Weekly national intelligencer., 1850-11-09

early period after adoption. 1t found TO be, in
point OF fact, Of little practical utility.
In June 1871. Governor MHFLIE, of Pennsylvans, de-
msnded of the Governor Of Virginia the surrender Of Baldwin
Parsons Francis Mcclure, and Absaom Wells. who had
been indicted in the Of Oyer and Teminer OF the county
of Washington in that State for kidnapping "ceran free
negro named John, and carrying him of to Virginia Inc
Governor of Virginia. BEvERLv RANDOLPH, doubtful OF ne
be made TO the rquston asked the advice of ne
Attorney General Of the Sae who, in elaborate opinion
advised him not to comply with it. he insisted that 'ne
Constitution had provided means and no mode
executing the provision in question: and that there was no
law of Congress supply the omission. III said JAMES
IssIs, the Attorney Genera the delivery and removal in
question be effected il must be under the authority ony
Of the Constitution Of the United States BY that the de
very required and the removal authozed but the man
in which shall be effected is not prescribed And
again "The directions Of The General Government under
: which the Governor of Pennsylvania has made demand
for the delivery and removal Of the persons mentioned 10 MS
letter. be complied with by the Government OF this
State without additional provisions by law to enable 1t
8 to do So"
Acting upon this opinion the Governor Of Virginia re-
fused surrender the tugves wheeupon the Governor OF
Pennsy addressed communication to the President Of
the United States, in which he said'
sBut as the Attorney General of Virginia has suggested
another difficulty to arresng persons demanded as iug
tves from justice have thought the present proper oc-
casion bring the subect your view, that by the In
terposon Of the Federal Legislature Ito whose consdera-
ton you may pleased submit such regulations may
be established will in future obviae all doubt and ebar-
upon constitutional question delicate and inn
portant."
The President General WAsHIssToS, referred the mat
ter with the opinion of EDMUND RANDOLPH, the Attorney
General which adverse the opinion Of the Attorney
General of Virginia. to Congress- message dated October
~, 1871. [Ameican State Papers, voL J. Miscellaneous
%. 3d. This the immediate cause Of the passage by
Congress of the act of February H. l793 which only
designated the Executive Of several States the
upon whom the demand for fugves from justice should be
made and the mode and proof upon which should be made
but determined similar proceedings to be had in respect to the
mode Of eclaimng persons escaping from the service Of
their masters"
Proceedings in Congress.
The history Of the act Of February r. ls93 prospecting
fugves from justice and persons escaping from their mas
tes weud be incomplete without tracing its progress through
Congress This the necessary, because in the midst
Of the excitement and agitation which fanatics and dema
gogues have produced in the Northern mind it might well be
supposed that il passed amid violent opposition, and
but another concession wruDg by the tyranny OF the South
from the tame and submissive North. Such not the
There no excitement there were no iDfamma-
tory speeches. and the opposition merely nominal 1t
passed in the Senate unanimously Friday, January Is,
1893. Senae Journal uol l, p. 472 Of the Senators
of that day JoHS LANsDoN, Of New Hampshire GEO.
CABor of Massachusetts,; OLIVER ELLSWORTH and ROGER
SHERMAN, of Connecticut; RURUs KIsG of New York !;
and RoBEar MoRRIs, Of Pennsyvanianames not honored
among their people only, but ''amar household
words to the whole country Such men-al OF them but
CABor and ELLSWORTH members Of the Federal Conven-
Charta, the Declaration Of Independencewere likely
any encroachment upon the rights and liberties OF the
North And yet they made opposition to the act 1898,
which will be presently shown to be- in all substantial pro-
Visions quite rigorous and quite exacng its auxiliary,
the act of 1850.
In the House of Representatives the on its
was, yeas 49, nays Tin the proportion almost Of
Here is the list as it stands upon the record:
YEAs-Fisher Ames Mass, John Baptiste Ashe N. c.,
Abraham Baldwin, Ga Robert Barnwel s. c.. Egbert Ben
son, N. r.. Elias Boudno N. j., shsarashub Bourne,
Mass Benjamin Bourn R. l.. Abraham Clark, N j., Jona-
as. Dayton p ssr Gsr1 Ma ade a IG9%as % I n
Benjamin Goodhur Mass James Gordon, Pa christopher
Gresnup, KY, Andrew Gregg Pa. Samuel Griffin Va.
Hlhouse CT, William Hndman, Md Daniel Huger, s. c.,
Israel Jacobs Pa, Philip Key, Md. Aaron Kitche N j.,
Amasa Learned, CT, Richard Bland Lee Va George Leon
Frederick Augustus Muhlenberg, Pa, William Vans MUIR
Md Alexander D. Orr KY, John Page, Va, Cornelu.
vester N Y, Israel Smith, VT William Smith, s. c. John
Steele, n. c., Thomas Sumpter, s. C Z, Thomas Tudor
Tucker S. c. Jeremiah Wadsworth, CT, Alexander White,
NAYsoSamuel Livermore, N H., John Francis Mercer,
Md, Nathaniel Niles, VT, Josiah Parker Va, Jonathan
Surges CT, George Thatcher Mass, Thomas Tredwell,
N Y.-House Jonna, DoL 1, p. 690.
An analysis Of this vote according to geographical div
sons shows that from the Northern Sstesthere were twenty
six in favor Of the bill and five against it and that
from the Southern States there for
against it. And Of those who voted in the Affirmative
fve-BALDwIN and WILLIAMSON, of Georgia, DArroS Of
New Jersey FITzsIMMoNs Of Pennsylvania and GILMAN
Of New Hampshirewere members Of the Federal Conven-
tion and two-CLARK, of New Jersey and GERRr, Of
Of the Declaration of Independence.
Surely these did not set the example of oppressive
and unconstitutional egisaon-dd sanction any thing
to which the General Government pledged by the
compact Of the Union. And in the face Of this VOTE
nearly unanimous taken in connexion with other prominent
facts which this investigation has far developed any
who regards the law and acknowledges the force and
obligation Of constitutional provisions ghtfuy object the
recamng Of slaves by their owners Will even the ercest
Of the agitaos at the North dare deame the integrity
patriotism of such men FIsHER AmEs and ELBRIDaE
GERRT, of NICHOLAS GILMAN, and THEODORE SEDswIcK,
and JEREMIAH WADswoRTH, because of their for the
act OF 1898! Has anacsm gone far that they will
write TRAITOR on the ombs of their fathers, aud point
these men as the "betrayers Of human freedom -
Comparison dra,0n betwee,s the act of 1893 and
the act Of 1850.
The character of the opposition the of September l8
$780, would almost justify the conclusion that no law Of the
kind had ever before been in force snd that truth
as has been frequently stated, contvancs for the
rest OF quet respectable men, guilty Of crime," to be
manaced and remanded into Southern bondage" by
this and similar lsicstions Of fact doubtless that many
have been led TO regard law of singular hardship
oppession aboundng in excessive pains and penalties To
dspate these false impressions, and convince all willing
TO be convinced, is only necessary make fair compa-
rison Of the two acts the one Of 1898, and the other
Of 1850.
The third section Of the of 1898 ~ s. Stat at LARGE
Uo l. 302 authorized their slaves in any
State Territory in which they might find them In virtue
of this slaves might be taken without warrant and it
offence against the laws Of State for the
their agents convey them back to the State whence they
absconded- Bald.Oin's G. C. Rep, p 577-'7s.] Sill,
this power was from the very difficulty Of its exercise nuga-
tory, unless aided by positive law.
provided further that the certificate for the delivery and