Brownlow's Knoxville Whig. [volume] (Knoxville, Tenn.) 1866-1869, 1868-11-25

4 ami, ma. aa,sa BY ahososn ~ ne Peace
os 80 80, Blsokmaa, before Jasee q N.rbor
s,bs co7uty of Montgomery, on "a vas tried
1865 Tbs justice before - ne pisinta for the sum
renaerea ,s rom which the defendant hppealcd
=, he circuit Court Of honigo@sI3 !. a.
tria' -. dsesndang Tb4 plaintiff moves for a rev
i sicb being ovsrruled be has prosecuted an appeal
- IN error 70 this court -. -, a. II
- 10 the Jury Upon agreed state Of facts, from
b;b n appears that Gholson, the administrator Of
,hs ,Tsato Of A. NJ. Rogerf, deceased, hired woman
named Ellen to BlaollnaB, fos The years 1850, 81,
,ez and Isss SAID womah Ellen, and her Charles
eontuusd in tho service a. employ - Biaekmsu from
IssS az 70 the 9zd q FebAsgy, 1893.
TIE military forces Of Re United States occaped the
town Of ClaTksEihs mfitary post during The year
1854 and up 20 the ga oil February, 1868 daring The
whole Of which time Blafkinau lived within tbs liets OF
said post During this pHod great May faTes came
within the lines, snd did they pleased far a. Their
masters concerned. No master could control hs
slave They hirsi tbemtelves 10 whom they pleased
aud received Che hire ldaay Of the ciizsnf Of Oarf
vile we're compelled TO lire these negroes DO without
servautf aud il was their qommon practice 10 hire any
negro they wanted who would consent live with them
Blackman paid Gholson for the hire up 1884, and this
suit is brought recover he hire for The year i0s ana
mp 10 the 22d Of February. 1885.
At the first Of the yo 1864 sho huIband Of the Wo-
Ellen notified Blstmah that be must not pay
GholfOn any fafibH fer her hire, and that hom thas
timc the wages mhsi be paid fo Der, ane aceordngy
Baekman paid the wgsnn her hire Tor the years 1903
Gholson fthe a.imBistrator, was al time in tho
rebel army So also Of the heirs OF the nteatAe
Rogers bu, there other heirs Of The nestae Sho
were infaBss and had participation IN tins rebellion.
Under this general state Of facts, dis Honor the Cir
cut Judge Instructed the jury at tae facts Of The case
that the defendant paid the hire 70 the negro under
the circumstances enumerated you will fud Tor the de-
PENDANT II on The contrary you val find for the plain
til"
We think ttns insiruotiou was erroneous There San
certainly be questions bat that the Law stood prior
10 the breaking DOT Of the recent rebellion the plaintiff
would have entitled % Of the defendant the
hire Of said laves whilst they remained in bis service
part the defendant 70 pay the same and is equally
clear that payment 20 ths slave would not have dis
charged liability Of the defendant on account of the
hire The question tbe., arises aave the rules Of law
bv which the rights aud liabilities Of the parties would
have been stated, been changed abrogated and
II is insisted in argument that inasnuch a. Ghoson
the administrator, and Of tho heirs Of the intesate
Rogers once 10 the rebel army, and said slaves
were within the town Of CarkEvile while IL was occupied
By military forces Of the United States therefore,
der the provisions Of the of Congress approved
March 49, 1862, entitled Fan act 10 make additional
article Of war, and Of the act approved July IL, 1862
entitled "An act 10 suppress instruction, etc. Said
eaPtTes Ofwa aud became free prior to the
hiring IN so. ~. .t.
this proposition cna be maintained The act Of the Is h
Of March, 1852 vel I2 United States statutes a large,
$50 does nothing thas 70 prohibit officers or per
sons the military naval Service Of the United States
from employing any Of the forces under their respective
commands for the Purpose Of retaining fagives from
service labor who may have escaped from any persons
10 whom such service or labor is claimed 10 be due.
This is only additional article Of war, and was only
designed TO govern the conduct Of those who IN the
military or naval service Of the United States and did
in any manner affect the rights Of property or liabi
tiles Of others.
The provisions Of the act Of July n, 1862 relied up
on arc Incorporated 10 tbs 9th section Of the act ard
As FooNs: "That 3l slaves of persons who shall here
after be engaged IN rebellion against the Government of
the United Staes who shall In any way give aid
comfort thereto escaping from such persons and taking
refuge within the lines of tho army and ell slaves cap
ured from puch porsns OF deserted BY them and coming
under the control Of the Government Of the United States
and all slaves Of such persons found being within
any place occupied by rebel forces aud afterwards
pied by the forced Of the United States shall be deemed
oapiyes Of war and shall be forever free Of their servi
tade and gain held slaves" Volume IL, United
States at large SOL II has likewise been inss
ted 10 arguments rst that both these acts Of Congress-
are unconstitutional second that the act Of the admin
straor 10 engaging 10 rebellion could not in any man
affect the property belonging to the estate OF bis in
tesale third that Of several heirs distributes
could not by engaging IL the rebellion, thereby preu
dice the rights Of others.
We will not now stop TO discuss those several propo
sens express any opinion touching them, because
they do properly arise r the cause and their decis
ion not necessary 10 az adjudication Of the rights Of
the parties IL is sufficient TO say It does not appear
from the fccs presented BY this record that any person
% whom said slaves belonged who had any interest In
them has vince the passage Of the act Of July ~ 1862
engaged in any rebellion agains. the Government Of the
thereto consequently the provisions Of the statute do
not apply; neither The statue OF these slaves the
rights liabilities Of The parties are in any manner
But the instruction Of his Honor to the Jury seems 10
have been based upon entirely different grounds from
those relied upon in this court Among other things be
said 60 the Jury
n ruling the law in this case the court cannot over
look the fact that the--day--, 1856, the Pres
ilent Of the United States issued proclamation de-
clarng the Negro free This proclamation at the time
hacked an N n mill
or, both upon land and which certainly increased
up 70 the termination Of the war.
II affected the Independence Of individuals tended
TO OvShroW Institutions and eonTentonaisms States
for the time being EhOrn Of their prerOgaves all be-
subordineted 20 this power and as a necessary
and inevitable consequence the relation Of master and
slave pending the latter years Of the was in point
Of fact suspended, which terminated by consent Of
master and States into absolute and fixed change |
going in fact to the extreme Of making the negros
legal status freeman. SO Il Is that sitter the rela-
ton Of master and slave suspended derHnged the
masters class recovered their control and
authority the slave but in the end, by The national
will and decree, lost forever This revelation, although
rapid regular, and perhaps in point Of fact, the
emancipation Of slavery by tho States only ratii
cation Of the proclamation Of emancipaiOn or putting
II necessary that We enter fully discussion
Of the principles stated by his Honor in this pcrhon Of
his instructions 20 The jury Tor IS we conceive they are
based upon assumption OF fact and cOnss-
queuty have application whatever 10 The case under
consideration. They 10 have been based upon the
%
had time issued proclamation declaring all
slaves 10 the United States free When IN fact such
proclamation ever issued.
Ii is true that the President Commander in chief
Of the army and navy Of the United States did, the
hrs day of January, 1863 moasaro and for the
suppression Of the then existing rebellion against the
authority Of the Government Of the United States issue
a proclamation by which he declared that al persons
hei slaves in oerain designated States aud parts of
States should thenceorward be free But Tennessee was
not Of the designated States any part there
If dpFiQunfed Therefore tho
slaves in the State Of Tennessee not changed nor
were the rights Of parties IN reference TO this species
property in Tennessee affected, proposed 70 be Affect
cd by this proclamation IL bad reference whatever
10 either
Then it cannot be said that the emancipation Of the
slaves in Tennessee by amendment Of the constitution
Of the State adopted and rsthed By the people Of the
Sae the 22d Of February, 1855, either ratihcg
ton Of the proclamation Of The President putting
the seal 30 the decd For have before shown the
proclamation did not offer freedom 10 the person held
slave in Tennessee, consequently ratification Of
that proclamation could have given freedom 10 any such
person. There then deed OF emancipation Of the
slave IN Tennessee to which seal could be attached.
The amendment c the constitution Of the State ratif
Cd on the 22d Of February 1885, is itself the deed Of
emancipation by which the ponds Of slavery were dis
solved and that class Of Pertons held slaves In Ten
nessee were emancipated
argued, aud perhaps 10 some exaont his Honor the
veu Judge recognized The correctness Of the PROPOSE
, aun, eA nssmuch as during the stormy struggle
through which We have recently passed IA many iustan-
ces masters were unable 10 control th;, si.s o as
ssmea 70 DC Tree, and havo been since emsnoipafed
s ~ we're IN legal contemplation, free, in fact
from ulat time hencefsrwara The % VI 49,, 49,, "a "a
my rSht Of property IN the slave We o.nnot 60, 81
hser hsa- es u p'aP9sitloE. Now had the contest
80 see"esn teeoom upon the one hand - .1.-. /
upon the other, and frsedom had ,Tinr ana slavery
maps the principle eontonded Tor would ~ wen PEI
i -. 60 "ss ohee sieve would be held a. hsv
ing oeen ne ron the beginning Of the ttrurcl = s
tne TINE az which be declared himself 49, VI H0n
e u ss s va not the issue The struggle was a, n