The American slave code in theory and practice: its distinctive features shown by its statues, judicial decisions, and illustrative facts

Front matter

T.

rO-

'f lN^

Contents

PAGE

Preliminary. Chapter, 15

P A E T I.

Chapter I

OF THE GROUND AND NATURE OF THE SLAVe's CIVIL CONDITION.

The Civil Condition of the Slave grows out of his relation to his Master, as Property, and is determined and defined by it, 289

Chapter II

NO ACCESS TO THE JUDICIARY, AND NO HONEST PROVISION FOR TESTING THE CLAIMS OF THE ENSLAVED TO FREEDOM.

" A Slave cannot be a Party to a Civil Suit." (Stroud.) 295

CHAPTER HI.

BEJECTION OF TESTIMONY OF SLAVES AND FREE COLORED PERSONS.

Slavery Is upheld by suppressing the testimony of its Tictims, 30O

YIU CONTENTS.

CnAl^TER IV.

SUBJECTION TO ALL "WHITE PERSOXS.

Submission is required of llic Slave, not only to Ihe will of his Master, but to the will 01' all oilicr ly/iite Fcnons ! '' 305

CHAPTER V.

PENAL LAWS AGAINST SLAVES.

The Laws are unequal ; Iheir administration despoiic: their execution barbarous. Even this is exceeded by "Lynch Law," 309

CHAPTER VI.

EDUCATION PROHIBITED.

The Slave, not being regarded as a Member of Society, nor as a Human Being, the Government, instead of providing for his Kducaliou, takes care to forbid it, as being inconsislenl « ith the coudiliou of CuUelhuod, 3 19

CHAPTER VII.

FREE SOCIAL WORSHIP AND RELIGIOUS INSTRUCTION PROHIB- ITED.

The Government not only allows the Master to forbid the Free Social Worship and Inslruclion of his Slaves, but il also steps in with direct prohibitions of its own, which even the Blaster himself may not relax or abrogate, 3i6

CHAPTER VIII.

LEGISLATIVE, JUDICIAL, AND CONSTITUTIONAL OBSTRUCTIONS TO EMANCIPATION.

The Statutes of the Slave States not only make no provision for a general Emancipation, but Ihey obstruct and prevent Emancipations by the Master. And the Constitutions of some of the Slates forbid the Legislatures to abolish Slavery, 334

CONTENTS. ix

P A E T III.

Relation of the Slave Code to the Liberties of the Free, 353

CHAPTER I.

liberties of the free people of color.

The free People of Color, though not in a condition of ChattelhoocI, are con- Btautly exposed to it, and, at best, enjoy only a portion of their rights, .... 3.15

CHAPTER H.

liberties of the white people of the slaveholdixg states.

The AVhite People of the Slaveholding States, whether Slaveholders or Non- Slaveholder;', are deprived, by the Slave Code, of some of their essential Right?, and cannot be regarded as a people in possession of Civil, Religious and Political Freedom, .... 372

CHAPTER HI.

LIBERTIES OF THE WHITE PEOPLE OF THE NON-SLAVEIIOLDING STATES.

The Rights of the White People of the Non-Slaveholding States are directly and indirectly invaded by the Slave Code of the Slave States ; their Liberties, to a great extent, have already fallen a sacrifice, and can never be secure while Slaveholding continues, 389

CONCLUDING CHAPTER.

Summary Review of the Slave Code; its Cliaructer and Eflects— Inquiries concerning the Duty of Christians, Churches, and Ministers — The Responsibilities of Citizens, of Society, of Civil Government, of Legislators, of Magistrates — Scrutiny of the Legality of American Slavery — Tlie Heavenprescribed Remedy— The W( rthlessncss of Temporizing Expedients— Closing Appeal, 394

1*

LETTER FROM HON. WILLIAM JAY TO THE AUTHOR.

New-Yokk, 25th January, 1853.

Rev. axd Dear Sir :

On returning the ]\1SS. of your "American Slave Code, in Theory and Practice" I must ask you to accept my thanks for writing it, as well as for favoring me with its early perusal. Surely, never before has mischief been framed by law with more diabolical ingenuity than in this infernal code. Your analysis of the slave laws is very able, and j-our exhibition of their practical application by the Southern Courts, evinces great and careful research.

It is more easy to make than to refute a charge of exaggeration against a work of fiction like Mrs. Stowe's ; but your book is as impregnable against such a chai-ge as is Euclid's Geometry, since, like that, it consists of propositions and demonstrations. The book is not only true, but it is nnqicestionahly true. You show us the rack constructed " according to law ;" we examine, at our leisure, the cruel but skilful contrivance of its machinery ; we see the ministers of the law bind the victim on the instrument of torture ; we see one feature of humanity after another crushed and obliterated, till at last an immortal man, made a little lower than the angels, and for whose redemption the Son of God shed his blood ou the cross, is converted into a beast of burden — a vendible animal, scourged at the will of its owner, and offered for sale in the market with horses and oxen.

Your book will take from our Xorthern dough-faces and slave-catchers the flatteiing miction they are laying to their souls that

LETTER TO THE AUTHOR.

" Uncle Tom's Cabin " is a gross exaggeration ; that, of course, slavery is, after all, not so \ery bad ; and that they, in doing its biddings, are not as base as they seem to be. You show tliem that the most educated and refined among the slaveholders have, for the past century, as legislators, been deliberately enacting the most fiendish of laws, in utter defiance of the moral sense of mankind, and the precepts of the blessed gospel of the Lord Jesus; and that their grave and learned judges have enforced these accursed statutes, in all their execrable rigor, thus giving a solemn sanction to the atrocities portrayed by Mrs. Stowe and others without number, still more aggravated by investing them with legal impunity.

May God make your book a means of awakening the consciences of our cotton divines to the deep sin of upholding, in the name of the blessed and adorable Redeemer, a system so damnable as American Slavery ! These reverend pro-slavery champions of Christianity resemble the priests of Juggernaut, recommending the worship of their god by pointing to the wretches writhing, and shrieking, and expiring under his car.

That the blessing of God may rest on your labors for his glory and the good of our sufl'ering and oppressed brethi-en, is the fervent pra3'er of

Tour friend and servant,

T7ILLLVM JAY.

Rev. Willlvm Goodell.

THE AMEEICAK SLAYE CODE.

THE AMERICAN SLAVE CODE.

PRELIMINARY CHAPTER.

OCCASIONS AND USES FOR THIS VOLUME.

The practical importance of an exact knowledge of the Slave Code and of its legitimate workings, will be manifest from the considerations that follow.

It is often maintained that the "legal relation of master and slave" is not a criminal one, and that there is no sin, or moral wrong, in the mere fact of sustaining that relation. On the other hand, it is held that the relation is wrong in itself, and cannot be innocently sustained.

Such a question cannot, intelligently, be settled without a correct understanding of that " legal relation," and of the particulars in which it consists. And it is only by the Slave Code of the country that " the legal relation" can be ascertained. By this, and by this only, is it to be defined. " The legal relation of master and slave" is what the Slave Code declares it to be. And it is nothing else.

It is worse than mere trifling, it is evasion and sophistr}', to ransack the archives of some other age

16 THE A:\rERICAN SLAVE CODE.

and nation for the laws and usages wliich then constituted slavery, or whicli we may now choose to call slavery ; and then, on the assumed (or even the ascertained) innocency or divine sanction or tolerance of tliose usages, to argue the innocency of the existing "relation of master and slave" in this country. Sincere and honest inquirers are bound to ascertain "the legal relation of master and slave" as it now exists in America, in virtue of the code that authorizes and defines it. They are bound to bring " the legal relation," as thus defined and ascertained, to the standard of the Divine will, and say to whether or no it corresponds with that standard. The question whether it is right or wrong to sanction such a " legal relation" by "sustaining" it, will then be easily settled.

ISTo man, in America, can hold a slave by any other tenure, or in any other "relation," than that Avhich the American Slave Code describes. lie cannot hold a slave under the code of Moses, (if it ever could have been done,) nor under the usages of Abraham's day, for no such code or usages now exist. If he relinquishes the hold on his slave that the American Slave Code gives him, he manumits him, at once and entirely. Let him do this, or let that code be blotted out, and he cannot forcibly retain a man in bondage a single day, without becoming a felon in the eye of the law. So that in "sustaining the legal relation," he sustains and sanctions the code, and its character becomes his. The more unsullied his reputation may be in other respects, the more effectually does his

PRELIMINARY CHAPTER. 17

example of slaveliolding sanctiou the system, and rivet the chains of the slave.

It must be futile and absurd to decry the code, and yet attem^Dt to justify him who holds a slave under it. The code would harm no one, if no one ever made nse of it. The Avorst that can properly be said of the code is, that it enables men who are thus disposed to hold the " relation" described by it. For, the very men for whose consideration we make this remark are forward to tell ns that the system (in other words, the code) is not to be held, resjjonsible for the mere abuses committed nnder it. It must, then, be responsible for the relation, and those who sustain the relation must be responsible for it.

IVe propose, then, hy an exhibition of the American Slave Code, to test the moral character of American slaveholding. The practice (in the absence of mere abuses) cannot be better than the code, or rule of conduct, that gives it license and sanction.

On the other hand, the usages under any code are seldom or never better than the code itself. Communities are not forward to proclaim themselves worse than they are, by giving public license to evil practices not prevalent among them, and which they do not intend to practise and sustain. " No people," says a learned writer and profound thinker,* " were ever yet found who were better than their laws, though many have been known to be worse."

The only exceptions to this rule are where bad laws

* Dr. Priestley.

are forced upon a community without their consent ; or where, from their odiousness, or by the progress of civilization since their enactment, they have becqme obsolete. " In our own country, the people (except the victims of the Slave Code) enact their own statutes. And in the present investigation it Avill be made apparent that the Slave Code has not become obsolete.

The present contest for the abolition of American slavery has encountered a species of opposition which it has been dijQBcult to meet. If existing j)ractices are arraigned, we are told that these are only abuses of the system, which argue nothing against the innocent "legal relation." Thus all efforts for the abolition of that innocent relation are discountenanced and disparaged. At the same time, all adequate, trustworthy, and truthful representations of the cruelties habitually and extensively practised upon slaves, are scouted as incredible or exaggerated. Attempts are made to offset them by the cool remark that parents are sometimes cruel to their children, mechanics to their apprentices, and capitahsts to operatives in their employ. To this it is often added that, on the whole, slaves are as well off as other laboring people, and better off than they would be if set free. In this way, the sympathies of the people of the North are withdrawn from the slaves. And whether we arraign " the legal relation," or the so-called " abuses," we find our attacks warded off by the arts of sophistry and evasion. Even ministers of religion and ecclesiastical bodies have been proficients

PRELIMINARY CHAPTER. 19

in these arts, and the friends of liberty themselves have thereby been led, in some instances, to make unAvise and unfortunate concessions.

In this book we shall endeavor to show what "the legal relation" is; what the usages of slaveholders generally are; and the natural and necessary correspondence and connection between them. In describing the "legal relation," we shall use the testimony of slaveholders themselves, in their own language, set forth in the most solemn and authenticated form, the public testimony of their legislative acts and judicial decisions, made for the very purpose of defining and enforcing that relation. If such testimony cannot be received, there is an end to all rational discussion. Our account of the usao'es and practices current among slaveholders will be found sufficiently authenticated by their own testimony, and by other unimpeachable witnesses. More than all this : The intelligent and reflecting reader will be compelled, if we mistake not, to perceive that the connection between " the legal relation" and the most frightful " abuses" is that of cause and effect, or more properly, of a "whole with its constituent and essential PARTS, insomuch that the presence of the one implies and certifies the presence of the other.

In speaking (as we are compelled by the prevailing use of language to do) of "the legal relation," of the "laws" of slavery and of slave "owners," we must not be understood to concede the "legality" of such a relation, or the validity of such " laws," or the reahty of such " ownership," in the proper mean-

20 THE AMERia^' SLAVE CODE.

ing of those terms. The "law of sin and death" is not obhgatoiy law. "Mischief framed bj a law" binds men to nothing but to the repudiation and contempt of it. " If it be found," says Lord Littleton, " that a former decision is manifestly absurd and unjust, it is declared, not that such a sentence was had law, but that it was not law." "It is generally laid down that acts of Parliament contrary to reason are void." Of the character and validity of the Slave Code the reader of this volume will have an opportunity to judge, when he shall have carefully examined and considered it.

N. B. — It is sometimes alleged that the severe laws against the education and free religious worship of slaves were occasioned by the impertinent interference of abolitionists. But it will be found, on an examination of their dates, that, with few exceptions, they were enacted long before any of the Abolition Societies were formed, and even before the American Revolution.

On the other hand, it is somelimes said that these and other severe enactments are antiquated and obsolete. It is marvellous to see with how much confidence these self-confuting statements are made by the same persons. Tlie careful reader of the following pages will find ample evidence that both these pleas are without a shadow of foundation.

Part I. The Relatiojs" Of Iviaster And Slave

CHAPTER 1.

SLAVE OWNERSHIP.

Fundamental Idea of modern Slaveholding ; namely, the assumed principle of Human Chattelhood, or Property in Man ; constituting the relation of Owner and Property — of Master and Slave.

South Carolina. — "Slaves shall be deemed, sold, taken, reputed and adjudged in law to be cliattels personal, in tlie liands of tlieir owners and possessors, and tlieir executors, administrators and assigns, to all intents, constructions, and purposes ivliatsoever.^'' (2 Brevard's Digest, 229 ; Prince's Digest, 446, &c., &c.)

Louisiana. — " A slave is one wlio is in tbe power of a master to whom he belongs. Tlie master may sell him, dispose of his person, liis industry and his labor. He can do nothing, p^ossess nothing, nor acquire any thing, but what must belong to his master." (Civil Code, Art. 35.)

" Tlie slave is entirely subject to the icillofhis master, who may correct and chastise him, though not with unusual rigor, or so as to maim and mutilate him, or expose him to the danger of loss of life, or to cause his death." (Art. 173.)

It will be foand, as we proceed, that this attempted or pretended limitation of power lias no real existence, and affords no protection to the slave.

An exception, in Louisiana, to the general tenure of " chattels personal," is expressed as follows :

"Slaves, though movable by their nature, are considered as imviovaUe by the operation of law." (Civil Code, Art. ttGl.)

" Slaves shall always be reputed and considered real estate ; shall, as such, be subject to be mortgaged, according to the rules prescribed by law, and they shall be seized and sold as real estate.^'' (Statute of June 7, 1806 ; 1 Martin's Digest, 612.)

This provision, if literally carried into effect, would prevent the sale of slaves from off the plantations of their masters. More of this in its proper place,

Kentucky. — B}^ the laic of descents^ slaves are con sidered real estate, and pass in consequence to heirs^ and not to executors. (2 Littell & Swigert's Digest, 1155.)

From the following it appears, however, tliat special care was taken in Kentucky, that the slaves should derive no benefit from the distinction between real estate and chattels personal :

They are, however, liable, as chattels, to be sold by the master at his pleasure, and may be taken in execution for the i^ayment of his debts. (lb ; see also 1247.)

Virginia. — In 1705 a law similar to that of Kentucky was enacted, but was soon after repealed. (Note to Revised Code, 432.) Slaves are therefore held as chattels j^ersonal in Virginia, as in most of the iV slave States, wliere, in the absence of entire ivritten codes, or such general enunciations as those of South Carohna and Louisiana, the chattel principle has, nevertheless, been affirmed and maintained by the courts, and involved in legislative acts. A specimen of the latter description we have in the following :

Maryland, — "In case the personal property of a ward shall consist of specific articles, such as SLAVES,

WORKING BEASTS, ANIMALS of any kind, STOCK, FUR- NITURE, plate, books, and so forth, the Court, if it shall deem it advantageous to the ward, ma}^, at any time, pass an order /or the sale thereof, ^^ &c., &c. (Act of 1798, chap. CI. No. 12.)

Without further citation (as might be made) of particular enactments in this place, it may be sufficient to state that the " Eoman civil law," as existing at an early period, before its modification under professedly Christian Emperors, is generally referred to in our slave States, as containing the principles of their " peculiar institution." "Where other usages or statutes, in any of the States, fail of furnishing the requisite definition of the " legal relation," recourse is generally had to the " Roman civil law." Those also who defend the " legal relation" as an innocent one, and who claim that Christ and his apostles did not disapprove it, but gave it their sanction, are forward to remind us that it existed in the Roman Empire at that period. It seems desirable, therefore, in more aspects than one, to ascertain precisely what that relation was. We find that information in Dr. Taylor's Elements of the Civil Law.

26 TUE AMERICAN SLATE CODE.

"Slaves were held ^ro nullis: irro mortuis, pro quadnipedibm; they had no head in the State ; no name, title or register ; they ivere not capable of being mjured, nor could they take by purchase or descent ; they had no heirs, and could therefore make no will ; exclusive of what was called their pecuUum, whatever they acquired was their master's ; they could not plead or be pleaded for, but were excluded from all civil concerns whatever. They could not claim the indulgence of absence reipiiblicoi causa: they were not entitled to the rights and considerations of matrimony, and therefore had no rehef in case of adulter}^ ; nor were they proper objects of cognation and affinity, but of quasi-cognation only : they could be sold, transferred, or pawned as goods or personal estate, for goods they were, and as such they were esteemed ; they might be tortured for evidence, punished at the discretion of their lord, or even ptut to death by his authority.'''' (Taylor's Elements, p. 429.)

Such was the "legal relation" said to have been sanctioned by Christ and his apostles as innocent, or (as others express it) not condemned, thsapproved or censured by them. Such Avas the heathen " institution" now held to have been adopted as Christian. It must be added that the ancient heathen "relation" of owner and property has been more rigidly enforced in Christian America than it ever was in Pagan Rome. Our slaverv allows no p)eculium or exempted property to be held by the slave. It denies education and literature to its human brutes. It ignores their religious nature, and bars the door of redemption and

SLAVE OAVNEIISUIP. 27

release. But wc anticipato topics of future exaiuiuation.

The testimony already presented is corroborated by jurists "who have examined the subject. Judge Stroud, in his " Sketch of the Laws relating to Slavery," has fully expressed his views on this point. Having explained the maxim of the civil law, "partus sequitur ventrem," by which the condition of the slave mother is for ever entailed on all her remotest posterity, he remarks as follows :

"This maxim of the civil law, the genuine and degrading principle of slavery, inasmuch as it places the slave upon a level with brute animals, prevails universally in the slaveholding States." (Stroud's Sketch, p. 11.)

The same writer also says :

" It is plain that the dominion of the master is as unlimited as that which is tolerated by the laws of any civilized country in relation to brute animals — to quadrvpeds^ to use the words of the civil law." (Stroud's Sketch, p. 24.)

" The cardinal principle of slavery — ^that the slave is not to be ranked among sentient beings, but among things^ as an article of property, a chattel personal — obtains as undoubted law, in all these (the slaveholding) States." (lb. pp. 22, 23.)

This, then, is the definition of the terms, Slavery, Slave, and Slaveholding, as furnished by slaveholding communities, and as understood by jurists who have studied their legislation and jurisprudence. This is the theory of American Slavery. This is its fundamental Luav, if it lias any. This is the "legal relation of master and slave," if there be any such relation.

The next point of inquiry is, Whether these definitions correspond with existing realities, or facts ? Whether this theory is an empty abstraction; or whether it is carried out into actual practice? Whether this law is merely a nominal one, (as is sometimes alleged,) antiquated and obsolete; or whether it furnishes the rule of action to the slaveholder, the rule of condition to the slave ?

From statutory enactments and recognized codes, we now turn to the courts. Their reported decisions, in the hands of the lawyers, and in daily use in the decision of new causes, will tell us whether or no the Code of Slavery is obsolete, and the statute book of the slave states a dead letter.

Chief Justice Kinsey, of the Supreme Court of New -Jersey, in 1797, said:

"They" (Indians) "have so long been recognized as slaves in our law, that it would be as great a violation of the rights of property to establish a contrary doctrine ut the present day, as it would in the case of Africans, and as useless to investigate the manner in which they originally lost their freedom." (The State vs. Wagoner, 1 Halstead's Eeports, 374 to 378.)

To be a slave then, even in Kew-Jersey, is to be property, upon the same tenure upon which otJier property is held. This is " the legal relation of master and slave" there, if the courts understand it correctly.

SLAVE OWNERSITTP. 29

"We will now travel furtlicr south, and look into tlie courts for information. As our guide wc will take "Wheeler's Law of Slavery," a regular lawbook, made for the use of slaveholders.* Slave property, like other property, is the subject of frequent litigation between the different owners or claimants of it, or with their neighbors. From these suits chiefly, and for use in future suits, the volume of Mr. Wheeler is compiled. The incidental testimony of such a work to the nature and incidents of slavery is the strongest and the most unobjectionable that can be conceived. We shall refer to it frequently in this volume. On the property tenure and chattelhood by which slaves are held, its testimony is clear and explicit. The idea is involved and implied throughout the entire volume. A few direct statements of the doctrine will be sufficient. Let it; be understood that our quotations are the decisions of Courts, stated in the language of the Judges.

" Slaves, fromi their nature^ are CHATTELS, and were put in the hands of executors, before the act of 1792

* " A Practical Treatise of the Law of Slavery, being a Compila tion of all the Decisions made on that subject, in the several Courts of the United States, and State Courts ; with copious notes and references to the Statutes and other authorities, sj-stematically arranged. By Jacob D. Wheeler, Esq., Counsellor at Law. Kew- York : Allan Pollock, Jr. New Orleans : Benjamin Levy. 1837." 476 pages, octavo. This work is recommended by Hon. Judge H. Hichcock, of Alabama, and by the New-York Mercantile Advertiser, and New- York Star.

declaring them to be i~)ersonal estate.'' (Wlieeler's Law of Slavery, p. 2.)

'' The phrase '^jersonaZ estafc,' in wills and contracts, should be understood as embracing slaves." (lb.)

" Slaves were declared by laAv to be real estate^ and descend to the heir at law. They are considered real estate in case of descents." (lb.)

" Although for some purposes slaves are declared by statute to be real estate, they are nevertheless, intrinsically personal, and are therefore to be considered as included in every statute or contract in relation to chattels which does not, in terms, exclude them. They are liable, as chattels, to the payment of debts," &c. (lb. p. 37.)

In the case of Harris vs. Clarissa and others, March Term, 1834, (6 Yerger's Tenn. Rep., 227; Wheeler's Law of Slavery, pp. 319-26,) the Chief Justice, in delivering the opinion of the Court, found occasion (p. 325) to say :

" In Maryland, the issue^'' {{. e., of female slaves) " is considered not an accessory, but as a part of the ?«e, like that of othej- female animals. (1 Har. & McIIen. Eep., 160, 352; 1 Ear. & John's Eep., 526; 1 Hay w. Eep., 335.) Suppose a brood mare be hired for five years, the foals belong to him who has a part of the use of the dam. (2 Black. Com., 290; 1 Ilayw. Eep., 335.) The slave, in Maryland, in this respect, is p)laccd on no higher or different groundJ^

Mr. Gholson, of the Virginia Legislature, by the use of similar language, (as will hei'cafter be quoted,) offended the dehcacy of some, who suj^posed him to be peculiarly brutish and gross ; but we here find it to be in accordance with, the ordinary language of the courts of law !

About forty-five pages of " Wheeler's Law of Slavery" are occupied with judicial decisions concerning the " warranty of slaves" sold, in respect to their soundness, health, " freedom from all redhibitory vices, diseases," &c. It is impossible to look over the revolting details, and to notice the coldhearted insensibility with which the rules and decisions of the Courts are laid down and recorded, without being deeply impressed with the unhumanizing effects of the j^rocess, particularly in the systematic forgetfulness that the slave is any thing more than a brute animal. The section concerning " tlie warranty of irwral qualities''' may be claimed as an exception, and is certainly one of the most remarkable pieces of law literature extant :

" The 2500th article of the Code of Louisiana divides the defects of slaves into two classes : vices of hody^ and vices of character^'' " But with regard to those of character^ the next article expressly declares that they are confined to cases where the slave has committed a capital crime, where he is convicted of tJieft^ and where he is in the habit of running aivatjy (p. 133.)

" Drunkenness is a mental, not a physical defect, and is not ground of redhibition." (lb.) " But a fraudulent concealment of it will be a ground for rescinding the contract." (lb., p. 134.)

" In South Carolina there is no implied warranty

32 TUE AMERIC^X SLAVE CODE.

of the moral qualities of the slave ;" "as where a slave was sold who had committed burglary, the fact being unknown to both the seller and purchaser." (lb., p. 136.)

These quotations are made to prove the bona fide, matter-of-fact cliattelhood of the slave, or his being degraded to the condition of mere 'property^ either real or personal. And they show that the condition adheres not merely to the hody^ but to the sovX ; to the moral qualities that distinguish a man from a brute ! It is an honest servant that the vender sells. If the article is proved to have been dishonest, the sale is vitiated. The honesty of the man, then, is a commodity in the market !

" Craziness or idiocy is an absolute vice ; and, where not apparent, will annul the sale." (lb., p. 139.)