New-York daily tribune. [volume] (New-York [N.Y.]) 1842-1866, 1863-03-30
An sNsTRUcT,vE PRECEDENT.

As there seemed to us ~ be grave missppTe-
hcusions aAoat with regard to the natural and
necessary effect Of the Presidents Prociama
tons Of Freedom TO persons held MS slaves
within the States or district, in hagrant rebel.
lion against the Federal Government, Ne some
dave since stated what wo understood that
effect to be, and immediately found thAi we had
stirred up decided breeze. Up 10 this hour,
however no one Of the Opposition Journals, 50
far as we are aware, has questioned the sound
meas Of our exposition, though several have
made much ado over it. We find 10 The Pr'ls
of Saturday an article which seems 10 cas,
additional light on the subject. of which tn
substance is as follows;
At the outbreak OF our Revolution, nearly
or quite oil the reyolted Colonies being then
slnveholding while those south Of Pennsylvania
were prepouderan,Iy so, Gov. Dunmore Of Nlr-
GINA proclaimed tie emancipation of the slaves
in that Colony, as other Royal Governors or
Genernls afterward did further South. OF
course, the rlayeholding Wings were good
deal annoyed and e1asperatcd by this, though
they do not seem To have thought Of the mild
eIpedient suggested by JEFF. Davis, Of hanging
all Royal officers who should be captured
while endeayoring to give effect 10 these Proc
lamations. On the contrary, Mr.. Jefferson,
when Col Tareton made a cavalry raid on
his plantation aud took away good share OF
them, but that he did not. Had il been biz
purpose to give them their liberty" SAID the
patriarch of Democracy, "he pouid hare been
right" A good many thousand negroes lett
their masters on this induccment, aud served
the British in various capacities, many Of them
being taken hence to Halifax aud the West
Indies. The following article was, therefore,
inserted in the Treaty of Paris. which closed
that protracted struggle:
Ar T. That his lrtaun.c Msjrs.y shall with ell eonvs
nieut speed aud without canng any dtIrun az carrying
any Hesy" - o'-r Eo"e,iy 81 ne %e',ss" '-h,S
! United States
Was it perGdy in Great Britain to assent
to this article
In process Of time, grave differences Of
construction we're developed Our Shareholders
claimed that they were entitled by this article
TO the return Of all their negroes who, having
escaped to the British, were carried away by
them, or to recompense therefor. The British
of course didn't see the matter in that light.
The dispute was settled by Jays treaty Q79o),
by our Government ncceding to the British
construction. This was ono ground OF the
furious clalnor raised against that treaty.
ALEXANDER HAMILTON, defending that treaty,
summed up the argument for tho British con.
Q tructiOn Of this article 40 follows:
Tho nssroe, question either ision In the course
Of military operations they Joined The British army upon
ytstion by proclamation However dishonorab' 10 d'ssi
britain tho Iser may have boen al ibera species Of
w.ss there is no ground say that the strict rules OF war
did not warrant that the effect not Ia the one case
"A we'll as In tho other change Of property Ia tbs thing
lHsrnilton, vol T. pare igl.
In the Interpretation Of treaties things odow OF m0rai
are 10 be presumed The abandonment Of negroes who
have been Induced quit their masts on the aith OF
acs proclamation promising them liberty TO fall esan under
Ina yoLo OF thar and int Slavery az odoss ans
i'm uo,ai in0 az ean W oonesrsd odious. not only ~
IGpSs,s ~ sat VI Pory On sas Of the 0satf'"px Ps'