(Jay's grandfather, for whom he was named, was the diplomat for the Continental Congress; during the George Washington administration, he served as Governor of New York and as first Chief Justice of the United States.)

Black citizens of New York regularly aided slaves brought to the city to gain freedom by force of state law.

On 6 November 1852, Napoleon presented a petition to Judge Elijah Paine Jr., of the Superior Court of New York City, for a writ of habeas corpus that would effectively emancipate the slaves.

The state of New York designated lawyers to appear in support of the petition, including John Jay, Erastus D. Culver, and Chester Alan Arthur.

[13] When the case reached the New York Court of Appeals, John Jay II submitted an amicus curiae brief arguing that, inasmuch as Lemmon suffered no loss, he had no justiciable controversy.

They agreed to have fugitive slave Richard Johnson act as a guide and take the newly freed men and women to North Buxton, a freedmen's neighborhood in Canada.

[17] Shortly after reporting the decision of the Court of Appeals, The New York Times published an article criticizing the opinions of the two dissenting judges in the Lemmon case.

It said "judges are gradually giving way to the pressure of one side or other, and ceasing even to pretend to administer the law as they find it, or to stand by the old rules of interpretation in any case in which the interests of slaveholders are involved."

Although the piece noted that in the North, "the evil has been less apparent," preferring errors that favored freedom rather than slavery, decisions based on the Fugitive Slave Law "have at least rarely been illustrations of judicial wisdom, moderation, and impartiality.

This question depends upon different considerations and principles from the one in hand, and turns upon the rights and privileges secured to a common citizen of the republic under the Constitution of the United States.

"[20]Don E. Fehrenbaccher later suggested that Nelson thought the Supreme Court might be required to rule on the issue of slaves carried to free states.

[21] Lincoln's House Divided Speech on 1858 outlined the threat if the Supreme Court followed thinking related to Dred Scott when ruling on the right of states to regulate slavery: "The nearest approach to the point of declarating the power of a state over slavery, is made by Judge Nelson.

"[22]As noted, the outbreak of war meant that the Supreme Court never heard Virginia's appeal of the Lemmon case.

Historian Paul Finkelman noted in his book[23] on the history of slave transit in the North that "Lemmon was the culmination of a long and intense conflict over the place of slavery within the legal framework of the Union.

"[24] Finkelman also noted that Lemmon was "part of the larger social and political movements that ultimately led to the Republican party, the Civil War, and Constitutional amendments ending slavery and making blacks full-fledged citizens.

In explaining why it was leaving the Union, the South Carolina Secession Convention noted: "In the State of New York even the right of transit for a slave has been denied by her tribunals.

Historian Thomas C. Reeves said that Arthur did not contribute work that was any more important than that of John Jay (who sponsored the case and designed the strategy), or William M. Evarts, who argued it in the Court of Appeals.