Daily Richmond Whig. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1840-1842, 1841-04-28

action FOE Congress take in references TO this COZ.
'roversy, or the Lac OF Nev York. This leave 10
sa0se charged With our interest and rsh,s on the ssr
OF Congress, and who are far better qualified to sug-
sest some plan than am. But would ask is the con-
stitutional right to recover runaway slaves left ~
OUT remedy TO render that right effeciuaif May not
Congress pass those laws which are Unnecessary and
proper 10 carry into effect granted powerl 10 not
the right to surrender fugitive slaves expressly con-
erred upon the Federal Government And did not
congress, IN 1898, pass Law to carry that provs-
| ION OF the Constitution into ELECT II Congress
nave not the power to secure TO Shareholders their
| property in slaves, and to protect them in .Aeir
rights against the assressons Of the non -savehold-
ing States, II was vain and idle for the slavehodng
States TO have made the clause referred to sine
qua non to their adoption ofthe Federal
But contend ha, under the decision of the Supreme
Court OF the State of N. " Congress have the RICH,
TO apply remedy in WHERE perha ps the State
redress might fall short Of the wrong and where in
attempting TO protect the rights of her citizens in this
species OF property, the remedy resored to might Of
itself work hardship and injury the people Of the
State In the case referred to, Jack vs. Martin, I2
Wendo. 3lI, Judge Nelson, who delivered the opin-
ION of the Court, sald The counsel for the plain
tif IN error contends that the mode of making the
claim, and OF delivering up the fugitive, subject
exclusively OF State regulation, with which Con-
gress has no right to interfere; and upon this view
the const,ulionaly Of the law Of this State is sought
to be sustained" The Judge, however. thought
very differently. (Which power, then, was il in-
tended should be charged with the duty Of pre-.
scrioing the mode in which this injunction Of
the Constitution should be carried into effect and
oil enforcing its eIecuton-the States or Congrcss7
at is very clear, il left TO the former the great
purpose of the provision might be defeated in spite
of the Constitution. The States might omit sny
legislation on the subject and thereby leave the
owner without any known means by which to assert
his right or they might so cucumber and embarrass
the prosecution of them, that their gs alton on
the subject should be tan,amount to denial
Again--the learned Judge, in delivering the OPT
mon OF the Court, said, 81 am satisfied, from an
attentive perusa of this position, that fair inter
probation OF the terms in which 1t is expressed not
only prohibits the States from legislation upon the
question involving the owners RI hit to this species
OF labour but that it is Intended give Congress
the power TO provide the delivering up of the
slave"
The opinion Of the Court, and the reasoning Of
the Judge, clearly establishes the authority of Con.
gress TO lesIslate upon this subject: and is il not
desirable 10 avoid collision amongst the States, and
10 prevent difficulties IN relation to runaway slaves
IRON Occurring in fuiurel and it Congress had the
night TO enact the law Of 1898, as the Supreme
Court of the State of New York has decided thew
did have-is II not their duty to make further pro-
VISION, SO that the Constitutional guarantee may be
rendered eHectual TO tho States holding slavesl
And the Governor of Virginia admits the right and
the policy OF Congress passing some law upon the
subject, when lie says: "a direct application to
Congress, with view 10 carry into effect the DO w.
er which the Constitution has conferred on the
Federal Government, by enlargng the scope Of the
Act of 1898, would only operate a measure Of
preeauton against the recurrence Of similar ques-
tons hereafter" IL is high time that this excl
ung subject was settled, and do trust that il will
be settled satisfactorily both paIes; and have
no fears that Congress should take action upon it,
Before concluding, beg leave again to recur TO
the time when the proposed bill shall take eff.
feet. and do contend that 1t is very desirable on
several accounts which will not again urge upon
the House, TO postpone its operation till the next
year IL has been siid that it will not alter the
character of the bull, to postpone its action ill May
LIST, 1872, but have endeavoured 10 show that II
woH'd change its character materially; and il we
hope TO achieve friendly adjustment Of this whole
controversy, and that | suppose to be the wish of
the advocates OF this bill, repeat that do re-
gard It all important that the course indicated by
my amendment should be acquescej in. | might |
illustrate this position by the Of South Carroll
IA at the time she was endeavourng to counteract
the Tariff system. She originally EIed her law to |
go into operation at too early day, and IL vas
found necessary afterwards postpone 1t, in order
to afford an opportunity to Congress of adjusting
The controversy beweea that State and the Federal
Government, by passing what is Familiarity called
the compromise act" hope Virginia will avoid
a similar mistake, and that the amendment which
now send TO the Chair will be agreed TO.