The daily union. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1845-1857, 1850-06-19


Of iueyes shall, upon the production Of the
record and other evidences aforesaid grant % such claim
fled and proved % be owing service labor a. aforesaid
which ce!cae shall authorizes such cansn 70 seize Or
from which he escaped
In other words il prescrbes that the jurisdiction al
home-the State from whieh1pe fugitive ied-shalI adju-
der The constitution Ii provides that the owner may
take certificate with him 10 the State where he i 70
make the aud that such adjudication, 80 certified
stuU be final and conclusive upon the juysd on abroad
In other words. constitutes the free States The
ecuive, the ministerial officers OF the slave States
for the purpose OF carrying their Judgments INTO elect
execution That is the amount Of il Now, we are
placed in such position as that BY the obligations OF
the constitution, and deny your right % place Us there
BY the constitution you authorized TO demand OF The
jurisdiction where the slave is found the redeyery OF
the slave but when and how Why, upon showing
that the fugitive Is slave and owes service 70 INC clam
ant But who are 10 Judge OF this BY the constitution
Why clearly The jurisdiction upon whom The demand Is
made and such il the act Of 1873. Now BY this amend
ment you take from the jursd c!lon upon which tae
tution and give that jurisdiction to another State, and
make us its executive officer only The entire extent Of
your gh g egsats on tas subject prescribed e oy NE
There Is no commonaw principle or remedy about u
You have no right you have no power, therefore. 70
leg slate on this subject In this way The constitution
imposes the doing OF The act upon the foreign jurisdiction
but leaves that foreign jurisdiction 10 Judge whether
the facts true upon which The act to be done But
to be done only upon certain state Of facts yet you call
upon one Jurisdiction do the act and another, and for
eign Jurisdiction. 10 judge Of the facts.
The course of practice in these in the slave States
submit to the memory Of professional gentlemen from
those States. have looked into some OF their statutes
and every statute book into which have looked far
my memory goes requires II speak on the subject
at all nothing beyond the oath Of the Claimant himself
to ente him to the possession OF the runaway Now,
II to be Tolerated that when man comes into free
State (wheFe upon every principle OF International law,
being on free soil, he is recognised freeman the
oath Of the man who claims @ be the owner shall set
MES That could not be done in any free State
would be an outrage upon law and evidence u \
sew has examined the statute books and would really
ask him IL in the course OF his investigation in the slave
holding and non-sIavsholdng States, he has found a
State negro to whom he had no rightl do not be-
lieve single instance be shown in which slave
holder claimed free man OF the North as his prop
Mr. DAYTON. really hardly know what is the con-
nexon of the question of the senator from South Caro-
lima with my argument, will answer the senator's
question, however, short time, when come TO that
MIR. BUTLER Ibid not want 10 be misunderstood
The senator stated that it outrage that ought not
be tolerated that should take his property
upon his evidence, upon his own affidavit then
asked the senator if he knew OF single instance in
which STAKEHOLDER had claimed that which was not
his.
Mr. DAYTON submit now 10 the senator from
South Carolina whether he reasonably suppose that
posted up TO the facts in regard TO the case OF
every runaway negro in the United States. When
said this outrage was speaking not of the fact
oil man taking his own property upon his own oath as
the senator says but OF the legal prncple and said It
outrage upon law that man standing upon free
soil, recognised there freeman, should be delivered
up slave the oath Of the claimant alone, the negro
MI. CLAY With the permission OF the senator from
New Jersey, will say word. The senator from New
Jersey says he has made research into the statutes OF
fha alnua Nfat
search that the oath oil the owner OF slave was
everywhere deemed sufficient evidence to establish the
Mr.. DAYTON. fbeg pardon for the interruption. but
Mr. CLAY was going to say that there is not such
law, within my recollection, any slave State IN the
Union. But in every case where the question of Free
dom slavery is at issue, the master be more
witness in that case than in any other to which he was
Mr.. DAYTON. i know whatI intended to say and
think did say. said had looked into the statutes Of
OF the southern States, and found that, in regard
runaway negroes the oath OF the owner was sufficient
to entte him 10 the possession OF the negro
Mr. CLAY. should like to see the statute which con-
tains such provision
the honorable senator was not speaking OF the case
where the issue was regularly made up IN court upon
was il the subject abou, which we are talking. | was
speaking OF the master taking possession OF runaway
negro, upon his oath, and such understand to be
the practice in this District at this hour the runaway is
delivered up, If it be proved 10 the satisfaction Of the
magistrate before whom he IS aken by the oath OF the
claimant himself, that the runaway is his property My
impression s that where any rule OF evidence has been
lddown by the statutes OF The States into which have
looked il has uniformly been that which have stated
| II is certainly so in Virginia
/ Mr. MASON With the permission OF The senator,
will say few words 10 the law OF my own Stale.
The senator has made statement, and trust be
will not consider II dscoureous in ask him what
he II he means TO say that in the Stale OF vlr
gina, trial OF question OF freedom slavery, the
oath OF the claimant the alleged owner received in
evidence he is mistaken But il he TO say that
the State OF Virginia every person OF the African a
considered slave by law and that the burden OF show
ing that he Is slave devolves the party claiming
freedom, he is right That is the law OF Virginia Thus
IL is that If any citizen OF Virginia claims any ohe OF the
\ erty under the laws OF Virginia, just II citizen OF
Virginia claimed horse TO be his property, and no
other claimant appeared He is not required take oath
at ALL in order 10 reclaim bis property at home put the
senator right on that point The caman, s required
TO take oath that the African he claims is his property
but II he meets OF the African the high road
and claims him his property he may take possession oil
him without any OATH But he does il nj his own risk
II he claims and takes freeman. the freeman
proving his freedom recover damages for unlawful de
enton, the white man. Now, on the subject
OF the oath, suppose the senator means this body
IN the State OF Virginia is entitled BY law TO apprehend
any OF the African who going nj large without
an owner and 10 comnit them 10 jail, and the laws re-
quife the jaiIor TO hold them. II citizen oil Virginia
comes TO the Jail and claims the African his property
he Is entitled TO take him OATH precisely as he would
: any other species OF properly
II Mr.. DAYTON. have allowed the senator from VIr-
gnia to 60 on With speech the subject rather than
question or explanation, because saw exactly To what
point he would come. knew that could not be mis-