The daily union. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1845-1857, 1850-08-23

provided are will be The sacred duty of In
States TO project them An the enjoyment OF lbe, properly
need not say what alienation OF feeling. what hosli
relations, will be engendered between the States A ~ re
sorting for redress they shall have 10 resort TO the STAT
legislatures being refused the Legislation OF Congress
Whether lhai VIII be done or not do not know, s.
have the strongest reason to suppose that il will b.
admitted that Al IS asking much in this age OF civil
eaton, IA any well organized State any State OF po
cal morals or legal morals, to say TO citizens, We are un
able 10 afford you redress; you must submit TO hess
laws and we are not able to afford you and your prop
efty redress The amendment which was proposed pro
vdes that the laws shall be ascertaned through the
dun OF the courts OF justice, and through the medium
the federal COURTS and provides further by moditca
ton which suggested, and to which The gentleman
sented that the finding of the jury of the escape wei
as the proceedings shall be required that they are bono
ds and without collision. apprehend that there Is nc
doubt that losses paid by the general government should
be only bona ds losses struck and felt the forcs
OF the argument which against the provision, by thu
suggestion that would place il in the power OF masters
by couson TO let the slaves escape in order to be pac
for them but that is efectuay guarded, think, by thu
modhcaon which requires the jury to lind that there ha
been no coiluslon am sorry to have detained the Sen
ate but thinking this ought TO be OF the provisions
OF the law have thought il my duty to explain my
sons
Mr. BERRIEN | have, Mr. President, on this occa
sion. an unwecome duty to perform. My desire is, te
the utmost extent of the constitutional power with which
feel myself invested as member OF this Senate, TO
cure the return oil fugitive slaves to their am
that the constantly recurring loss of their slaves
affords great and just ground OF complaint TO the citizens
OF the southern States am satisfied, from statistics
l
sustained by the escape OF slaves, and the protection
which has been afforded to fugitves from service by the
free States rise to an amount which is not possible to
suppose that the people OF the slave States continue
10 bear. lear, therefore, all the consequences which
may result from the Intellectual enforcement of the pro-
vision of the constitution. am DESTROYS, moreover Il
explain my position, from the fact that, some remarks
which had occasion to address 10 the Senate during the
last winter, casually adyerted 10 this subject and sug
gesed thai il was question which would deserve
sdea,ion, if adequate were provided by the
government for the return OF fugitive slaves, whether
in process OF lme application might not be made to
Congress- asking indemnity Of the United States for The
losses which had been sustained The principle Of thai
suggestion is proposed TO be carried out by the amend
ment under consideration. | have anxiously examined
it. with view to discover if could possibly lend to it
the support which disposed to give by my vote as
senator of the United States desire to say, defence
OF the bret observations propose to make upon the
subject what presume will be conceded by everybody
that question OF the exercise Of constitutional power
must be considered apart from its sectional character, in
/ fiuence or operation.
Now. sir, the broad principle upon which the amend
men rests is this that wherever citizen OF the United
States has right under the constitution for the practical
enjoyment Of which the exercise OF the legislative
power Of Congress necessary, the failure practically
| 10 enforce that right gives hin claim TO indemnity
from the government OF the United States That is the
broad principle Leaving out therefore, the consideration
Of this particular provision the principle is this you have
constitutional right which it requires legislative inteer
ence to enable you 10 enjoy and that legislative interior
shall take place. but, in the practical exercise OF it,
you fail to recover the rights which the constitution
cures 10 YOU you entitled to indemnity from
the government of the United States. have found my
self unable to acquiesce in that proposition, and think
is Indispensable to give effect to that principle which
asserts, IN order to support this amendment
Sir there have been various cases stated analogous
IN principle to the measure now proposed, which think
can be met without difficulty. II is said that the United
Saies have compensated individuals who have sustained
relation which subssis between the United States and
indiana residing within their limits forbds the analogy
commended for As understand this matter the power
ercsed by the United States its origin was to compel the
Indians themspye s make this indemnify through the
annues they entitled to receive from the United
States and il subsequently, that limit passed, and the
indemnity made by the treasury OF the United States the
principle motive which operated upon the government
was founded consideration OF the character of the
people with whom they had to DEAL and the importance
Of protecting the country from Indian and violations
do not think anyJust argument can be drawn from those
laws.
But it is said that the government of the United States is
bound 10 protect each State from invasion and if,
the occurrence OF such invasion, becomes necessary
for that State Immediately avail herself of her e
forts 10 epel this invasion, the United States has uniform
refunded the advances which have been made by such
State. There Is no doubt about that but in order TO
make that applicable to the under consideration,
the United States should have gone much further; and
they have done that II would be necessary to show
that the United States had paid to individual citizens
whose property was destroyed by such foreign invasion
the value Of that property. The United States has spu-
lated to protect the States from INVASION and of course,
to protect the citizens OF each State in their rights OF life,
liberty and property. But the extent 10 which The gov
eminent has gone IN making rerbuton for property de-
slroyed by foreign invasion has been limited TO those
in which the military operations of the United
States have exposed the property oil individual citizens
peculiar liability to destruction by the foreign foe, upon
the acknowledged principles OF the laws OF No in
stance can think be produced in which the
OF The United States has been called upon under this OBJ
legation, TO afford protection each State from INVASION
TO pay the value OF property destroyed by the invading
force, where that property has not been destroyed
consequence of its having been occupied military po
siton, or Tor some other connected with the mill
ary operations OF the United States And unless IL can
be shown that the United States is bound to cover all
nd, 1~.,.
from the aggressons OF foreign enemy. the refer
red 10 does not within the principle OF the under
consideration
Well sir, the next referred 10 is that Of the Next
can treaty. Gentlemen have not, / think considered
with their usual accuracy the and extent OF the
stipulation entered into by the United States with Mexico
We acquired from that government considerable extent
who by our becoming proprieors OF the SOIL became
subject to our jurisdiction The extent of stpula
ton with Mexico is, that in relation to those savage
tribes who remain within the limits acquired by that
treaty. they shall be restrained by the United States from
acts OF aggression upon the Mexican territory. We
stpulae that we will prevent them will restrain them
from making these aggressions and where they be
prevented we will punish the aggressors and salts
faction. In no case, under no circumstances, the
case which has been suggested IN this argument No
case occuLin which Mexican citizen come be-
fore the Congress OF the United States and demand compen
sation Tor property destroyed by Indian Tribe The
extent OF the obligation OF the United States is To prevent
the aggression, IT be practicable. and II not, to punish
the aggressor and to exact satisfaction from him
Now, SIR, as to the case OF instruction. The United
States are bound by the constitution to protect the States
IRON domestic violence when appealed 10 by the egs-
ature or II that not IN session. by the executive and
THIS obligation the government ~ bound 10 fulfil but