Richmond enquirer. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1815-1867, 1842-05-03
COMMUNICATIONS.
FOR 7HEEEQ UiRER.

j 1t would be difficult TO determine for which the
Richmond Wing is most remarkable-its stupidity OF
It's malice Its Editor has been known TO be &C.
tuated by generous impulse and he IS constantly ex
hibtng ignorance relation 10 the painest matters
which would be discredtabe 10 day laborer IN the
streets In addition to this he constantly INDUCES IN
disgusting blackguardsm-w worthy alone Of an inmate
OF ST. CHESS. He mistakes low abuse for satire land
ialsehood for wit. Per Sc, he is unworthy OF no.
tice, and his press beneath contempt But II is the
acknowledged organ, in Virginia, OF the party
which arroganty claim ''a the talents aud all the de-
cency !" This is my apology for noticing it
The characteristics of that print never more
fully displayed than in its late articles relation TO the
controversy between Vireinia and New York; IN which
the Wing, from the beginning, hns taken sides with
tie latter. Entertaining undying hatred for the
chairman of the select committee Of the House of De.
egates, which had that contest in chorss he preferred
To betray his native State, and lean To her enemies,
aud then aid and comfort, rather than lose op.
porunity of rsducng and vilifying him. This Editor
has displayed conspcuously, in his columns, every
thing which misrepresentrd the position of Virginia,
ana he has refused TO publish Legislative reports, Qhe
first concurred by the unanimous voce of The entire
Assembly; and the second sustained by majority of
lis party event. which vindicaiedit But would
he endless and useless 10 undertake to specify all of
the instances of It's TO Virginia this subject
But fair specimen, seecta short paragraph from
his paper Of the Goth ms ant. Here it is "lncdentally
connected with this subject, rhe New York contro-
versy and growing out Of il, question affecting
the rights of the Siates and about which, to exclude
conclasi0as, chose to express an opinion. We al.
hide to the Jury law of New York. We regard that
law unjust in its operation upon the South, and
wanting in that comfy, 10 say nothing of friendship,
which should subsst between the members Of the Con-
federacy But that Mac York had right 10 enact IL,
zee, as State Rights men, cannot deny-Each State has
perfect right to regulate the proceedings of its
courts and however much, in the particular case we
might be benefited, not so much Federaiists as
"
the State Courts, within their legitimate sphere The
fact is one State has right TO demand fugtives from
another Stale-as matter of right-She may ask il as
ciyility, which she would reciprocae, and which
common cisility should prompt each State to grant
But her course for redress is through Congress. She
has right 10 demand of Congress the passage OF
law requiring the Federal ges and Murshals 10
fugitiyes TO be delivered up the requiston of
Stale officer THIS is the course which Virginia should
have pursued, when New York declined complying
with the demand made upon her. ltwould have effect
ualy prevented the unpleasant controversy which has
arisen-and long this, should have had the
rogues at work in the Penentiary" Just at this time,
when the propriety Of the repeal of the New York
law which renders the recapure OF fugitive slaves
impossible is under discussion in that State this EdI
tor owing his support to the Southern people, and his
allegiance to Virginia, voluntarily comes forward "to
exclude conclusions TO relieve the expectation Of any
one that he would not take sides against her, to say
sthat New York had ght TO enact IT, Just at this
time when the Democrats Of New York are urging the
repeal Of This Wing iaw, upon the ground that 1t IS
unconstitutional, and that the Supreme Court OF the
United States has so decided it, this traitor TO the com.
muny that feeds and protects him, comes forward TO
saw that i, is CONSTITUTIONAL and that the Federal Courts
have nothing do with the matter and this, too, in
an article in which in few lines farther on, the urs
dicton Of the Federal Judges is admitted in an Infinite
" questionable instance, as will presently show
This Editor obviously would prefer this law should
nd nil If its dancers uS-It has for
him-he has slaves to run away, and he has no
hearth 10 be made desoaie by the torch and blood of
Instruction He would obviously prefer, that it should
not be repealed at ALL rather than it should be done by
Democrats lie would rather that Virginia should be laid
waste Than that his folly in advising to confde in
Northern Wings, and his falsehood in charging nsin-
certify upon Northern Democrats, should be made mani.
nifest Can treachery go farther than this But let
US recur this idea, for the first time avowed IN
yrpnia that New York had right to pass this law.
LIST, Let US see what the provision Of the Constitution
of the United States this subject, and of the law of
Congress- passed in pursuance Of it. The third clause
Of the second section Of the fourth article declares in
press terms that No person held to service or labor
in one State under the laws thereof escaping INTO
another SHALL in consequence of my law regulation
therein, be discharged from such service or labor but
shall be delivered up, claim of the party TO whom
such service or labor may be due
TIE first clause is prohbitory upon the States, and
forbds the enactment Of any law, or the adoption OF
he NAV be discharged from the service of his master
And the second provides, that the fugitive is TO be deli
vered up summary proceeding, without the delay
of formal trial in court OF common law. The Ian
guaye u.s. that he to be delivered up "0A claim OF
the master.
IL was upon the authority of the Constitutional pro
VISION that Congress, Mt its second session, alter lie
adoption of the CONSTITUTIONS passed the law author
zng the master of any fugitive slave his agent or at
torney to seize and take him before Judge OF the Cir.
Of the III & before State
Magistrate who is authorised upon proof to his salts
faction BIZ oral testimony or affidavit certified by
gstrate Of any State or territory, that the person so
seized is slave of the CLAIMANT TO give certificate
thereof which is declared to be sufficient warrant
for removing the fugitive 10 the State from which he
fled It was also, the authority of this constitu.
tional provision that the net imposed penalty
unon any person. ,rho should hinder obstruet such
claimant in sci=ing arresting such t0gitire.
But question may arise, as TO the true construction
of this constitutional provision. As do desire to
extend too much this communication, will content
myself with quoting what Judge Story, Northern
man. SAYS upon this head Al page 676, vol B. OF his
Commentaries upon the Constitution, he says:
"Ths clause, Uhe providing for the recapture OF
fugitive sayes) was introduced into the Constitution
solely for the benefit of the saveholdng States, TO ena-
BILE them 10 reclaim their fugitive slaves who should
have escaped into other States where slavery was mol
tolerated The want of such . provision under the
confederation felt, as grevous inconvenience ny
whatever would be allowed TO the owners; and some
times indeed they met with open resistance. Ills 90,
rious tAnt these prOrsi0ns0r the and remo5a Of
ugitires Of both classes, contemplate summary rainise,
rial proeeedngs, and not The ordinary course adie'a
inresigations to ascertain chether the complaint e ecu
founded or the claim Ownership be established 6syond
all legal In Of suspected crimes the
guilt or innocence of the party is TO be made ont at his
trial, and not upon the preliminary enquiry, whether
he shall be delivered up All that would seem IN such
cases to be is tina, there should be pima face
evidence before the Executive authority 10 satisfy It's
Judgment, that there is probable 10 believe the
party guilty such upon ordinary warrant would
Justify his commitment for trial.
"And in the cases of fugitive slaves, there would
seem to be the necessity of requiring only Prma
ace proefs efo'cnershp, nithoutpuning MeParty to
formal assertion Of his rights By suit at ne common
aw Congress appear 10 have acted upon thus opinion
and accordingly, the statute upon this subject! nave
authorized summary proceedings before magistrate
upon which he may grant warrant for removal