Richmond enquirer. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1815-1867, 1842-02-24

",il D. ready !, meet i "aen ha Gated asl upor
it. lie shaald Ike /, hn,.. ,o.. as came /, IL rr%
Gucs::Gr i'ds /. ~: ID - til Distribution Ac
ist.i. Bu. Il II "a~ question, stri i.c iiou ia
'l;vrc wcud " tle d,lcuiiy il g,in. an an,,,er
lie would Ike % know wheti r there single
mcniber OF t!is iousr, mlu his not formed definite
, opinion nfan tits question:, and Why, lie should
Ike 10 hnnw, could nc; Mr. Sisveo-on' But the
gentleman irom accomac thinks that .lis il no,
an Important question, nor of any practical Import.
Vow III ,h!s, The gentleman from iccclnack, aud the
gentleman whose claims he supports, directly al
points-ior We have been INST informed - The Gentle.
mnn, that Mr. Stevenson considers tiis important
question. The gentleman, however, had endeavored
~ show that tile Resolutions TO which he had referred
when last up had no application to the question tefore
the House. The gentleman said. that the duty Of lie
Governor Vi New York I" deliver up the tugtives de-
manded by The Governor Of Virginia arose, no, under
the act Ut Congress, but under the Constitution al the
y. D lie would show that was not SO. by reference
10 The article Of the Constitution which relates 10 this
SUBJECT II will be found, that sIch duty IS imposed
on The Executors cf the States ~ person charged
= any State with treason, felony other crime, who
shall flee from justice and be found in another Stale
shall, on demand Of the cIecuiirc authority ofhe State
Jron ehch he ed lie delivered up, TO be removed 10
The State having jurisdiction Of Tie crime. IL must
be evident t,en that tins clause of the Constitution
does mol impose this duty upon the executive OF the
State II expresses that the fugitive shall be delivered
up-but no where says they snail be delivered up by
the executive Of the State Ii was to carry into ftc,
tins general provision Of the Constitution that the
hm 81 Congress was passed. That law provides that
the duty OF delivering up ugitivrs shall be performed
by the chief magistrates of the States and Territories
Without this law Of Congress, the duty of delivering
up fngyes from Justice would not reet upon the IKE.
cutye OF the States The duty is imposed by tie lac
of Congress- But ie would like to know IT, as the ger
i!eman says this duty under the Constitution only
How it that this House passed the resolution 10
which he had referred: That resolution DECLARES
press terms, that Gov Seward III refusing 10 comply
with the demand Of the Governor of Virginia for The
delivery OF the tugIilyes named, had violated the
Constitution and the laws Of the United States As
yet, III the face OF those resolutions drawn by himself,
and adopted BY the Legislature of this State, the gen
teman contends, that lie duty OF delivering fugitIvcs
from Justice is imposed b. the Constitution aud not by
the law. With what property could this House de
nounce Governor Seward for violating the law of the
United States, il the doctrine now commended for be
true, that the Executive Of The States has right
execute duty imposed by an act Of Congress- The
demand Of the Governor Of Virginia was made upon
the Governor Of New York under the act of Con
gress, and the act OF Congress frequently referred
10 IN the correspondence upon The subject There
could then he pretence that the duty enjoned by
the law FOR the distribution of the public lands could
not be performed BY the Governor Of the State because
it duty imposed by law Of Congress. But The
gentleman from Accomac seemed to think that the
land bill would be repealed In this lie did no:
with the gentleman, and believed the law 10 be just,
wise, aud benriicent law, and had idea that the
people Of this country would submit TO its repeal
Mr.. DAEsEy said, that, inasmuch MIR. Stevenson
had been put in nominations he would withdraw the
name of MIR. Taylor
Mr.. BAYLY said he knew what would be the argu-
ment Of the gentleman from Cumberland. lie had not
pated IL because he preferred that the gentleman
should state himself lie knew that the provision
of the Constitution, did in express terms impose
the duty of surrenderng fngitives from JUSTICE pom
the Executive Of State. But il did SO, effect, and
by necessary nplicaton as the Report made two years
in the New York contest, (Which was agreed
UNANIMOUSLY stated IL is true that the provision is
silent 10 the tribunal upon which The demand 10
be made but it provides that the fugitive is 10 be deli
vered mp ION the demand OF the Executive authority
Of the State from which he fed: but the inference
irresistible that the clause contenplaes that the de-
mand is not only to be by the Executive of the State
from which the fugitive had fled, but to be made upon
the Executive ofthe State in which he had taken refuge
There was great, greater reason Tor requiring that
The demand should be made upon Us by the Executive;
and tie act Of Congress- passed shortly after Tie adop
ton of The Constitution, Is IN accordance with that law.
To show that the surrender Of fug,ives from justice
had been always regarded rs an Executive duty, he
need only refer to the fact that in all Governments the
discharge of it had been conided to The Executive.
This fact familiar 10 the trainers OF our Constltu
ton. Hence he supposed it that they only directed
by whom the demand should be made, without, in ex-
press words providing upon whom it should be made.
This the reasoning which brought bis mind to the |
conclusion arrived at in the report last winter The
Madison papers contains full authority for the ground
taken. That authority is this: "hlr Butler and MIR. |
Pinkney moved TO require fugitive slaves and servants
TO be delivered up ike criminals"
s'Mr. Wilson: This rcodd 06tge the Elecat,re cf the
State TO do itGt public erpease"
".Hr. Sherman saac more proPriefy IN the public
sei=ing and Surrfndering stare or strUaEt than a
h0rSc."
II must be borne in mind, that this language was held
in the Convention which framed the Constitutions; and
before the law of 1893 passed. which imposed the
duty Of surrenderng lugyes from JUSTICE upon !he /
Executives Of the States express terms. Ssyerthe
less, Mr.. Wilson and Mr.. Sherman regarded it as SET
tied matter that fug,ves from justice 10 be sur
rendered BY the Executive pubic expense; and hence
they objected that fugitive slaves should he surrendered
in the same manner. And it for this that
distinct cause was introduced into the Constitution
providing Tor The delivery of fugitive slaves.
This was precisely the view he took of the last
gentleman from Cumberland proposed 10 draw an ana
ogy between that plain and clearly defined duty of the
Executive. ard tls supposed duty Of the Governor to
appoint agent to carry out the Distribution Law.
Sir. b. knew al provision in the Constitution to
warrant such step, and inclined TO think it would
lie in derosation Of that instrument, though he would
express positive opinion the subject; for, not
beng blessed with The quickness Of the gentleman |
rom Cumberland he had not time TO bestow upon il
The requisite reflection,
HOUSE OF DELEGATES
February %, l5i2.
\ communication received from the Senate that
l,t,o oil