which had been used in the days of Elizabeth, more than once repeated, that the air of England was too pure for a slave to breathe in.

Lord Mansfield (Trinity term, June 22, 1772) gave his final decision very briefly. After reciting the causes assigned by the captain for detaining the negro James Somersett on board of his ship, and making a few preliminary observations, he subjoins, "the only question before us is, whether the cause on the return be sufficient? If it is, the negro must be remanded; if it is not, he must be discharged. Accordingly, the return states, that the slave departed, and refused to serve; whereupon he was kept to be sold abroad. So high an act of dominion must be recognised by the law of the country where it is used. The power of a master over his slave has been extremely different in different countries. The state of slavery is of such a nature, that it is incapable of being introduced on any reasons moral or political; but only positive law, which preserves its force long after the reasons, occasion, and time itself from whence it was created, are erased from memory. It is so odious, that nothing can be suffered to support it, but positive law. Whatever inconveniences, therefore, may follow from a decision, I cannot say this case is allowed or approved by the law of England; and therefore the black must be discharged."

However desirable it must be to the philanthropist, that slaves landing in England should become instantly free, candour requires the admission, that the decision of the above case fails to establish that doctrine. One important point is certainly established by it: A slave accompanying his master to Eng

land, cannot be forcibly sent off the island.

But whether a master bringing a slave into the island, may lawfully exact his services there, is another question. Whether, again, upon a slave landing on the island, the claims of the master become void, or only voidable, may be questioned; but the question is not answered by this decision. It appears, however, by the judgments subsequently pronounced in several cases by the English judges, that the construction has always been in favour of the freedom of the slave, as long as he continued in England. A question still remains, what will be the condition of a slave, who shall visit Great Britain, and return again to the island in which he was previously held? Is the right of the master revived by the return? This is the question whose decision has recently produced such an effervescence in the English community.

A female of the name of Grace, held as a slave in Antigua, was taken to England as an attendant upon her mistress, a planter's wife. There she remained for some time as a servant, and upon the return of her mistress to Antigua, she accompanied her thither. A question was afterwards raised respecting her freedom. Several points were made; but the principal question, and, indeed, the only one which involves a general principle, was, whether the power of the owner, which is admitted to have become dormant while the woman remained in Great Britain, was revived on her return to Antigua? The cause was tried before one of the local tribunals, and decided against the freedom of the woman. An appeal was made to the high court of

viem utre a DRE vman 19 Se Wilian bat, he jung nent te IT VAW W unirmen.

Tie wiga ansuters tus mesin m tenending in the neon Someren 12. i 19 Tre hata e ata te n Fire at that the uter unt muiritur paner gun. E

da saming inm de ut anties Cenas Brain, ather via W VEHO us afer, thes ane teme : ut hat us master ny egaly umpet tim

tura dhe pancitos: eut z sinar ignent prinomeet a vy Sir Philly Turks, then tecome icet ¦ chancalor, utting in a menu than-¦ sary. Her the learned pigs seeme to intreg a parality for the date-aciding side of the question. He appears to consider the practice of boying and selling dares on the exchange and other places of pacle resort in London. 1 in edena of general acquiescence with the decision of the chancellor, and a national sanction of this opprobrious trike. This judgment, says he, was m no more than twenty-two years reversed by Lord Mansfeld. The decision of Lord Mansfield, he says, established the doctrine, that the owners of slaves had no authority or control over them in England, nor was there any power of sending them back to the colonies. This is represented as a sudden change, the reversal of a decision which had been delivered by lawyers of the greatest ability in the country; and the proscription of a system confirmed by a practice which had obtained, without exception, ever since the institution of slavery in the colonics, and supported by the general practice of the nation, and by the pubhe establishment of its government, and it seems without any apparent op

bustion in the par te munic. F would in Trust ins at us Set mom si fra sy num zaninly, fa utitte num sarde n be emmung mit mat #tet, is le mumiy mint, fint the practica o sazng saves ʼn ne srams. aut puniey Tuficzng n der jezens. unter or if eru Bujorca, IMÉ sest e scow Katon of de me painarge part of the community. These ences being staibarat uni mmsbut by the gimmuns T Turke unt Tabor ant de siseptent fermom if the former ʼn agacity of art chanceler, and engaged a number of awyers of the greatest as a the ringiom, to extane more deepLT The foundation of the doctones on vici the traders were acting; and in consequence of the new Erit which was shed on this momentous sect by these laborious ingaties, as wel as the repulsive character of the existing traffe, the latter decision was obtained. The learned judge seems to think that Lord Mansfeld made his decision rather broader than the question before him required; and yet his own construction of that decision is unquestionably an extension which is not essential to it. He considers the sole question, which it was necessary to decide, to be, whether the slave could be taken out of the country to be returned to slavery in the West Indies? And that was the question really decided. The reason of the decision, it is true, is rather broader than the decision itself. 66 Slavery is so odious that it cannot be supported without positive law."

Here the judge endeavours to show, that villenage, the supposed English prototype of slavery, and the slavery of

of the West Indies, have a similar origin; both being founded in custom. Without pretending to argue a question of law with Sir W. Scott, I may observe, that the West Indian slavery has not the same foundation as English villenage; it is not founded on immemorial usage. It did not descend with the customs which compose an acknowledged part of the common law, from times beyond the memory of man.* And, therefore, unless this system has a foundation of its own, it can have no legal foundation at all. Sir William expresses a doubt whether the resemblance between villenage and African slavery was so close as to effect, by the decay of the former, the fall of the latter in England. He considers the sentence of emancipation, pronounced by Lord Mansfield, as owing to the increased refinement of the sentiments and manners of the age, rather than to the decay of the two systems of villenage. He proceeds to show, that the decision in Somersett's case did not extend beyond the island of Great Britain, and was so understood by Hargrave, one of the most eminent of the advocates. The present question, he says, might have been then settled, by act of parliament, with very little comparative difficulty, and if then so settled, would have saved abundance of trouble.

Admitting that a slave; landing in England, becomes free, he proceeds to the question, what effect is produced by his return to the colony where he was held as a slave. This return is tacitly presumed to be voluntary. One

*A custom is not good in English law, if it can be shown to have commenced since the reign of Richard the first.

VOL. I.--40

Black

argument, to show that he returns to slavery, is founded on the fact, that, during the time which has elapsed since the case of Somersett was decided, no instance has occurred, in which the attention of English justice has been called to the case. The uniform practice on one side, and acquiescence on the other, are construed as a presumption in favour of the claimants. seamen have been employed in navigating the West Indian ships to Great Britain, and yet the slavery of the West Indies has not been interrupted on that account. Slaves have come into Great Britain, and passed out of it, in returning to the colonies, in the same character of slaves. No doubt has been entertained of their state, after the return, whatever it might have been while in England. The practice of the colonies, in this particular, has not been interrupted or restrained by the mother country. This may be considered as presumptive evidence of its legality. Policy also peeps out. If the nume rous slaves in the West Indian archipelago, who have been in England, or whose mothers have been there, were now declared free, a set of important and complicated interests, on both sides of the Atlantic, would be affected.

A difficult question has to be met, in order to support the conclusion in favour of slavery. A person landing in Great Britain is admitted to be actually free, not merely liable to become free. The ownership has become extinct, and not merely dormant. The maxim of law, which grew into popular use during the decay of villenage,

age, while in a state of decay; that negro slavery is not an exact copy of villenage, and that, as villenage did not travel out of England, its laws and maxims do not control, and have never been used to control, their transatlantic possessions. The question is made to turn essentially upon the difference between the laws of the mother country and those of the colonies: and upon the principles which have been permitted to govern on the different sides of the Atlantic. While slavery has been discountenanced at home, it has been encouraged and supported in the colonial dependencies.

Taking this decision, and the arguments by which it is accompanied, as an exposition of the present law of Great Britain, in relation to slaves, the matter may be summed up in a few words. A slave passing, with or without the consent of his master, from a slave colony dependant upon Great Britain to the mother country, or taking refuge on board an English ship of war, becomes immediately free, and cannot be lawfully carried back by force into the colony from which he escaped. But a slave having thus become free, and returning to the colony from which he escaped, relapses into his original state of slavery.

May we not be permitted to hope, that, if this decision should not be reversed, the case may obtain the attention of parliament? If the air of England is not yet too pure to sustain a dormant slavery, probably an act of parliament might be procured which would impart to it all its boasted purity.

It may be observed, that the air of several of our states is nearly as pure as that of Great Britain; and had not

this quality been impaired by an article of the constitution, would probably have been wholly so. One case may, and sometimes does, occur, in which these non slave-holding states furnish a complete asylum to the slave.When a master is accompanied by his slave into one of the free states, the latter may choose his own time for returning into slavery; there is no law to compel his return. An instance of this kind occurred a few years ago in this city. Upon application to Judge Washington for a certificate to authorise his removal, the judge replied, that, as the slave did not escape from another state or territory into this, he had no authority to direct his return; the man must choose for himself whether to go back with his master or not.

Manufactures.-The Petersburg Intelligencer, in some remarks on the prospect of Virginia becoming a manufacturing state, and on her present condition, draws the following glowing but doubtless accurate sketch of her present condition :

However, the season for serious reflection has arrived. For years Virginia and other states to the south have been evidently on the decline, while N. York and her northern and eastern sisters have flourished in a measure beyond example. One reason is, that we have depended alone on agriculture, the products of which year after year have fallen in price; while they have turned their attention to manufactures and commerce, as auxiliary branches necessary to assist and sustain that which is the main pillar of a nation's strength. Is this so? Our decaying towns, and deserted plantations, present a melancholy and heart-sickening contrast to their wealthy cities, and hundreds of thriving villages that have risen like exhalations-and where are our great public works to vie with theirs? our canals, roads, bridgeswhere? But what shall be our remedy? Let us avail ourselves of the bounties

of nature, and embrace the advantages presented by circumstanceslet us establish manufactures, at least to an extent sufficient for domestic consumption-thus providing partially a home market for one of the great staples of our agriculture, at the same time lessening so far the outgoing of our people. Let us, in fine, if we are not dead to our own interests-if we are at all ambitious of rivalling the great states of the north and east-let us profit by their example.

This will unquestionably be good policy. But what is that example? The establishment of manufactories, I suppose. Who then are the operatives? The answer is easy-free men, and not slaves. The editor of the Intelligencer may be assured it is the difference in the condition of the operatives, not in the nature of their employments, that causes New York and her eastern sisters to flourish, while Virginia, with all her natural advantages, is verging to decay. It has been a question among political economists, whether agriculture or manufactures ought to be preferred. Adam Smith considered the former as the proper source of national wealth. Certain it is, that nations have flourished, and made rapid advances in the accumulation of wealth, among whom manufactures were either neglected, or carried on to a very limited extent. Our own country furnishes a striking example. Who can deny that our situation, as a nation, was highly prosperous, while our surplus agriculture was feeding the operatives and the warriors of Europe, and our manufactures derived from the workshops of the eastern world? But no nation has ever been permanently prosperous where the labourers were slaves. When Virginia converts her slave population into a hardy yeomanry, labouring for their own advantage, and

applying the powers of their minds to the improvement of their condition, then, but not before, she may rival N. York and her sister republics. This change in the character of her people, can only be effected in time; but the longer the work is delayed, the further must the state recede from her once prominent station among the states of the Union.

LEGISLATION OF SOUTH CAROLINA.

Among the proceedings of the legislature at Columbia (S. C.) during the present session, the following may be taken as a specimen of the predominant feeling in regard to the people of colour.

One of a string of inquiries which a committee of the house was directed to make is, whether Congress can legislate, directly or indirectly, upon the subject of slavery, by promoting the object of any society which contemplates a melioration of the condition of any portion of the free coloured or slave population of the United States. The report of the committee on this subject, subsequently given, is

Resolved, That the American Colonization Society is not an object of national interest, and that Congress has no power, in any way to patronize, or direct appropriations, for the benefit of this or any other society.

Charleston Courier.

It is not necessary to inquire whether the plan adopted by the Colonization Society is the most eligible that could have been devised, to attain the avowed object of the association-the melioration of the condition of the black population in the United States, and the relief of the white inhabitants from the incovenience and perils resulting from the increase of a dangerous class. The object of these legislative measures obviously is to discountenance any attempt to meliorate