Richmond enquirer. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1815-1867, 1840-01-11

lives upon demand, after the civil magistrate shall
have asccrtaincd the existence of reasonable grounds
for me rhnrgs and SUFFICIENT to pat Tie accused t?on has
tridt Thus then it s seen, even in reference TO
nations not bound by treaty or contcdcraied by COM
pact, that the usage Of surrcndcring ugtves from JUS
tcc Is observed and cherished IN the most liberal sp:it
But the principle is greatly enlarged IN It's appll-
cation TO those countries situated each otncr, and
whose citizens are engaged in constant negotiations
or frequent intercourse the ono with the other In
such the duty of each sovereign 70 restrain
his subjects from interfering with those Of the other
becomes ndspensably necessary to secure the bless
ngs Of peace, and to avoid the evils Of constant
state of Hence Vacl, page lG3, observes, ''the
matter is carried still farther in States that are more
closely connected by friendship and good neighbor
hood. Even in cases Of ordinary trapsgreSSions,
which only subjects Of civil prosecution either
with view to the rccorery Of damages The uiiic
ton of sI;ght Grill punishment the subjccts of two
neighborng States reeprorcly cbged 10 APPEAR be
fore he m"girne Of He Pidrc rhrre hy arc accused Of
h0cing taHed in Mer d"ty Upon requisii.on of that
magistrate, called "Lcttcrs Rogatory they are sum
momed in due form b. their own magistrates and
obliged to appear An admirable institution, by means
Of which, many ncigiboring States live together in
peace and seem to form onl Y one Republic. This IL
in force throughout all Switzerland. As soon rs
the "Lcters Rogatory issued in form the superior
of the accuscds bound to enforce them. Il beiOR9S
not to him 10 fraiainG whetrr the accusation be true
false. He is presume the justice Of his neghbor
and not to suffer any doubts on his own part to impair
an institution well calculated 10 preserve harmony
and good understanding between the States. II this,
then be the law which experience has proven to be
lu,ary is operation and which ought TO govern the
relations of ncghborne States ordinarily and if the IL
brral and prompt surrender Of fugtves from Justice
has been found to be essential in preserving peace
between them, surely every consideration OF phi!an
thropy patriotism and public duty require that i'm
pcdmcnt should be ntcrposed 10 its full and free ope
ration among the States of Federal Union
| her. fprpn in hat liz
principle of international law in the absence of all
positive agreement, applies in full force and with pc
cuar fitness 10 the relations of the twenty-sx States
of our contaderacy, it fortunately becomes unncces
sary to do from the fact that the States themselves
have long since converted the abstract principle into
an express provision Of their fundamental law In the
h article and I'd section ofthe Federal Constitution is
found the following clause, "a person charged in any
State with treason, felony, or ether crm' who shall flee
from justice and be found in another State, shall de-
.nand Of the Executive authority OF the State from
which lie fed be deiirrcd be removed 10 the State
hariag Jurisdiction CfMc crime. As early 1893 the
Congress Of the L. States passed act providing for
the full and complete execution OF this provision of the
GENERAL government By prescribing the form i'll which
the demand should be made, and requiring the surren
der accordingly. See laws Of the L. s. by Story, vol
/, page 2S4 Thus the trainers of Federal Const.
tuition intended no, only to to 'thc citizens
of each State all privileges and immunitcs of citizens
of the several States but TO preserve unimpaired the
happy and harmonious relations Of all the States BY
curing the prompt surrender of every person who shall
commit criminal offence in State and flee to
her for protection, to be removed for trial and punish
ment ''tO the State hdring iuriSdictiOn Of Me crime -
But according to your Excelcncys construction Of this
clause the terms "lreason, felony, other cyMc, al
though comprehensive enough TO embrace all criminal
offences and 10 reach all fugtves from Justice must be
restricted and interpreted TO include only such OF
fences Grc rcrOga:c9 crimsS 6y The nnirorSa lac
Of all cicii-ed c0""rirs. Thus tho citizens OF Penn
sylvania and Ohio may enter the territory of New
York and commit thousand offences made criminal
by your laws, TO the great annoyance and injury OF
your people, but if they happen to be crimes peculiar
" affecting the inhabitants of New York, or of a
grade character each not ''recognizcd crimes by
the universal law of all civilized countries, you may
in vain demand their surrender You may punish
your own citizens for committing similar Offences
but those of other States who entered your terrific
ry for the predetermined purpose of violating your
aws-iniuring the rights and disturbing the Icpose of
your peaceful and unotfenting countrr!nen may flee
from your State eXultng in their crimes and it is ne
Their Your right 10 demand or the duty of their CO.
vernon to surrender them for t-ia! or punishment
Such construction OF the clause Ill question would
utterly defeat the object of those wise and saga
cious statesmen who framed the Federal compact; and
instead Of promoting peace between the States, would,
in nv humble Judgment, cherish constant state of ex
citenent and collision between them But, Sir is it
true that the offence committed by Peter Johnson
Edward Smith, and Isaac Gansey, is not recognized
as criminal by 'thc universal law of all civilized
counries' They charged with sioniously stealing
from John G.. Colley, citizen of this State, property
which could have been worth less than sir
strsn hundred dollars And understand stcaiing to
b. recognized as crime by I'll laws, human and divine.
But you escape this conclusion by Informing me thc
property stolen being negro slave) hat there IS no
0,c Of this State arhtch recognises Sarcry statute
rhirh admits that be the property Of
thcr, or that can be stolen from GRoihfr. Now,
sir, need tell you not for offence against Tie
iGlcS Of lclr YORK., but those Of Freipid that the de-
mand made; and because the injury inflicted upon
citizen of Virginia happens not to be recognized as
criminal BY the laws of New York although expressly
made felony BY the laws of this State you refuse to
surrender the offender and by consequence to decline
all agency in redrcssing the grievance complained of
! do not mean to be drawn into discussion Of the
abstract right of slavery, or to urge any arguments
against the right proprety Of any nation peo-
pie to interfere with domestic institutions That,
assure YOU sir with all possible Difference is not with
the people Of Virginia debatab!c question Upon that
subject need only add, Virginia knOwS her rghts AID
,rW at all times matntain them. But when renem-
Der that slavery has existed in almost every civilized
country since the foundation of the word-that was
recognized and not forbidden By the Saviour of man.
kinG-tha it for long series Of years recognized
ana tolerated by the Legislature of New York, when
its citizens 9Ood, rirtn0us and miSe they
no,r-that it has existed in this Stale continuously
for more than two hundred years-that it still exists
one half of the States of this Unon-and that is
cognized and tolerated by tie Constitution ofthe United
States, the common government of all the States, you
will pardon for denying the claim OF authority Iii
New York to pronounce the laws of Virginia upon that
subject null and void because she has thought proper 10
abolish slavery within her own'dominions.
1t is of the Of sonnd construction that the OBJ
legations of the Constitution should be made to apply
uniformly and equally to all the States and their c
respectyey yet because the stealing ca Stare
is made felony in Maryland and not in \. Y, two cit
those States may confederate and come into Viz
GINA and steal Stare, and fee to their respective
States for refuge and upon demand from the Go
vernon of this State for the surrender Of each the Con-
sttuton according to your view requires the Governor
of Maryland to surrender the offending citizen of that
State but docs not require you to surrender the offend
ing citizen of your State The conclusion is, that the
Constitution, which designed TO confer upon the
citizens of all the States precisely equal rights auo-
zes the punishment Of citizen of Maryland for the
preparation of crime for rhieh excuses citizen Of
.reto Tort-although both are equally guilty Such
could have been the intention of those who framed
the Constitution. Their sense OF justice wonld have
Ia such inequality and