The Charlotte journal. [volume] (Charlotte, N.C.) 1835-1851, 1842-04-07
THE MARYLAND AND PENNSYLyA
MA CASH.

B MA .t<A9tN
We made, in our last, brief statemer,
of the main points of this important case
recently decided by the Supreme Court Of
tho United States. We are indebted TO
learned Member Of the Bar for the follow.
ing more particular statement of the iudu.
ment Of the Court, and also of the separate
Opinions Of the Judges, than We from on,
own knowledge we're able to furnish:
Case Of Prigg against The Commonwealth
of Perasyioaaid.
The points decided by a majority of The
Court we're
! LIST, That the provision in the Constitution ,s
I the United States relative TO fugitive slaves cY
ecutcs itself so far as 10 authotize the owner q,
his agent TO seize the fugitive IN any State of tba
, Union. property; and that no State law I,
Constitutional which interieres with such rpht
I'd. That this provision also eoutemplates Ieg.
islation by Congress- TO make the delivery of q
fugitive slave more efectual against all State Or
other interference.
Sd. That Congress having legisla;ed. such l..
gislation is the supreme law of the land, exelua.
and with which legislation by Congress. no STATE
can pass a law TO qualify, impeac, or control The
remedy given by the act of Congress.
i,h. The power of legislation by Congress !,
exclusives and no State can pass any law TO car.
~ into effect the constitutional provision in n,
gard 10 fugitive slaves, even though Congress had
not legislated upon the subject.
5ih That the points thus decided arc in no
manner intended TO interfere with tho police
pOiser Of the State 20 take up runaway slavss
and guard against their misconduct or depye.
daiions.
This opinion was delivered by Mr.. Justice
SroKr.
The Cnwr JusrIcr and Mr.. Jusiica nAsirf.
coneurrnd in the opinion that tho Pcnnsylyauia
law was unconstitutional and void, aud that no
State could pass any aw to impair u impede the
right Of the owners Of fugitive slaves, as confer.
red by the Constitution and secured BY the act
Of Congress; bat they held that tic States were
competent to legislate with a view to cfiseiaaio
the remedy gren by the act Of Congress.
Mr.. Justice McLEAs also eoncurred as 10 lie
unconstiiutonality OF the &C, Of tho Pcnasylya.
MA Legislature, lie was Of opinion that Goa.
gross, in this particular case, bad right 10 con.
fer the power with which State officers vera
clothed by the set OF 1898. and held that Tho
States were competent TO punish inifsciions Of
that act by the owners Of fugitive slaves as
when, for example, the slave was seized aud car.
ried away without procuring the certificate Of The
judges az justices OF the peace. which i requires
Mr.. Justice BtInwiS was Of opinion that tho
constitutional provision required no Legislation,
but executed itself: aud that therefore the act Of
Congress aud the Pennsylvania law were bull
unconstitutional.
: Mr.. Justice WAfSE eonenrred with the major
-
mated an intention Of ding his opinion a, length
This case was brought ~ to the Supreme Court
of the United States under the 25th section 81
the Judiciary act Of 11r9. and the provision Of
, special act of the Pennsylvania Legislature. BE-
ing the result Of negotiation between Maryland
aud tina, State conducted by J. AEREDIrn, Esq
as Commissioner Of Maryland.
! Tho cause was prgued BY Neesrs. MgnrDTr
and Mason for the STATE Of Maryland, and ~
Mr.. UASnLY and the hTroRxEr GrxrRAL 81
Pennsylvania for that S,ate.-Nst IHtsl.