Richmond enquirer. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1815-1867, 1841-02-23

| Governor OF this St6te, page 13r u lho
oo,nondence unon this subject lie observes, g" beg
leave therefore, to state most respectfully thal
ting the aGadaUi to be sufficient an 1ofm ana suos'
" to charge the defendants with the crime o. seniIns
" negro slave from his master IN Inc ola'e oi 'He''
&c deGncd bv the laws Of that State, yet IN my opinlon
&C The o.ncc is not within the meaning OF the Consl
&c tuition of the United States. II language is eh'ileo
TO the credit of having meaning at 'ha' Tue
above ;ndspuatly proves the fact OF waiver on me
mart of The Governor of this State, of all detects IN le
affidavit, upon which the charge was based; placing The
refusal to make the surrender upon other ane entirely
different grounds. But i. the second place, wha'
construction does the Governor OF Virginia put upo"
| this language The latter observes IN reply 10 Tue
Governor of New York, in page torty-seVen OF Tue
correspondence, I" Had you placed your refusal 10
{. maize the surrender upon the ground Of the (sup-
81 posed) defective affidavit upon winch the demahd
&C was made however widely might and snouid nave
differed in opinion with you upon that SUBJECT would
have preferred and should probably nave aooPeu Tue
sc easier plan of removing your o'nicn','e " a'e =
out in an uuexce ptionabe form But you nave rem
&C dered il unnecessary for TO pursue That course or
g TO urge any arguments in favor OF inc snicency oil
&c the affidavit You close the door OF inormai.ty by
declaring that admitting The atdGrt 10 De SUFFICIENT IN
u form and Substance charge the defendants 1niM the
.s r,, of sf,al;ng STARE &c, Quoting the Govern
or If New York language as given above)-and this
construction of the Governor of Virginia, is certainly
reasonable and correct ONE and not attempted TO be de-
ned or controvercd by the Governor OF New YORK IN
ria had drawn wrong inference from his language,
il would have been natural aud proper that he should
have taken pains set himself right upon the subject
But he mpedy admits the construction to be the cor
rect one by allowing IT to pass uncon.radcted
This waiver Sir, ! consider entirely improper and
unnecessary. The Governor of Virginia might have
found difficult, not impossible, 10 meet all the re-
ouiremens OF the statute in order to fix the charge
clearly md satisfactorily upon these alleged fuglvcs
upon this, the Governor of New York might nave
,,yad hic rpfn nj IN
| citing controversy been prevented ANA the Execn-
tive Of this State in TINS wavlrg the detects winch
attached 10 the process upon which the charges against
these three individuals based, expressly and prac-
tcay ccntraven his own sentiments upon that sub
ec as stated by him on the fourth page Of this cor
resoondence 1.-THE power of delivering tugitves, he
observes, ais one of the highest Importance, and
deeply concerns the liberty aud security OF cl'i-
" zens In such cases, staiutnry requirements and
even technical forms of proceeding are safeguards
against the arbitrary caprlcous exercise OF Exc
" cutve authority.
The question: Sir involved in this controversy, is adj
mitted by both New York and Virginia to be one aris
ing under the Constitution Of the u - and must be set
tied if settled at all, by reference to the meaning
which bound tn attach 10 the words treason ie
lony or other crme used IN the I'd section OF the
| ith article of that instrument.
alt results from thi. view Of the subject, says the
Executive of this State, 'tha the offence charged IN
the affidavit and specified the requisiton IS moi
felony nor u crime within the meaning of the Constr
sutton, and that waving all the detects IN the aioa
SC w.t. cannot surrender the supposed fng'tivcs 10 be
carried TO Virginia for trial under the statute Of mat
/" State
His Eycellency further observes al need not inform
e you, Sir that there is law Of this State, which
e recognizes Saverv-no statute winch admits tiai
" can be the property 81 another, or mat one
g man he stolen from another Nor Is necessary
. to inform YOU, that the common law which - III inEce
IN this State when not abroaated BY statute, does
not recognize slavery, nor make the offence 81 which
" the parties accused in this case ielonicus or crni'
50 nal
As this Sir, is question involving purely consti-
tutona construction of rtain words embraced there
in il appears TO me that neither the doctrine of the
common law or the laws of all civilized naticns, Ia
fayorite phrase with His Exceency the Governor of
New York; the present laws OF this State are 81
all concerned in the settlement Of this question The
former is doubtless the proper standard to which refer
ence should be made, in deciding controversies be-
tween independent nations. And the latter is Justly
applicable cases arising between our own citizens
or those who may have rendered themselves properly
subject TO our laws. But in controversies arising
under tie Constitution, where the sovereign States
Of this Union, the citizens itself, are concerned
the Constitution or compact which those States IN
their collective WISDOM have fit TO adopt for the
protection of their mutual rights, and the redress OF
their mutual INJURIES according TO the STRICT natural
and intended meaning Of the terms thereof IS the only
law whose provisions should be consulted whose OBJ
legations should be respected or enforced THIS is the
doctrine Of some of abest constitutional writer's
and confirmed by that ght and eminent jurlst Chief
Justice Savage, lin the case OF Clark fugitive from
the State Of Rhode Island, decided in the Supreme
Cour, of this Sate.) The Chief Justice delivering
the opinion of the court, observed, Tle first answer
is that Tie statute of Rhode Island is not properly
before us-au offence ola highly immoral character is
stated in the warrant, and certified by the Cover
&C nor Of Rhode Island to have been made criminal by
g the laws Of that State" And further, "Had our
" Constitution and laws been silent upon the subject
and no conventional arrangement existed between the
g several States composing our Conederacy 1t may be
conceded that the practice arising from the comfy OF
nations would be applicable. Here then Uhe Fede.
raj Cnnsttuton) is the law on the subject-n positive
regulation and antamount to treaty regulation, and
TO resort TO the comfy of nations for our
" guidance"
to which all the States of the Union, i'll their sovereign
capacity the contracting parties. And for the pur-
pose Of this argument may regard It as compact
between the two States Immediately concerned in
the decision Of this question, to wit: New YORK ana
/ Virginia. In order to ascertain then the meaning
which these two States intended 10 give the word
"crime when they entered into this compact is pro-
per 10 enquire what construction they put upon this
:n;.ch mystfed word in their own statute laws. Did
1 Virginia and New York both recognize slaves as pro-
perry at the time of the framing OF the Constitution,
| And have they not by the enactment of statute laws
upon this subject, expressly recognized them as such
since? fthen by their own laws, they pronounced
the stealing Of slave TO be a crime, not only at
the time of their forming this compact, and before,
but also in repeated instances since that event, what
meaning to understand they intended 10 attach
10 the word crime, when they transferred it from the
spirit OF their laws into the terms of that compact
But has New York recognized property in slaves since
the formation of the Constitutions refer to Session
Laws Of; New York of the year 1909, when an act was
passed-a section Of which will take the liberty 10
read to the House at shall and may be lawful for any
g rne who shall have rcsit ID ten years within this
81 Stale, and who shall be about 10 permanently
{" thcrcfrom carry with HIM her every such slave
as shall have been the PROPERTY Of such person dur
" ng ten years mex, preceding" Here, SIR, the prn-
cip!c not by implication. hut in direct terms, recos
nlzed and established tia. slaves lawfully subjects
Of property.
4 Il, then, New York ana Virginia entered into the
compnc with express reference to this matter, and il
intended by them ha' the word crime, as used
t.al section OF the Constitution which provides that
,-:.an engaged in anA State with treason, felony
e,aoG ia another State .'all, on demand Of the