Publisher's Synopsis
This historic book may have numerous typos and missing text. Purchasers can usually download a free scanned copy of the original book (without typos) from the publisher. Not indexed. Not illustrated. 1838 edition. Excerpt: ... the common law: the only difference with regard to the apprenticeship of persons who were slaves, being this, that the test of slavery, which is 'due registration, ' is requisite to the bringing the emancipated slave within the restrictive operation of the law. If a consequence of freedom be the proper understanding of one's rights and duties, a man cannot be lawfully controlled by another, without information on the nature and character of the dominant right. The registration of apprentices seems clearly analogous to the registration of vessels under the navigation laws, which declare confiscation the penalty of non-registration; and the non-production of the Register, presumptive evidence of piracy or illegal trading, which justifies her seizure, and condemnation at law." Grand Court, Spanish Totem. Tuesday, June 6, 1837. Bayley v. Ewart.--" Mr. Justice Bernard delivered his reasons for dissenting from the judgment of the majority of the count, as follows: -- Mr. Justice Bernard.--" The plaintiff in this case seeks to recover his immediate discharge from the remainder of the term of apprenticeship, created by the acts for the abolition of slavery; and the fact upon which he rests his claims is, that, although returned by his former owner, and included among his slaves as required by the 57th Geo. Ill, chap. 15, commonly called the Registry Act, for the years 1817, 1820, 1823, 1826, and 1829; yet, inasmuch as he was not included in any return for 1832, he has not been duly registered in conformity with the laws in force in this island; that he therefore did not pass into apprenticeship, under the 1st clause of the 3rd and 4th William IV, c. 73, and did not incur the obligation imposed by that act, and that of consequence under the...
