city (Mr. Thomas) argued this point upon
that question.
Mr. STIRLING. That argument was made
upon another question which embraced it
The other question was whether the legisla-
ture should provide compensation for eman-
cipated slaves. That necessarily involved
the question of the right of property; but this
does not.
Mr. MILLER. Upon that question the gen-
tleman from Baltimore city (Mr. Thomas)
was allowed to make his argument upon
slavery.
Mr. THOMAS. My argument was only in
reply to the argument of the gentleman from
Anne Arundel (Mr. Miller) yesterday morn-
ing.
The CHAIRMAN (Mr. Hollyday.) As the ar-
gument has been allowed this latitude, the
gentleman has a right to proceed.
Mr. MILLER resumed: "Judge Blackstone
in his commentaries in 1775, 11th edition,
vol. 1, p. 127, says, that a slave or negro the
moment he lands in England falls under the
protection of the laws, and so far becomes a
freeman; though the master's right to his
service may probably still continue. And in
page 424, repeats the same, and adds, that
the law will protect him in the enjoyment of
his person and property; but yet with re-
gard to any right which the master may law-
fully have acquired to the perpetual service
of John or Thomas, this will remain in exact-
ly the same state as before; for this is no
more than the same subjection for life, which
every apprentice submit? to for the space of
seven years or more, &c.
" In the British books, slaves are some-
times called slaves or servants; and it is said
by Lord Mansfield in Somerset's case, that
there may be a villein in gross by confession.
In the case of Somerset in 1772, Lord Mans-
field mentioned the opinions of Sir Philip
Yorke, and Lord Chief Justice Talbot, in
1729, and recognized by Lord Hardwicke in
1749, and calls them two of the greatest men
of their own or any times, and says he pays
all due attention to their opinions. Lord
Mansfield puts several questions as to the law
with respect to their settlements, their wages,
actions for any slight coercion by their mas-
ters. In Somerset's case the court declined
deciding the question, whether by being car-
ried to England he thereby became free; but
say, that they would judge upon the return
of the habeas corpus, and according to their
own laws, which did not admit of so high an
act of dominion as in that case had been ex-
ercised by the master over his slave, and
therefore that Somerset must be discharged.
Lord Mansfield in Somerset's case »ays, that
the state of slavery is so odious that nothing
can be suffered lo support it but positive
law.
"In this collision of individual opinions,
and opposing decisions in the British books, |
this court will not say what would have been
the decision of a British tribunal upon the
question stated in the exception."
So that the court have not decided that by
the common law of England slavery did not
exist.
Mr. THOMAS. No; they dodged that ques-
tion; but Judge Chase decided that in the
general court, and they did not overrule that.
Mr. MILLER. This is the decision of the
Court of Appeals upon the exceptions taken
in the court below. After consideration of
the decision given in the court below, the
Court of Appeals reversed it.
" And acting as a court of an independent
country, unfettered by any political stipula-
tions on subjects of this nature, and bound
to decide according to the laws of this State,
they do not consider themselves at liberty to
adopt an opinion that might possibly prevail
in a foreign tribunal."
The instructions given to the court below
which this court reversed were these :
"That if from the evidence in this cause
they are of the opinion that a woman called
Joice, the ancestor of the petitioner, was a
negro woman carried with her owner, claim-
ing her as a slave, from the island of Barba-
does to England, and afterwards brought into
this country by Lord Baltimore, claiming her
as a slave, between the years 1678 and 1681,
and that she, during her life was held, used
and treated as a slave, and that her issue have
been held as slaves ever since, that then they
must find a verdict for the defendant."
Mr. BARRON (interposing.) One word for
information, we have got nothing to do
with what was done in those days. The
question with us is whether we shall now be a
free or a slave State.
Mr. MILLER. That question has been de-
cided by this convention. The court be-
low, as I was saying, had instructed the jury
upon that state of facts, that the petitioner
was entitled to freedom; and the Court of
Appeals reversed it. The Court of Appeals
says:
" This ease being brought before the court
by original proceeding, we are of opinion
that it must be governed by the law of this
State; and that in this case, however the laws
of Great Britain in such instances operating
upon such persons there, might interpose so
as to prevent the exercise of certain acts by
the master, not permitted, as in the case of
Somerset; yet upon the bringing Ann Joice
into this State, then the province of Mary-
land, the relation of master and slave con-
tinued in its extent as authorized by the laws
of this State; and therefore that the judgement
of the general court most be reversed."
Mr THOMAS. Will the gentleman allow
me to ask whether the Court of Appeals in
that decision did not entirely exclude the
common law, and decide the case according
to the act of Maryland of 1715? |
