The daily union. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1845-1857, 1850-03-01


There i something worthy Of noce, sr 10 the history
1sa, the constitution was LEFT TO execute itself There
ws,s y n hs Ss,Us New YORK To-
for carrying OF sfree person OF color Upon that ndict
ment and under the preceding clause Of the constitution
Of the State Of New York applied to the COVER
nor Of Virginia 10 surrender this person. who had fled
from New York TO Virginia. The governor Of Virginia
Carolina, Mr. BuTLER,l refused TO make the surrender
Then, SIR for the first time was the attention Of this gov
ernment called 70 those two clauses Of the constitution
Dor General Wsshnstoa sent message 70 Congress.
stating the difficulty This produced the act Of 1898
Mr.. SEWARD, (nlerposipg) rise for the purpose
The case to which the honorable gen
tleman refers which arose between Pennsyl-
yania and Virginia, and not between the States OF New
Mr. MILLER | am very much obliged to the genile-
man for the correction. 8e
Mr. BUTLER, lin his seat) It says in the report Penn
Mr. MILLER | was mistaken. The senator is right.
Then il seems that the first revolt against the consttu
ton made BY Virginia herself by refusing to deliver
The law Of 1893 is still in force and il the only law OF
Congress upon the subject II that law not sufficient
for the purpose Of giving to the people OF the South
the States but the fault Of Congress for not passing other
laws more efficient to the purpose -
With regard 70 the State Of New Jersey, will state
onca sava Stats her.eIf She eseTenced soms of the
difficulties in recovering fugitive slaves they ran away
there as will he seem into Pennsylyania She had laws
mon that bec, which Are sill IN force, and. ahoush
s6e has M slaves now she has IN compiante with ne
ac Of Congress and he constitution Of lie United States
from time to time passed laws for the purpose Of enabling
the owner 10 reclaim his slaves And those laws give
to the owner the means OF claiming acquiring his
slave property which are given to our own ctsens tor the
protection Of any property the State Thus far she has
he nassef ~ ConerEa Bu The difcnlv e moi now with
he States 81 tRe decision Of he case of he Common.
wealth a pennsvlyania ps Prgg the Supreme Conf Of
he United States have decreed hat Ali ersation mon
that subject Nv the States "A void: that hev have no
jurisdiction over he subject Whatever That Is the de-
cison ~ The Supreme Court az understand II and the
honorable senator from Kentucky TMr. CLAW was. /
think mistaken n The view he took Of this case in sun.
posing thai The question OF concurrent jurisdiction was
not point expressy decided by be court II will be
found examination of the case that It was held
by majority OF the court Justice Story delivering the
opnon.) that the power Of legislation relation ugi
tive slaves is exclusively In the national that
was an exclusive Jurisdiction on the part Of the general
government and that the States could pass no laws
upon the subject And upon that very point Chef JUS
lice fancy disagreed with the majority Of the court and
held that though State could moi pass any law in con-
hct with the law of Congress- vet il might pass laws
regard % he st aSrressio compained IL II thsre be-
wrong and neglect anywhere, Congress. and not the
State governments to blame and should give the relief
But are told that the difficulty lies with the people
institution Of slaverythat they interfere with The execu
ton az the law and Frequently obstruc the nasfey In Inc
pursuit Of his slave have no doubt that herr are
Of this kind But Mr. President Il must strike every
one that there is difficulty inherent in Inc nature Of The
case itself arising out of The peculiar property claimed
AMI il will be fon1d almost impossibe for us bv any law
OF Congress, 10 overcome these difficulties While we &C
owedge the right Of the master 10 reclaim his slave
and also our duty under the constitution to surrender the
slave to the master when he comes into our State and
give to you the aid OF our law and OF our courts to re-
claim your slaves in the same manner and to the same
extent as enjoyed BY our own citizens in defence of their
we ought not TO be called aggressors upon your
rights because we do not control eyery sudden outbeak
OF popular feeling upon the subject OF slavery
But sir am not aware that the people OF the State of
New Jersey have thrown any such obstacles In the way
OF retaining the fugitive slaves On the contrary sir
the complaint there IS that you do not keep your slaves
al home-ihat YOU suffer them TO come upon us in such
numbers thai, In some OF our countless thew are a
perfect nuisance Iii ws known fact that, from the
OF running away from their masters harborng in our
swamps aud woods and there living by depredatng upon
the property OF our citizens In most cases the master
never comes for them al all many are worthless slaves
suppose not worth the expense OF carrying them back
The difficulty in New Jersey has BEEN not about surren
derng fugitive slaves to their legal masters but rather
how 10 get rid OF those worthless slaves which you su
fer to escape into our territory and TO remain there to The
annoyance OF our people.
This charge against the North relative the surrender
Of fugitive slaves, has been greatly exaggerated But if
the South require any further laws protect their rights,
am willing, and believe every northern senator here is
ready and willing TO vote for any proper law which may
be thought necessary enforce TO the fullest extent the
The next aggression charged upon the North is, that
va 9Th al in