Richmond enquirer. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1815-1867, 1841-02-18

In reference to this constitutional question, upon
which the resolution of the gentleman from HerSmef
takes issue with the Governor, have but word to
saw. look upon it very grave question: when
ought to command the deliberate consideration of the
Legislature of this State look upon the efforts that
have been made here TO excite sympathy for the slave
population of the Union, entirely misplaced Ihey
have no place or part in the argument They belong
it, and should not sway the judgment or bias the
feelings This, Sir, is question of constitutional
right and other considerations should be brought
to bear such have in view the protection
Of that sacred instrument from violence And, Sir
conceive the remarks of gentlemen on the other
side, 10 the hardship of dragging citizen from
the protection of laws into foreign State, tor
trial there among Strangers altogether naPpcabie
Such remarks imply dIstrnst OF the frmncss and I'M
Partially of Virginia in the administration OF JUSTICE
unbeconng in us, and most uni ust in point OF fact
We have right TO presume that the obligations OF
the Constitution held in higher force here than IN
Virginia We cannot do so without ImpugnIng the
fairness of the administration OF justice in sister State,
and this occasion have no more reasons Tor DIS
trust, than should have in every instance OF re-
QUESTION from that quarter, even IN case OF alleged
murder. The gentleman from Washington (hr Gull
ver) undertook to draw parallel between case OF
this kind and those of which our forefathers com
planned, when citizens were dragged across the ocean
TO be tried in foreign land There is no similarity,
(said Mr. To- whatever between the two cases. Then
the citizen was taken out Of the country, where the
offence was committed, and tried in another. This
was the case of demand of fugtlves, with the ex-
press view that they may be tried IN the State where
the alleged offence committed. And so long
as we nave Constitutions which is the law paramount
in all the States guaranteeing the right Of trial by nry
we have right to distrust the impartiaity OF any
State in the administration Of criminal justice. All
such entirely naPpcabe TO the cues
ton before
| Mr. Speaker, the great point, in my judgment, in
order to come safe and right conclusion is TO deter
mine if possible, the true intent and meaning of the
Constitutions and when we have arrived at that, we
NAV stand upon il rock from which no So
phstry can move us. The State of New York, the
Governor says has no law recognizing the existence
OF slavery that man may be the property OF ano
Their But, concedng this TO be true for moment, let
me call attention TO our condition at the time when the
Constitution was adopted. Every State i'll the Union,
with perhaps sing exception, acknowledged the doc
trne that one might be the property of another.
And the laws of New York, revised in l7sS, and en-
bracinp all the laws of the State upon the subject Of
slavery, distinctly acknowledged that might
hold property in another Those laws use the word
uslaye" and speak Of the "vaue' of such 'slave. -
They provide that If ssslave is scduced detained
from his "master, and the master or owner thereby
loses the services Of his slave the master
the yaue of his slave. There be doubt that at
the time of the adoption of the Constitution, the right
of property in slaves was distinctly recognized By
| laws and that such the doctrine, generally,
throughout the Union. Now, believe to be true,
the Governor to Virginia, that State can at lis
pleasure, bring within the constitutional provision, as
= crimes, F" such were not "crmes at the
time of the adoption of tl.a instrument. The gentle
man from Washington, (r Culver) in illustration Of
his views, supposed the of State passing law
making il criminal for parent to shake hands with his
child after few months years absence, and asked,
with an mir Of triumph, if, in such case, the Execu-
tive of New York would be bound TO deliver up iu
rlive on demand Of the Governor Of the State, which
had enacted such law. The absurdity of the propo.
si,ion on its face shows how entirely nappcaL!e il is
to the case in hand. No State enlarge the bound
aries of the CONSTITUTIONS neither can State d
mns the lis. Of crimes throw out OF the provisions
of the Constitution, those that were acknowledged as
SUCH at the time of its adoption. II it be true that N.
has declared that slavery shall not e3st within her
borders that does not at all lessen the obligation Of
New York to her Sister States, nbrdge the rights of
those States the fulhlment of all the obligations Of
the Constitution originally understood, and agreed
to- And slaves were then recognized rs property,
all over the Union, the act OF abollshing slavery
within her limits does not change the provisions OF the
Constitution destroy the rights OF others acquired
under il.
Them Mr.. Speaker, (wihout OBTAINING the house
louger,l if at the time OF the adoption of the Con.
stitution slavery was recognized by the laws ct oil
the States in the Union, or almost ali, and that by
common consent, man was allowed to hold pro-
perry in another, and if By the common law, steal
ing was crime, everywhere-thcn most assured
~ the stealing of slave crime, and intended to
be embraced IN the constitutional term "olher crime
1t does appear to me-ahough | am free to acknow
ledge have had difficulty in making my mind Gor
do not consider this Of those clear cases in re-
gard 10 which man may decide at first blrsh, and nc
nit there is plauspiiity in some OF the views o the Co.
VERMONT say is my deliberate judgment that the Go
vernon has erred rom the DISCRIMINATION have been
able 10 give 10 the subec-crrcd in his position with
gard the right of Virginia 10 demand, and the oblga
ton OF " Y surrender citizen charged with stealing
slave And trust the gentleman from Albany (slr
Wheaton) will not say that charge the Governor with
wilful violation of the Constitution because think
he has no, construed the Constitution right, as he
did the Legislature of Virginia. for expressing SINH.
lar opinion, though in strong and decided terms And
should this House come The conclusion that the Co
vernon has erred in his construction of the Constitution
and placed his refusal surrender ground not war
raned by that instrument, it will not be deemed an i'm
puation of wlul violation of the Constitution, TO
give expression of that opinion, but the discharge OF
public duty DUE under all the circumstances Of the
case, as we'll 10 ourselves and the Governor as TO the
State of Virginia
Sims Of the Timcs-E1tra SeSsion-Schcmes Of fund