Vermont watchman and State journal. [volume] (Montpelier, Vt.) 1836-1883, 1843-02-24

NUMBER II.
lire !Siarts.

Ma EDITuR TIE convention thai framed our
Federal Constitution met with no 1mg diflirul-
y ~ tNiug the rlgi!ls ul the p'1pic 90 The dl1 r
eat States IN reg1r! to 5Hgihue S'GreS. jy HE
c.mm0h id0, aud the law ot nations. Il siace be.
came free by entering lie icuiO y II fee State or
Government = whether he tlnl - 10y ruusr1I ol
his na.lrr, or 10y escaping from his masters Gus
tody. II was loresren Il at il h,s pru iple ct lhe
common law remained in I0rce, sell emancipation
would deprive The slave States OF mn institution
which lh-y Tegario Important to their pros pe.i.
~ 4 member from SOutl Carolina moved an n
inrndmeuD 10 the Constitution, requiring (Hgiiire
srrcS and servants 10 he 6eirered up ike cfigu,lS
This was objected 10 by ue!nh-rs OF Pennsylvania
aud Connectcut. for the reason that IL would in
volVu the people of the free States In The expense
OF slavery vide 3 volume Madison Papers. l447.
An amendment was subsequently, adopted, in The
form in Vhicd il is now tO;'n in the clause OF the
Isl section OF the 4 article, which provides that
"no person held TO service or labor IN one State,
under tie laws thereof, escaping into another,
shall in consequence Of any law or regulation
therein be discharged From Sach Serpice or iGJOr,'
Nc BY this provision the common law, as it then
stood, was changed 80 lar rs the United States
were concerned, 81 that slave ESCAPING 20 free
STATE dld moi thereby herouG free.
I'm Ter This provision Congress passed The law
OF 1893 requiring cer'ain officers Of the State aud
Federal Gotenm"ns to act when fugitive slaves
were brought before lhrm aud It wns supposed
by uHf people genera iy, that we were hound TO
nil the master ~ ieralturng his iuglise slave
This has led nltiy Of our people u believe the
subject OF fugitive slaves 10 form an exception to
the doctrine lal dawn ia my first number. Bat
the subject ciuie before the Supreme Court Of
the United states at their lat session, in the case
al rrigs ". the Commonwealth OF Penhsy vania:
u!d il was decided, an solemn arsunirui thai no
:;aie Utfi:er wnS Obliged 10 aCt IN such case, and
thll so much of sad lazy as required Them TO act
was unconstitutional. In this lnanner the doctrine
laid doAn in my las communication was confirm
ei 10y the Supreme Court at The Uni'ed STATES in
r.gnrl 10 iugitice siGreS. There were many ulher
important points deci led iu that SC, from which
lhc following principles are deduccd:
save, by escaping Ia free Stale, acquires
cel tlin tRporlant rights and privileges. When he
reaches oar territory We regard him rs man, ana
not rs properly. II le nOrk for mo- or sell mn
property he may sus me ~ his ONn nainc, and
collect his pay. Neither |, nor any other man,
except hs uitsier, can Lake advantage Of his hay
ing heen slave. II any person attempt 10 arrest
him, NJ "A slave, wiIhaul process, h1 may defend
himself with Just SO much lorce as becomes nee =
cssIry protect his person and lis personal liter
~ la this respect he enjoys the same rights nu !
privileges which oar clzens possess lie Is Ii a.
bile tn be arrested, and lnGcu back 10 slavery by
his form n nasler-th all 0lher respects he tegar-
lied IN law rs a freeman. While ~ II slave Stalc
he nlny npI resist The violence Of his master, by al
ACT OF srdeieuce II he So do, lac may lac in
slautly slam by his mlSttr, or otherwise severely
punished nuler the laws Of such STATE. II is III
law, Occurring it criuiIna u INN 10 deiCud his
persnn against the violence OF his ulsloT, whlrh
constitutes Siarcry. That law can hive uo 0pe =
ration ia our Stdlr The slave, tlotelurc, by cS.
gaping from slave State, escLprs from tie upr-
| ration of that iaw. It, pcuaIes cannot he visited
| upon hun Tor an ucl done IN Ohip. There is nu
such law here, nor is IN the power of our Legisu
ture 10 enact such u lazy. Oar Constitution Tor
! butts It's existence.
The court, in the referred To, exprcssl de-
Cided that The jurisdiction is vested SoIcly IN Com
! gress that the passing OF law upon tho subject
/ by Congress, Is conclusive that Ihu master shall
have The benefit conferred by Ile act and that M
/ state law can he iu,erpos,d 10 qualify OF change
| tie powers giVen by Congress. They further ds-
cided that 1t was eqlalIy plain that Congress- Ia
! lended lhhI The mas,er should have no other OF
| JiHiher idcditS tor capturing his slave hnu those
expressed III The law VI Congress aud, therefore
no State law eau aid 10 the powers conferred IN
the act Of lob IL, therefore, follows, thai he
may defend hiusolt against his master while III
this State, Tor the Obvious rouson that self defence
is natural right, and there Is no law having force
/ within the State OF Ohio which Orbds lis eXer-
cse II his master attempt 10 arrest him, the
slave may defend himself with much force M
mny he necessary protect his person aad liberty
II the master press upon HIM, und IL becomes nee
essary or his projection, he nay kill bis muster