Green-Mountain freeman. [volume] (Montpelier, Vt.) 1844-1884, 1861-02-21
The Claa1a fugitive Slave Case.

come a cause ceicJre-haq been removed from
Provincial to British jurisdiction on writ Of
hGbCdS corpus, aud the event loreshadoWs, at the
very dawn OF a new Southern Empire, the grave
difficulties that must continually arise between
q Slave Conlederacy and the great AntSlayery
Power Of the world. The technical question
involved in the recent decision OF Lord Chief
Justice COCKBuRN, rs to whether the Province
of Canada is within the jurisdiction Of the Court
Of Queen Bench, is one for the future consid-
Grafton of the British lawyer but the Chief
Justice, in the emergency Of tho case, has, for
tho present. assumed that 1t is and his assnmp-
ton has been regarded with satisfaction in Eng
land and will be hailed with joy throughout
she length and breadth Of Canada. Upon this
point there can be mistake. Popular sympathy
Is unusually excited in favor Of ANDERSON, and
il his redemption from the doom Of a Toronto
Court had not been effected by hdbeaS corpus to
tho Queen Bench in England, it would Ger
tainly have been effected by an appeal either IT.
the Judicial Committee Of the Prlyy Council,
or to the Court OF Error and the llo Of Lords
The case that has excited SO IN ch comment
on both sides OF the Atlantic is Il very plain and
simple one wien Invested Of all ncumbrancc 49,
Some seven or eight years ago 4 slave named
JonN ANDERSON escaped from his master, MosEs
BuRroN. a cilizen OF Missouri In his Fight for
the British frontier he was encountered by one
ID .GGrs, who endeaYorcd TO arrest him, and IN
the conflict that eusucd DlcGEs was morally
wounded ANDERSON succeeded in reaching
Canada, aud his extradition vas demanded by
the United States Government under the 10th
Article Of the Aslburton Treaty which provides
that the u s and Great Britain shall give up
u Justice fugiti,es charged with murder,
piracy, arson and robbery upon such evi.
dence Of crimnaity as, according TO tie laws
Of the place the fugitive shall be found, ,could
juStifq has apprehension and commitment for
trial II the crime had been there con'muted:'
1t difficult to understand the grounds upon
which the Canadian Court resolved to e1lrsdlte
the prison. when it appeared that " the law OF
the place where he wss found" \ law that *
noros Slavery altogether-must, 10y the express
terms of the treaty, determine the nature of his
crime. Under the Canadian or British law,
ANntR.oN could only be convicted of XII ling n
man who attempted uujuslly to deprir, him OF
his liberty and this would amount at the most
TO mansIaug hter--an offence not mentioned in
the Ashburton Treaty. Tho whole question IN
yolyed IS one Of fact as to whether ANDERSON
was prima tacic gully uad>r The lar Of HE
place IN lrhich he unS fOnrd OF the crime OF muir
der The Court could take NJ official cognis-
sucs OF the existence of Slavery. mach less OF
the allegation that ANDERSON had been an
American slave, or was in any sense bound 10y
the restrictions of u Missouri c1do. Under the
law of the Stue from which the prisoner fed
the case would undoubtedly bear q different
complexion, for there it could I've proved that
he killed man invested with legal power TO ar
rest him.
But over and above the fact that, Ivy the law
Of Canada, no primd fdcie Of murder was
In ,ds ont, 1t further appears that the Ashbur-
ton Treaty ara carefully wortei to prevent IT.
application to cases like the present, or to sane
ton the rendition Of any fugitive slave; ior
WHOM Lord ABERDEEN, in June. lSl3, moved
the adoption OF the lil IN Parmont he dis
timely stated that no fugitive slave cond be
giyeu up under the treaty In the course Of
the debate II was suggested that slave might
be reclaimed as thief, but the Secratcty loI
Foreign Adsirs declared, in words now On re-
clri, mat - If a slave took a horse with him
o. seized upon \ boat, or, in short appropriated
to his use aayJhing that was necessary to hi:
flight, saeh an act could never be held 10 estab
li,h al aaimN tgraadi" tit had not beer
for these sssnrapres and explanations. the " Ex
tradition Of uleniers bll " would never have
in ayoF OF f eitise slaves.
The moral T. be dryed FROM this story is
that under no rreience whatever will Great
Britain conseat t. give up q slave who has ltd
% her territory for protection, even though
Vie dem nd he made upon tx guarantee and
responsibility tie Feicral Government III,
rendition of slave. besides being r,pugnanI
to the sense Of al Glasses Of the community
blth in the Province and in the Mother Land
wonld stu,uty the policy OF the Empire and yio-
late principles established by hundred laws
In this determination of Great Britain to pro-
tect the fugil We and in the Overwhelming pop
ular sympathy that the fate OF ANDERSON has
elcit d, our ) nth 'rn p liticaus may learn the
mousrous adsurdity OF their hope that Con-
iederaey based upon Slavery vii ever be re
cognizrd by the Government or people of Eng
land, or that a wide commercial intercourse can
ever exist between two countries whose sym.
palhi's and Institutions are 50 hostile that the
very act of inter curse will b, attended by in
Vulnerable dangers TO their peaceful relation
ship