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

the constitution that stand pretty strongly fortified
however the Senate should take different view OF
the and vote for such law. ] will acquesce in
their decision but, far am concerned, must vote
against it.
Mr.. UNDERWOOD. am very glad that the senator
from Maryland has called the attention of the Senate and
the country 10 this subject My colleague and myself
nave boh IN the OF the session, presented memo
las IRON citzens of our State claiming compensation
IRON he Qned States because OF the loss OF their slaves
anc her ailuie TO get them after making all possible e
ios TO effect that object An analogy has been referred
py om ana NG bs Gaoa in Tor 10
has referred also to the analogy Of the old "EngIsh hun
dred" Now there are other cases of similar descrp-
ton which throw light by way OF analogy upon this ap-
plication to make the government liable for the Losses
which the slave States thus sustain There are laws
passed in various parts of The United States 10 indemnify
or the injuries which citizens in towns sustain OCCASION
ally from mobs, by the brHng OF houses the pulling
down OF houses and ings OF that sort Ia every case
OF that kind, il becomes the duty of the community to
rebate ia the way alluded toy And in many Of he com
mantes where the remedies furnished are inadequate to
themselves have by law indemnihed for The losses and
injuries sustained. think that description Of cases is
much stronger than the OF Indian depreciation to
which the senator from North Carolina has referred.
The Indian tribes occupy the position OF foreign nations
OF independent people to some extent; and we are un
der obligation of being possessed OF the exclusive power
and control of intercourse with them. Although they
not like the nations beyond the Atlantic, yet being 10
under obligations obtain redress from them for the
wrongs perpetraed upon our citizens and.t becomes
matter OF policy with us to pay the citizens ourselves
rather than throw them upon self-redress and thereby
endanger Indian hostilies.
Sir, allow me to make remark upon the subject Of
as s n as G pg IS y
ermne that the officers OF the several States might if
they chose execute the law OF 1893 passed by Congress-
execute the law passed by Congress, unless il be mat
ter OF discretion with them. Under that decision the
officers Of the State were permitted to proceed to execute
the of 1898 until the legislatures OF various northern
States nterposed and actually prohibited their State on
from executing the law # is that inerposal the
the act Of 1893 BY State officers that constitutes the
basis upon which Congress, under that decision. comes
now to act upon the subject in order to afford the ID
States might not institute system of their own for the
extradon Of fugitive slaves have doubt upon that
subject taey were TO 40 80 sG IT, w1ua a ne! S v,oae ~
constitution OF the United States imposes duty upon
this government to establish system by which fugitive
slaves can be reclaimed And why was that provision
inserted in the constitutional II was because that with
out il would have been matter Of discretion with the
States whether they should adopt system Of that sort or
The trainers of the constitution were unwilling to
leave it matter of discretion with the States
for that discretion, particularly under the influences
have been exercised to produce system BY
which fugitive slaves were to- be delivered to their
owners Hence the necessity Of introducing clause IN
establish system by which these evils could be re-
dressed But in doing that the constitution does not
say TO the States, You shall not do it," There il
no prohibition upon the power Of the States to inst
tute their own system for the extradition OF fugitive
slaves at all. And conceive that such system, nci
siituted by the United States may also exist And If
both systems are put into operation, the only enec that
holder losing his slave would have the right seek hi.
redress through either remedy, at his discretion and
option
Now there are some anaoges growing out Of the
stuton of the United States. Full faith and credit
to be given the records of the judicial proceedings OF
the several States Under clause OF the constitution
md hoS had
giving verify and providing mode OF authorization BY
which records shall be evidence in every other State in
from having system of evidence upon the subject Of
records and the laws OF several States Not at all On
the conuary both systems CO exist; and there e not
State in the Union but what has its own laws legitimate
ing the mode by which the laws and records OF sister
States may be introduced evidence and the judges
and the courts OF The states may 0e % 0y ,hsss
Congress prescrbes upon that subject The State may
satisfy her tribunals by her laws and sir she
might have system for the extradion of slaves which
might give 10 the citizen of slaveholdng Stale the OPP
ton OF 10 her tribunals or those provided by
Congress.
courts and also in the United States court, when he
occupies the relation contemplated by the constitution OF
the United States being citizen of another State Here
are two systems for the accomplishment of the OBJ
lect coexlsting-one by the States and one by the
United States The citizen has right to take either.
And you establish system by the States Tor the
delivery OF fugitive slaves, and system by the United
States Tor the accomplishment of the same object.
The difficulty, and the only difficulty IN the matter,
grew OF this originally In the act OF 1893 the Con-
gress of the United States atlem sted 10 impose this as
duty upon the officers y the State which they had no
right to do. Each government must act through its own
functionaries, according to It's system and its own
laws; and this government has more right to impose
duties and enforce the execution OF these duties upon
State officers than has TO impose them upon the omcers
OF England or France or any other foreign country.
The other consisted, according to the dcisIon of the
Supreme Court OF the United States in Me OF "Pngg
us PENNSYLVANIA in attempting to ioce upon the State
authorities the execution OF these duties According TO
my view of that case, the fact that the Supreme Court oil
the United States decides that the officers OF the State
might in their discretion execute the act OF 1893 leaves
the foundation OF strong inference that the State itsef
light have its system. As understand the deci-
son. does deny that the State may have its own
system, and which shall be remedy, IL the owner oil
a slave chooses to resort oft
However, II is unnecessary to pursue that suolec'
further have, in a lew worls, given my IDEAS ~ 70
the manner in which State might have ITS own system.
and the federal government its system, under when ~
would be discretionary for the owner Of the save
to resort to either But the constitution OF me oheo
States does allow the blending oil these 70 -
10 impose The State officers, whether mey WI o nV.
the duty of executing the law oil he ohi'eu o,ass; NY
nartcniar object in rising to say to my fnend from
Marviand that while thank hun Tor the introduction
az s snbeot 10 the notice of the Senate and OF the coun
lv appfehend that il would be better for hm to with
Iay ,be amendment and not TO attach TO this bill The
bsct winch we have present hand is to endeavor
o nrepare some system which, in practice will enable
the ow oer TO reclaim his fugitive slave II seems to me
bat the remedy enable him to obtain his fugitive slave
4 a very different thing from obtaining compensation from
the United States in he fails through that remsy 20
obtain the slave and | apprehend that ii the two mess