The Madisonian. [volume] (Washington City [i.e. Washington, D.C.]) 1837-1845, 1841-01-26

WHOLE NO. 432.
York. of grade character each not recognized
crimes by the universal laws Of all civilized coun-
tries, you may in vain demand their surrender You
may punish your citizens for committing similar
offences, but those of other States who entered your
territory for the predetermined purpose of violating
your laws--njuring the rights, and disturbing the
repose of your peaceful and unolending countrymen
may iee from your State exulting in their crimes and
Is neither your right demand the duty of their
governor TO surrender them for trial and punishment
ouch construction of the clause in question would
utterly defeat the object Of those wise and gacious
statesmen who framed the federal compact; and in
'sao OF promoting peace between the States would in
my humble Judgment cherish consta state ofexcite-
neht ana collision between them But sir is il true
.hal the offence committed by Peter Johnson Edward
smith and Isaac Gansey is NOT recognized as criminal
py me unipersaf ians Of all ciritixed countries Pr
= hey are charged with leioniousy stealing from John
g. Coey citizen of this State, property which could
not have been worth less than some sir or SIREN HIM
dred dollars And understand stealing TO be recon-
nized as crime by all laws human and divine. But
you escape this conclusion by informing me the pro
perty stolen being negro slave "that there is law
of his State which recognizes slavery no statute
which admits that one man can he the property of an
other, or that man be stolen from another -
Now, sir, need tell you il not for an offence
against the laws of New York. but those of Virginia
that the demand was made and because the injury
inflicted upon citizen OF Virginia happens not TO be
recognized as criminal by the laws of New York al
though expressly made felony by the laws of this
State, you refuse to surrender the offender and by
consequence, TO decline all agency in redressng 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 property Of
any nation or people to interfere with domestic in
situations. That assure YOU sir with all possible
Difference, is not with the people of Virginia debate
able question Upon that subject | need only add
Pirginia k'ors her rights and aoiH at all times main
tain them.
is the of sound construction that the obi
cations Of the constitution should be made to apply
uniformly and equally to all the States and their eli.
zens rcspectvely-and yet because the stealing Of a
Stare is made felony in Maryland and not in New
York, two citizens of these States may confederate
and come into Virginia and steal Stare, and flee TO
their respective States for refuge and upon demand
from the Governor Of this State for the surrender of
each, the constitution, according to your view re-
CURES the Governor Of Maryland to surrender the Of
tending citizen of that State, but does not require you
to surrender the offending citizen of your State The
conclusion is, that the constitution which design
ed to confer upon the citizens of all the States precise
~ equal rights authorizes the punishment OF ciii
zen OF Maryland for the Preparation of crime for
which u excuses citizen Of Nelo York--ahough
both are equally guilty Such could never have been
the intention OF those who framed the constitution.
Their sense of justice would have revoed the very
idea OF such inequality and iniquity. =
The State of Virginia has unquestonahe right to
devise Its own system OF jursprudenceto regulate by
law the conduct of its own citizenstc declare what
shall constitute property within her borders-and to
secure her people in the free acquisition and
enjoyment OF -and finally TO declare what acts shall
be considered Jeionious criminal and TO denounce
upon those who commit them such punishment as her
Legislature may prescribe. Should citizen of New
York come within her domnions, while here he can
claim the protection of her laws for the security of his
person and his property but the contrary should
he commit an act made criminal by her laws and then
flee to New York, the federal constitution the laws
OF nations and even offended justice itself authorizes
Virginia to demand, and requires New York to sur
render him for trial-not, have said, for violating
the laws OF New York, but those of Virginia. All
the writers upon international law, believe concur
in the doctrine of Mr. Kent, The guilty party can
not be tried and punished BY any other Jurisdiction
than The one uhose lars hare been Violated" And the
constitution of the United States expressly declares
that he shall be delivered up ito be remored 10 the
State hdrtng jurisdiction Of the crime"
Governor Seward, under date of Oct "a, 1889, re-
plies to this letter at considerable length and denies
what he states to be the position of the Executive Of
Virginia, viz that is the duty Of the State upon
which requsiion is made, to deliver up Its citizens
when charged with any crime, without reference 10
the nature of the offence = and in regard TO the quo
taon from Chancellor Kent he insists upon the otole
ofthe Chancellors opinion on the subject part only
Of (which had been given by the Executive of Virginia
He says
The Chancellor continues the discussion by saving
the only difficulty in the absence OF positive agree
ment consists in drawing the line between the classes
of offences TO which the usage of nations does and TO
which it does not apply, inasmuch as il is understood
in practice to apply only TO crimes of great atrocty
deeply affecting the public safety" In accordance with
Chancellor Kens exposition the views presented
by other writers of great authority Grotius admits
that for ages past the right of demanding fugitive
delinqucnts has not been insisted in most parts of
Europe except in crimes against the State those of
very hcinous nature As for the lesser faults, they
connived at on both sides unless it is otherwise
agreed on by particular treaty. You will permit
here to say with all respect that il the usage
of nations is understood in practice" that we
are seeking to ascertain and that the difficulty in the
present is the very difficulty mentioned by Chan
ceor Kent The question under consideration, stated
in the language of Chancellor Kent, would be whe-
thcr the crime mentioned in your requisiton crime
of great atrocity deeply affecting the public safety
must respectfully insist that cannot magistrate
and involving the liberty of citizens of this
State, admit that TO be crime Of this character which
the laws of this State do not pronounce TO be
crime.
Let us now inquire what would be the consequences
of your position By the laws of this State the follow
ing offences declared to be mlsdemcanors that is
crimes of grade lower than felony. They are not
crimes of great arocity deeply affecting the public
safety, are they crimes punishable with death
Imprisonment in the State prison. SO that they would
be subjects Of demand under the usages OF nations
as expounded by Chancellor Kent or as recognized by
the laws of this State Petit larceny; extorting by
threatening letters; making conveyances to detraud
creditors; conceament of property by Insolyent debt
ors buying lands in suit buying pretended title
ransacting business in the name Of party not nte
rested; wantonly opening lock on a canal town
clerks neglecting to return names of constables any
violation Of health laws; entering the quarantine
ground without authority keepers Of boarding houses
negIecting report foreigners arriving by feyng
without license; selling goods by auction in violation
Of auction law; auconcers selling goods except in
the day time; adulterang distilled spirits or selling
such sniris defacng mile stnncs cheatinn ~ nlax