first edition, octavo, [iv], [5] – 52 pp., original pale blue printed paper wrappers, wrappers and text somewhat foxed, damp-stain to text, else a good, clean copy.  “The argument of Alvan Stewart in a test case arranged by New Jersey abolitionists to determine the effect of the recently adopted New Jersey constitution on the institution of slavery in the state. Stewart, a New York lawyer and prominent abolitionist, was retained as counsel in the joined cases of State v. Post and State v. Van Beuren, heard in the New Jersey Supreme Court in May term, 1845.  The question presented to the court was whether the New Jersey constitution of 1844 abolished slavery as well as the involuntary servitude of the children of slaves under the “Act for the gradual abolition of slavery,” passed in 1804 and largely reenacted in 1820. Stewart’s argument, which occupied about eleven hours, was an eloquent appeal for the unconstitutionality of slavery. In delivering the majority opinion, Justice James F. Nevius commented that Stewart’s argument was more an emotional than a legal one. The court held that the relation of master and slave existed by law in New Jersey at the time the new constitution was adopted, and that this constitution neither destroyed that relation, abolished slavery, nor in any way affected the laws in existence at the time of its adoption. Justice Joseph F. Randolph delivered a concurring opinion; Chief Justice Joseph C. Hornblower dissented but did not deliver an opinion. The case is reported in Spencer 368. State v. Post was later removed to the court of errors and appeals and heard in January term, 1848, when the lower court’s decision was affirmed.” – Felcone, New Jersey Books, 1315.Sabin 91629; American Imprints 45-6155; Dumond, p. 106; Afro-Americana, 9845