See the Newbern (N. C.) Spectator, Jan. 5, 1838, for the following: Bolton, Dickins & Co. "Anyway, we would split up and go to all these different showrooms. We'd walk in, and they'd say,'Who are you with' It could not be for a moment supposed that such men as Judge Ruffin, or many of the gentlemen who figure in the debates alluded to, would ever think of availing themselves of the savage permissions of such a law. But what then? It follows that the law is a direct permission, letting loose upon the defenceless slave that class of men who exist in every community, who have no conscience, no honor, no shame,鈥攚ho are too far below public opinion to be restrained by that, and from whom accordingly this provision of the law takes away the only available restraint of their fiendish natures. Such men are not peculiar to the South. It is unhappily too notorious that they exist everywhere,鈥攊n England, in New England, and the world over; but they can only arrive at full maturity in wickedness under a system where the law clothes them with absolute and irresponsible power. Another case, reported in Wheeler鈥檚 Law, page 198, the author thus summarily abridges. It is Dorothee v. Coquillon et al. A young girl, by will of her mistress, was to have her freedom at twenty-one; and it was required by the will that in the mean time she should be educated in such a manner as to enable her to earn her living when free, her services in the mean time being bequeathed to the daughter of the defendant. Her mother (a free woman) entered complaint that no care was taken of the child鈥檚 education, and that she was cruelly treated. The prayer of the petition was that the child be declared free at twenty-one, and in the mean time hired out by the sheriff. The suit was decided against the mother, on this ground,鈥攖hat she could not sue for her daughter in a case where the daughter could not sue for herself were she of age,鈥攖he object of the suit being relief from ill-treatment during the time of her slavery, which a slave cannot sue for.