OCR Text |
Show 32 NOTES ON 'l'he rigor of the law is the extreme of injustico. And that this is really so, might easily be shown in instances almost innumerable. ~'o mention but one or t'TO: The laws of most civilized nations recognize the principle of prescription ;-that where, for instance, a man has been in undisputed possession, for a certain number of years, (twenty is the usual number,) of a piece of bud, the law will not disturb his possession; and the provision is a wise one, for it operates to quiet titles antl prevent litigation. But suppose a landed proprietor, who is wa1lowing in wealth, takes advantage of the provision to keep possession of a few acres which he knows belong in justice to his poor neighbour, who has been prevented by some cause beyond his control, (shipwreck, for instance, and detention in an enemy's territory, or among a barbarou~ people,) from asserting his title within the limited time, would not every honow·able man cry out against such conduct as worthy of universal execration? Or again; take the statute of limitations, which is de· signed as a safeguard against fraudulent chims, trumped up against a man, when, from lapse of time, be could not easily find testimony to disprove them, and suppose a just debt, by some fault or mischance of the creditor, barred, or, as the popular term is, outlawed, by the statute; if the debtor takes any other advantage of the fact than to keep himself out of the clutches of the law till he can obtain the means to pay the debt, he can loy no claim to the character of an honest man. The Jaw of bankruptcy is another instance in point; and I might go on to mention several others, but as many of them will come in more appropriately when J come to tako up the author's specific charges, already quoted, I shall defer them till then. A word upon the police regulations of the slave-code. Our author has said little or nothing about them, either because she considered them of little consequence, or because. U X CLE ·roM' S CARI N . 33 she thought they were, on the whole, neither oppressive nor unjust. 'rheso regulations arc founUed in necessity, nnd arc therefore the more rigorous in tho more southern of the slaveholding States. No doubt they arc often irksome to the sla.ve, but so arc parental restraints often very irk.som~ to the child; nnd yet parental restraint, properly apphed, IS a good thing; and so arc the police restraints of the sl~ve·code. At any rate, that they are necessary, we may fatrly mfer from the fact that the masters, by enacting them, subject themselves, in most cases, to great trouble n.nd inconve-nience, which they certainly would not be disposed to do unnecessarily; and the some may be said of most of tho other provisions of the sbvc·eodc. Indeed, our author herself, not only admits, but even maint::tins their necessity to the continuance of the system, and that, too, in some cases where, in fact, they are not necessary; but instead of draw· in(l' from this fact the inference of their just.icc, she draws fr~m it the inference of the injustice of the system which requires such enactments. This inferuncc I shall have occasion to controvert in the sequel; I might, therefore, fairly pass over the specific objections before-mentioned: but as some of them arc palpable misrepresentations of fact, :>nt! others lie with equal weight against recognised laws and customs in all free civilized communities, I prefer to take them up, and dispose of them one by one. In the Appendix will be found a collection of extrncts from tho statutes and decisions of several of the slavcholding States. I would not be unllcrstood as mainta.ining thn t they are all to be found in the code of each State: I do not say this, for it is not true; but I do say that I sco no reason why they should not all be introduced into each State, and that if they were, they would, it seems to me, leave little to be desired in tho way either of alteration or of addition. 5 |