Rutland herald. [volume] (Rutland, Vt.) 1823-1847, 1841-02-23
For the Rutland Herald.
VIRGINIA AND NEW-IORk AGAIN.

To the Editor -
The controversy now going on between the execu-
tives of the States OF Virginia, and New ork, altho
not dssimilar in its character TO that which has taken
place between the Governors of Georgia and Maine
confessedly, one of very grave character; involving
principles, which demand thorough and dspassionate
discussion. am the more inclined TO offer my own
views this subject and assign some reasons there
for from having read communication published in the
Herald of last week, and signed d." the paternity
Of which, might by some be enormously asCribed
me; while, from the conclusions OF the writer | en-
trely dissent. Your Just and elaborate remarks
accompanying the communication however seem to
leave me AT liberty to pass from lis further special
tce, to the expression OF my own views on the subject
involved in the controversy.
The main question to be settled, seems to me TO be
ths,-Undcr what circumstances is the executive of a
State bound to deliver up Of lis citizens be trans
ported to- and tried in another State To the consti-
tuition Of the L. 5. must resort for the general
swer. That instrument declarcs-AIt. H. Sec >, as
follows " person charged in State with treason,
felony, other crime, who shall flee from Justice, and
be found in another State, SHALL the demand of the
executive authority of the State from which he fled, be
delivered up to be removed TO the State having urs-
dicton of the crime" This is the only clause of the
constitution which confers the executive of State
the power to deirer mp citizen the application of
the executive authority of another State. And read
lily admit that where this poicer is clearly conferred
the executive OF State, the duty of exercising it is
clearly enoined.
But this high preroga,ve is not to be exercised ca
! ".
zen not thus TO be rihed with. 1t must be clearly
a legal or constitutional duty which alone can Justify
the exercise of this power.
This leads me TO examine particularly the cases
in which it is made the duy Of the executive authority
OF a State TO deliver up its citizens, &c. 4 nerson
must be charged then with treason felony or other
crime The frs: OF these treason, is defined in the
constitution. and consists in evyng for wal &c
Felony OF other crime are acts declared TO be such
by the common law, or by statutory enactments And
here will suppose, (wbout however admitting the
business Of the position that State may declare by
statute all such acts, elouies, or crimes and prescribe
such penalties for their commission she fit
But 1t by no means follows, that all other States &c
recognize these prescribed acts as feones or crimes
when neither her statutes nor the common Law
pronounce them such; and the executive authority
such State to deliver up her citizens be remov
cd Tor trlal under such penal statutes. Ii is quite diff
cult that such persons should be made liable to the pen
allies Of such code, while residing within the uris
dicon Of the State which enacts it, But when the ex
ecutve OF such state, takes up her penal statute
goes forth into other States, in quest of victims IL be
hooyes him TO show most clearly, that the act com
planned Of is felony, or crime, according the dec
ara,ion of The common law, the books of Tho
State whose citizens he thus demands for transporta
ton and lrill, under il.
When such case occurs, there can be no doubt O
b the duty Of the executive authority Of the State OF
b, whom the rcqusition is made to deliver up &c.
This appears 10 me, is just and fair inerpreta
r. ton Of the only clause Of the constitution relating
J this subject, and which have above quoted.
For my own part, consider the doctrine held by ih
. Governor Of Virginia that a State may declare an
acts, elonles. crimes, which she pleases so to dc
Sgnale by her statute, and require the executives
other States 10 surrender demand its citizens 70
transportation and trial under alleged violation O
o them, TO be monstrous in the extreme
To illustrate the gross injustice and violation Of per
20 sonal rights which would be involved in the exercis
+ Of this assumed power, ! will suppose case !
b neghboT Of mine, highly respectable Young lady la
been engaged for the last few years as principal Of
o female seminary in Virginia. While there she Aa
taught the who usually aten led on her 10 reae
, Soon after her return home, this slave was caught b
y her master reading the Bible. When, on enquiry a
10 how she learned read, be was told By The slav
that Missa ). learn me read" Now this learning
slave 10 read being declared a crime by the statute
N Virginia, the executive Of Vermont would be ia dul
. bound, according 10 lhe doctrine OF Lieut. Gov Hot
IL kns, to deliver up this lady, proper demand bel
made, 10 be taken Virginia and tried for the heinou
5 offence Of having taught a slave read the Bible
Having treated this subject thus far upon gener;
4, principles, snail only add brief summary Of III
ID facts out Of which this controversy has grown 50 f
m as ] have been able TO obtain them
II Appeals then, that IN the summer Of 1899 n
: Roben Centre, schooner belonging 10 New Yorl
= then lying at port in Virginia, undergoing SON
9 repairs. That Tie carpenter at work upon her, was
= slave, TIE pioTeny Of one John r.. Colby Tn
20 while 20 WORK 1000 board lIs vessel, ho was told
DO sowo o' The m'1 belonging % her, that carpenters
rs' he could sr Ugh ages ~ The north That sa.