Lewisburg chronicle, and West Branch farmer. [volume] (Lewisburg, Pa.) 1850-1850, 1850-03-27

very to the offspring Of slave mothers
caused the act Of 99.h Of March. l7ss.
The constitutional provision before men
,i5iSed for reclamation Of fugi,ives followed
soon alier, and was supposed to P'see oil
power over the subject in the Nai'osai Leg
;,lature. The act Of Congress Of 18th Feb
ru.ry. 1893, entitled an act "fe'Pees."s
fueitvss from justice and persons escaping
from the service Of their masters" appeared
to confirm this opinion. 1t was believed
however, that concurrent jurisdiction ves-
ted 10 the National and State Legislatures.
Al the REQUEST Of number Of gentlemen
of the ncishboring State Of Maryland. Us
is stated in the argument in the case Of
Prigg vs.. Commonwealth, the act Of 2Sth
March, 1928. was passed. Three objects
were intended to be secured by this legisla.
ton, TO wit, the delivery Of fugi,ives from
labor. the protection Of free colored people,
and the prevention Of kidnapping.
The lst and I'd sections describe the Of
fence of kidnapping, and prescribe its pun
ishment. The proPriety and justice Of iss
enactments can not be questioned. The
other sections Of this statute, relative to the
reclamation of fugitives from labor and The
powers given TO the owner 10 retake his
property, and the obligations to aid and CO
operate with him imposed upon the officers
Of this Commonwealth, was o! such char
ac;sr as ought to have satisfied all reason
able and fair-dealing men Of the disposition
Of this Commonwealth and the acts oi
Congress completely carri ed into effect.
While the law provided ample security for
the safe keeping Of the alleged fugitive.
until the owner might have an opportunity
to obtain the proof Of his former condition,
it required other proof Of this fact than the
oath of the interested claimant his agent
or attorney. The provisions Of this la~
we're fair and equitable, and we'll ealcula
ted TO aid the owner in the recovery Of bis
property and it is deemed matter Of sur.
prise that it was contested and annulled,
through the agency Of the same State
whose Citizens had procured its enactment
The guards. in the statute, ia,ended to pre-.
serve the liberty of the free man, would BY
the investigation i, demanded. cause some
trouble in procuring the final ex'raditioG
Of the fugitive slave. The proof Of proper.
~, by other evidence than the oath Of the
claimant, was certainly demanding as lit
lie as our Southern friends in justice shoulc
have desired, when they asked the aid o
official power OF the Commonwealth ,t
send from her Jurisdiction and srritor, ,
human beings invoking the protection nne
guardianship of her laws. The Supreme
! Court, however, decided, that the provision,
Of said law. imposing restraints upon ths
claimants power to remove The alleged
fugitive, were unconstitutional. Ii The
restrictions imposed by the statute wer'
intended 10 aid the escape, or to prevent th'
extradi;ion Of the fugitive. the sccu
racy of the decision can moi be doubted
bu, if these guards were inserted as secss
sary to protec, the liberty Of the freeman
the decision was wrong, unless it was ad
Judged ,ha, the sole authority to claim q
prov id-d in the Constitution, and also au
| ,ho-ized him To seize and remove the indi
vidual whom he alleged was his p roperty
and to use fol that purpose the officia
power Of the State, without permitting t
her the righ, to control and regulate ,h'
manner o! the procedure or to determine
tho truth and justice Of the alleged d claim
II established the principle that stranger
to the soil of Pennsylvania, might entel
upon it, and by possibility infici the deep
est injustice upon her sovereignty BY ihs
abduction OF her citizens on false pretences
the supremejudicature having so decided the
question, our law-abiding citizens submit
ted, bu. with the determination, that in ihe
spir, Of tha, decision the officers Of this
| Commonwealth should not be made the
instruments. even by possibility, on such
slight foundation as claimants interested
demand. Of enslaving free men. To pre-
ven. this grea, possible wrong. the &C, ol
Sd March, ls47, repeating all legislation
on the subject, and forbidding the officers
Of the State 10 take any part in the recap.
ture Of such alleged fugitivss, was enacted.
The constitutional provision. and the act
OF Congress, our State has endeavored to
carry into ful! effect. She has denied, and
It is hoped, ever will deny, the power Of
Congress to impose the performance Of
duties upon her municipal and judicial ofi-
GERS, without her consent.
An act Of Congress, providing 4 mode
Of procuring due proof Of the correctness
Of the claim Of the repu,ed owner Of fu-
gi,ive from labor. and requiring satisiac.