The daily union. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1845-1857, 1850-08-25

within which public force can be invoked ia aid OF the
private force which would subject HIM to slavery he is
no longer a slave. He is man and he is where The
power which made hun a slave cannot follow hun lie
e free therefore That is all there is OF and that II
seems 10 me- is sound logic II r. legitimate deduction
from una Fashionable premises III gentlemen can SHOW
thai the premises unsound OF The conclusion CHROME
Gus, Jet them do so. =
Connecticut He thinks we may egslae Tor the extra.
dton of slaves escaped into the Territories although me
clause Of the constitution under which we act goes no
extend 10 the Territories at all Now ask The senator
where he finds constitutional power 10 enforce Inc sur
render OF slaves escaped into the rerI,onesf VIVA.
clause OF the constitution coniefs ~ WIN. ine seao
say that slaves passing taken IRON one OIL the States
into the Territories remain slaves II ne says that
understand him That is the modern southern dochne.
Does he say that these persons u iugves IRON
over the Territories? That also, IS posliion whcn
understand The point OF difference between us would
then be this maintain that Congress has no power TO
authorize or sanction slavery the Territories and that
inasmuch all territorial Legislative power rs derived
from Congress- there be, therefore, no territorial sla
very while the insists that qualihed rght OF
the master TO the slave, the right OF recamauon' may
exist in the Territories.
The senator Denies however, that the condition OF
the person thus liable be surrendered slavery lie
denies that the constitution continues the condition 81
slavery in the Of slave escaping from one state
into another He insists that The fugitive Is not prop
ery in the -sayehoding State In that, as legal
proposition, agree with him but this will furnish no
warrant for the legislation contemplated by the section
which propose to strike out The opinion which the
senator and myself entertain has not yet received the
lcton of the courts. Our opinion is not the law que
otherwise The Supreme Court, in the case OF Penn
sylvana vs Prgg, decided that, between States the
condition of the fugitive slave Tenans IN all respects
the in the State into which he escapes as II was
in the State from which he fled This is the language OF
the court:
The contains positive and unqualified fecog-
milton oil the right of the tt The aaue--
puls the right the service labor on his same gronnd
the in other State ~ IN the STATE
s nri,ho r. MS he 90 al ths iaetdsnts Of die ,ph
AHA nj me
which the local laws vi his
State confer upon him. as property
Now we are or should be practical men. We should
legslate upon facts and laws find them. The
power under which the Senate must act IN passing bill
Tor the surrender OF fugves from service is nowhere
expressly granted by the constitution, bn. Is claimed
by implication from this clause OF compact, and the
Claim is sanctioned by decision OF the Supreme
Court We must take this Whole decision together,
if desire to ascertain the consequences OF the
Legislation which it asserts to be within the com
potency OF Congress- This decision asserts that Con-
gress, in providing for the surrender OF slave es-
caped must regard him as property. H. then, Con-
gess shall exercise this same power regard slaves
escaped into Terrtoriesa not provided Tor IN the
constitutional must recognise or rather authorize the
continuance in the Territories OF the property relation
between the master and the escaped slave In the alb
oil legislation 10y Congress, slave escaped into the
Territories is free There is no slavery there for any
man, whencesoever howsoeve he may come Congress
Intervenes and there is slavery theresavey unlimited
in duraon unrestricted in extent, - with al the Incl
dents which attach the condition property relation
in the State from which the slaves Now, this
slavery gets into the Territories by the legislation OF Con-
gress. II not will the senator explain how it gets
there9
Why, sir, the very woman whose seizure and abduc-
ton gave the OF Prgg Pennsy had
children by free husband who never escaped from Ma
ryland, but born III Pennsylvsn And yet the
mother escaping slave and 'a the incidents" OF
slavery attached her, her children carried off with
her and sold TO the dealer do not say that this
was lawful or consntutiona-far from il bat it was
sanctioned by the decision OF the Supreme Court That
decision, though in my judgment wholly unwarraned By
the constitution, yet stands Tor law and must Iegs-
late practical men, well knowing that until reversed,
II will stand for law.
IT, then, Congress- by its legislation, the RICH,
OF reclamation ia ella OF which rs not given
by the constitutional il continues the masters power
and his property slaves escaped into Territories
that power and property are held by the Supreme Court 10
be continued by the consultation in and slaves
capped into the States does not Congress Introduce slavery
into the Terrores' 1t to that there can be but
one answer to this question | would hope, therefore,
that the senator from Connecticut might reconsider his
opinion
Mr. DAYTON. desire to say few words upon this
amendment iaasmuch as the yeas and nays have been
called upon it. am opposed TO the amendment decided
~ II seems TO me that carrying out the constitution in
good faith, according TO its spirit 1t right that should
give the slave States remedy for the recovery OF fugi
tive slaves IN the Territories well as IN the States 1t
true that the clause the constitution speaks only of
States But as has been already sand, that clause in the
constitution, connexion with the ordinance of 1857,
made provision for the redevery OF fugitive slaves.
That was the clear intent and meaning OF those who
framed the constitution IL thus case be not within the
letter, IT is within the spirit OF that instrument Ii is
Tying out in good faith the intent Of fathers. am
not disposed in meeting question OF this kind, 10 de-
priye the South OF this clear remedy in the Territories Ii
the slave escape and he have trial, such in my
view is right, | am for giving him up whenever and
wherever the Jurisdiction OF the United States extends
The senator from Ohio assumes the legal position tina,
slavery Is controlled by the common law, except where
the common law overrdden by the constitution There
Is no controversy about that There is controversy
about the fact that il slave escape from slave State
into free State upon free SOIL upon free
rllory, IN common law that slave is free But the ques.
uon IS whether, legislang spirit OF good faith,
ought moi 10 give 10 the South the fair benefit OF this
sntulons provision of the const,on-wheihe ought
not to override the commonaw principle II to
me thai ought TO carry out The provisions OF the
sluiion in good faith and If fair trial what is my
judgment ar trial, is given 10 the fugitive willing
10 give the South the benefit Of the redeyery every where
and anywhere But the senator from Ohio says .Whai
power have you 10 legstse in this wayW The consttu
ton limits this power oil legislation to slaves escaping
into the several States II the power comes from that
general clause which gives the government exclusive
power to leglslate for the Territories certainly we have
the power TO pass law upon this subject Our power
over the Territories supreme this question
covers all others III il does moi cover this que son,
pray let ask my friend how he will vote for the Will
mo, Pfoyiso' II shut slavery from the Terri.
tone we can let II III order slaves TO be delivered up
m the Territories. We have supreme and exclusive
jurisdiction over the Territories That is the legal position
upon which have stood all along The only question
was one OF expedlency-whether should exercise IL
or not
Now we come to exercise il; and what is the effect
Is u to establish slavery IN the Territories, contended
Not at all The from Connecticut has we'll put
the Illustration. We give up slave in a free State,
der this provision of the constitution and does that pro-
vision OF the constitution establish slavery in that free