The national era. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1847-1860, 1850-12-26


stitution, the doctrine Of its trainers 1t is the
doctrine Of the Free-Soilers. lfthere be any one
feature in the Constitution, which the whole his
tory Of its adoption has made plain, it is that sa-
very is SAFE Institution, OrtT which Congress has
no comTol-with which this Federal Government
has no legitimate p0iccTS TO interfere We, sir Of the
North, will not be constrained even by your Fu
gitive Law, to interfere with it. The slavery Of
Virginia belongs TO her. If she possess the power
and the disposition 10 uphold it, we cannot put il
| down or abolish it, IL she sees fit to abolish it,
we have no power to interfere to sustain it.
| have often defined the views OF anti-savery
men and of Free Sellers on this subject>-others
have often done it f; yet we are misapprehSnded
and constantly misrepresented. That CLAUSE of
! the Message now under consideration was intend
ed to mpute to us purpose, desire, to interfere
with Southern slavery. That idea, false and
unfounded, has been asserted and reiterated for
years. The President should have been better
informed For the hundredth time repeat that
Congress nor this Federal Government have any
more power to interfere with the slayery of the
Southern States than they have With the seridom
of Russia The slave States hold Their" peculiar
institution as independently Of this Government
as Russia holds her serfs. Again, sir, this Gov
eminent possesses no more right to involve the
people of the North in the support of Southern
slavery, than it has TO involve us in the support
Of Russian serfdom. Congress possesses no more
power nor right TO make us the catchers of South
ern slaves, than of Russian serfs.
These were the views and feelings of those who
framed the Constitution. They never dreamed
of making US the catchpolls for Southern slave
hunters
Nothing could have been further from the
thoughts Of those who framed the Constitution
In that Convention, MIR. Gouverneur Morris said
that che neUer wOad concur IN upholdmg domestic
slauTy" So say |, and 50 say our people Of the
North. We never will concur in unfolding that
institution. MIR Morris added 4" II is wtariow
Institution IL was the curse Of Heaven upon the
! States in which It s~iettp ~ s.....
| So we say. lt is a curse upon those States but
the curse is hers not ours, and we will not share
j-i' Ys.s f.~;ti-~ , -- - 70 --.--. SS--
share in it. Our fathers would not consent to be
involved in its crimes-we will not.
MIR. Gerry of Massachusetts said "While we
have nothing to do with slavery in the States we
should be careful to lend no sanction to itn Sir,
we will lend no sanction to it, nor shall your fu-
gitive law compel US to sanction it, Mr.. Dickin
son thought it proper subject for the General
Government to interfere with, as Il 0ftcted our ma
tionai h0ppmessO But Southern members resisted
this proposition. They would give to the Federal
Government no powers TO interfere with slavery,
for any purpose.
But desire to come more directly to the clause
relating to fugitive slaves When the committee
reported the draft of a Constitution it contained
the clause for the arrest and return of fugitives
from Justice, as II now stands They were to be
delivered up by the Executive of the State to
which they should flee and this was to be done,
also, at the expense of such State. While this
report was under consideration, Messrs. Butler
and Pinckney of South Carolina moved to amend
it so as to "re9re fngriues, sares, and seruans 10
be delivered up Ike criminals"
Mr.. Wilson of Pennsylvania said "This would
oblige the Executive to do it at the public eIpense
Mr. Sherman of Connecticut saw no more
propriety in the public Selling and surrendering
a fugitive slave or servant than horSe0 And on
these suggestions Mr.. Butler withdrew his prop
osition These facts were recorded by Mr.. Mad
ison and no stronger evidence could have been
left of the intention of the trainers Of the Consti
tuition to save the freemen Of the North from all
expense, and guilt, and disgrace Of arresting fu.
gtive slaves The clause for the return of fugi.
tive slaves, as it now stands, was subsequently
adopted, with the concurrence Of Mr.. Wilson an(
of Mr.. Sherman IL provides, that the State q
which the slave fees shall not, by any law o.
regulation, release him from labor. "Non-inter
ference between the master and slave, was thei
! intention, their Interior design. The last mem
Der of the sentence says Of the slave, he "shaH
deliusred MP on claim of The person 10 mhom such ser
rice or labor may be dusn This language has beer
understood by some as rendering action necessary
on the part of the people of the State to which
the slave may have fed. This construction il
opposed to the whole spirit of the Constitution
Every reader will see at once that such obligation
is not imposed upon the Governor, nor upon the
people Of the State, nor upon any individual
The Supreme Court has given construction tc
this language which is in accordance with the in.
tention and object of the trainers Of the Constitu.
ton. We are to deliver up the fugitive slave as
we deliver up our friends to the civil officer. We
are bound to permit the master to arrest and carry
back the slave, in the same manner that We permit
the civil officer TO seize friends under process
and take them to prison.
And such was the law of 1893. IL followed the
Constitution 1t saved the master from inter-
ruption while pursuing his slave. II provided
fines and penalties against any person who, dis
obeying the constitutional compact, should secrete
or defend or rescue the slave. There the law of
1893 stopped II went no farther gave the master
no process under the seal of your courts by which
10 arrest his slave Ii commanded no officer Of this
| Government to aid the master in making such
rest No powers Of this Government were prosti-
tuted TO such degrading purposes. =" Noninter-
fyeneeo between the master and slave was the rule
| by which that whole law was framed And it is
| to the honor Of the Supreme Court that, in their
| construction OF tDt COuotituNiou ahu VI tuo INV,
thew have carried out this view. They have
adopted the very idea Of Mr.. Wilson and Mr.
| Sherman. They declare the right Of the master
| 10 recapture his slave to be the same as his right
to take his property which strays into free State
They copstrue our duties, to deliuer mp the fugi-
tive slave TO he the same TO deliver up the stray
| horse If the horse or the slave come among us,
| we permit the owner or master to take him. But
| in neither case can the owner or master call on
us to catch the slave or the horse
Neither the law Of 1893, nor the Constitution,
contemplated the organization Of Northern free
men into a constabulary force for catching ne.
proes Nor did it give the master guard and
assistance to carry back his slave at the erpense
| of the nation Such provisions could never have
been approved by Washington, who signed the
| law of 1893, nor by his associates who had aided
In framing the Constitution, and who also voted
for that law They understood their constitu-
| tional duties.
All who read this message must see that the
only interference with slavery which the President
processes to deprecate, is that which tends TO
| loosen the chains o. bondage; he appears to have
no objection to that interference which rvets
them closer Could be have believed that the
intelligent freemen OF the North would fail TO de-
tect the palpable contradiction between that Dor
ton Of the Message which deprecates interference
with slavery, and that which urges the con,inu.
ance Of this law, which was enacted for the very
purpose Of interfering in support Of that institu
| tion2
Could any interference have been more direct
and palpable than that which makes 1t the duty
of the deputy marshal or commissioner, under
heavy penalty, TO exert his utmost powers to ar
rest the fugtive1 Which gives him authority TO
call the whole power Of the State TO assist him 7
Which commands all good citizens 10 aid and assist
in the promp" arrest and raurn Of The trembling
slan? This interference the President approves
II rivets tighter the chains OF bondage, while we
are all aware that he disapproved our efforts to
exclude slavery from the free territory of New
Mexico. But this law goes farther; It not only
| attempts To strike down Gods law which CON-