provisions Of the constitu-
ton, but may be made to bear the pecuniar'
burdens Of the rebellion. And third, that if
it is common property, it is not particular
" sacred or invested with peculiar ''privil-
eyes" but can only claim to stand upon a
footing with other property.
Therefore il follows that the Shareholder in
rebellion has no more reason TO comPlaln,-
taking bis own premises to be true, that
slaves arr property by the common law
that they are not returned to their owners
when escaping within our military lines, thar
they have when d horse, or an OK. or mule
thus escapes and is taken.
Il. this new it j, that we are mortified and
PANIED to know that Gen. HalIeck, recently
placed in command OF the Western Depart
ment, has ordered that no fugitive slaves shall
be allowed TO come within the Federal lines,
and that when they DO make their appearance
they shall be returned to their owners. Why
does not Gen Halleck make the same order
in respect TO rebel property in .ackasses. to
use Yancy', homely, but plain illustration
If We would not return d jackass belonging
to rebel in arms under a military escort,
why return a negro: What Is the differ
ence Is a negro any more ab>oIuteiy the
property OF a rebel than b,,He May
our army confscate brute animals, belonging
to the public enemy, and employ them in the
Federal service. and not be permitted to hold
men, claimed as property by the rebels
We trust the inhuman, needless and inju-
dicious order of Gen. Ha!leck will be revoked
by the Government. Let negroes be elevated
to the grade of property, at least.