The daily union. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1845-1857, 1850-08-21

Uut W ~ss,n"S s1S f'NtS" 'NN"''yi
record, made up regularly. Here is the description,
according the amendment, giving the character OF the
Then your commissioner magistrate has nothing TO DO
but TO decide the question OF identity and what do you
want of jury for that purpose Sir, il you will pass
BILL small bill OF some three or four sections providing
Tor commissioners providing record deciding the ques
lion OF IDENTITY and giving the warrant for removal, you
have ever, thing that my constituents want
have one suggestion more that wish To make, and
then believe am through There is an evil occurring
that has not been spoken Of notice IN one oil me pro-
visions of the bill that have been looking al ihai any
should obstruct inerpose diicues IN Tue
way OF capturing returning the fugitive he is TO pay
thousand dollars Now, the difficulty grows out OF this
that many OF these persons that thus inerpose are nor
worth cent; and your penalty OF thousand dollars-
Mr. MASON, (in his seat That is provided Tor IN
Mr. UNDERWOOD. That is in the amendment. then;
did not notice it, 1t supersedes the objection was
about to make was going to suggest that there ought
to be provision for the purpose OF reaching those VINO
could moi BE- reached by money and i h8! IS provided
MASON, supersedes the objection was about to take
10 that part OF the bill to which my attention has been
called. had not read his amendment, and am very
glad 10 hear II.
Then the whole measure, it to me, can be made
perfectly simple. Amend The act of 1893 according TO the
suggestions made by the honorable senator from Mchi
gan, Mr. CAss providing for the set oil magistrates that
the State Legislature has deprived us Of Provide Tor the
record Let the question OF identity be tried and men
punish those who any distractions think IT will
work well and will satisfy North and South and be sat
isacory to my cons uens
Mr. MASON Mr.. President | take little interest in
learning historical fact from the senator over the way
from Massachusetts,, Mr.. WINTHROP. understand that
the senator, in reply question Of the senator from
South Carolina lMr BUrLERl-which question was,
whether he knew of any instance in which man claim
ing slave by claimant OF slave State was found TO
be free and not savethe SENATOR by way OF CIV
ing Case gave that out OF which this law OF 1913 grew
The history of that law understand the senator does
Three from the State of Virginia went into the State
OF Pennsylvania and seized negro and carried him into
Virginia. and they indicted in the State of Pennsyl
vi MI A called A
made upon the governor OF Virginia for the surrender
of these three ugitives from usce-the offence
off this negro alleged to be free Now, war 10 know
OF the senator from Massachusetts Mr. WISTHRoP]
whence he learns that the negro thus taken in Pennsy
vania was free man and not slave.
Mr.. WINTHROP. Twill answer the honorable sena-
tor from Virginia WITH great pleasure In the first lace
sir our rule OF presumption in Massachusetts is precisely
opposite TO that which believe generally prevails in Vr
gina We hold that every coloed person is free man.
until he is proved to be slave. Now there is proof
or allegation anywhere that this kidnapped negro was
not ree and the very indictment found against those
who seZed him and sold him would seem 10 settle the
question that he | stated, however in the second
place. that he free man, upon the evidence oil report
which made the legislature of Massachusetts
years ago, by committee which had investigated the
facts and which describes him ga free negro named
John" do not understand moreover, that in any OF the
proceedings connected with this case, or in any OF the
papers communicated TO Congress at the time, the sug
geston was anywhere made that this man was slave;
but, the contrary, understand that those papers
everywhere speak OF him free In regard 10 this
point, however, am ready 10 be corrected,
But, SIR, as am called up again upon this subject,
cannot resist the opportunity OF giving more answer
TO the inquiry OF my honorable friend from South Caro-
lina Mr. BUTLER His question in substance is, where
IS there - instance OF free person being seized as
slave? Now, sir, he must allow me to remind him-and
assure him that do in spirit OF elimination
or reproach-that such thing may happen under
the express laws OF his own State II well known sir
and believe that the senator from South Carolina him
self has occasion expressed his regret al the fact
that the State of South Carolina and other slaveholdng
States have laws upon their statute books under which
free persons OF color, coming from Boston, or New York,
or Philadelphia any other OF the commercial cities OF
the Union, IN northern vessels and arriving in southern
ports, may be seized without any charge of cme and
without any examination except ascertain the color of
their skim may be carried shore and imprisoned and
unless, when the vessel Sails the master of the vessel
for their maintenance Jail during the whole period OF
their detenon may be sold into slavery for life Now,
supposing that OF these free coloed persons of the
State oil Massachusetts, OF any other State, having
been seized while board of vessel in which he
lawfully engaged and having been imprisoned and sold
into slavery in the manner and under the circumstances
which have stated, should make his escape. and should
succeed IN getting back 10 the port from whence he
sailed, would there be anything very unreasonable in
our calling Tor tral by jury upon question whether he
should be remanded into slavery Would IT be altogether
incumbent upon do you Think SIR, TO take the
oral testimony OF the claiman-even though he might
have purchased the negro bona deand at The time
to refuse to take the testimony of the fugitive himself.
OF those who might have known him free before
he went the lstarred voyage which terminated in his
n
Here again, then, is case IN which such occur
that alluded TO by the from South Caro-
lna might happen do not say that il is very likely 10
happen but cannot help adding in this connexon, that
my judgment there Is grievance, complaint which
tue southern States have arayed against the north
ern States, which be compared for moment with the
grievance which the northern States have complain OF
al the hands oil the southern States in the provisions OF
this law, by which the cooks and stewards engaged on
board their vessels and in the prosecution OF their law
full employments thus liable to be seized and sold into
slavery.
Before taking my seat sir, will venture TO make one
little more practical, perhaps in regard TO
this summary process recommended by the amendment OF
the senator from Virginia He is referred to in
o. Pennsylvania VS. Prigg. What were the circum
stances OF that case 1t seems that negro woman
named Margaret Morgan had fled from service and es-
capped 10 Pennsylvania in the 1892 and tina, the de-
ienGan the legally constituted agent OF Margaret Ash
more had caused the said Margaret Morgan TO be appre
hended in the year 1897. Now, here is interval oi five
years from the time OF the escape the time OF the
arrest; and there might be an interval OF ten years
Of twenty years even, far any provision OF this
bill ~ concerned There is no statute OF limitations
here IN regard TO the rights powers of the claim
ant He may come into free State after any lapse of
lme however long, and upon his oral esii nony,
when his recoiecons OF the fpguve may be in
DISTINCT and when the fugitive himself may be so much
changed to render liability Of mistake ever so great he
may demand OF one OF these commissioners the certificate
which may settle forever against the party claimed the
question OF his right 10 freedom Sir II the trial by Jury
is not to be allowed in all cases, would be proper
would not be Just, TO incorporate into this law
thing OF the principle ~ 'sresh pursut"-gving TO all
persons the night OF trial by jury except in of fresh
exceeding or two years at the furthesti When
longer time than this has eIansad allec ed