New-York daily tribune. [volume] (New-York [N.Y.]) 1842-1866, 1850-12-30

Of "a
ta IE1ss3f ali that be intimates is necessary in
.e,,,ar. NJ the Government, and he will require
/ e, b;a snbordnates the perform ance Of their du-
/ FOR mon the same elevated ground. AS fast IS
corrnption Or Illegal exact0n. though it be hydra
! bea6ed, is demonstrated to him, it ceases to be-
without effort other than waving simply the Just
! hand. AS ever, yours q. u. o.
The Constitution and Fugitive Slaves NO. r..
To he Editors Of The Tribune
What is the EXECUTIVE AGENCY contenp plated
in the Constitution for the capture and delivery
Of fugitives from Slavery This is 2 practical
question of no minor Importance. Does the Con-
sttution confer power on the Federal Govern
ment to enact laws and establish tribunals for the
reclamation of slaves? Does it address itself to
the Legislatures of the respective States Does
it authorize slavecatcber to seize any man he
may choose to claim as bis slave, and without
legal process carry him into bondage The last
of these questions supplies its own answer. No
one in his senses will pretend that the slave
hunter is to be Judge and Jury in respect to the
legal reality of his own claim. He is to present
his claim, and abide the award OF some competent
tribunal
Where, then, is lodged the legal and Judicial
power of this strange work? Is it with the Fed
eral Government, or with the respective States?
We are aware Of the general doctrine, that it is
the proper business of Congress to enact laws on
this subject, and Of the Courts and officers OF the
United States TO carry them into execution The
Fugitive Slave Laws of 1898 and 1850 proceed on
this principle. So far as we know, the correct
ness Of the principle has not been generally called
in question. Most OF the objections urged against
the recent law respect the constutl0nality OF it's
features, and not that of its source. 1t would
seem to be very clear, that if 1t is the proper
business of the General Government to catch run
away slaves by legal process then it is not that
of the State authorities to do it The work GER
tainly does not belong to BOTH it belongs whOty
to the one or the other; If TO the State then 1t
must be done by the tribunals and officers oil the
State and so il to the General Government then
that Government must employ its own agents, and
cannot confer Jurisdiction upon Courts not created
by the Constitution or laws OF the United States.
State Courts are not Federal Courts; neither can
the latter do the work OF the former. They have
distinct provinces, Let there be no conflict in
this business. Whoever undertakes to do it, let
him do the qrhole Of it. Hence, we renew the
the question, Where is the proper agency for car
rying into execution the provision OF the Constl-
tuition?
/. The mature OF the provision itself points to
this agencyi unless it be otherwise expressly
provided for in the Federal Constitution. Its de
sign is to fasten the bondage of Slavery upon the
victim, although he may fee from one civil COM
munity to another. The States are distinct COM
munities although whole forming fedora
tive republic AS communities, they are perfect
ly independent of each other, except in those re-
spects which bind them together as one nation.
The laws of South Carolina have no more authori.
tv in Massachusetts, than the laws Of England.
These distinct communities, in forming this Re
public make an agreement and insert 1t In the
bond Of union that slave escaping from the one
to the other shall not be discharged from the
bondage of Slavery, but shall be delivered upon
claim of his master. This is the agreement, and
upon its very face is manifest the agency of its
execution unless otherwise provided tor In the
terms of the compact. 1t belongs to the States;
it ia their business to catch fugitive slaves, unless
the people have assigned the duty to the General
Government. Suppose that two nations should
stimulate by treaty to deliver fugitive slaves the
one to the other then the act of delivery in each
case would be that Of the nation into which the
slave from the other had made his escape IRE
cisely so is it in the nature OF things IN respect
TO this compact between the people OF tne respect
tive States. Its execution is clearly STATE hcSioi
and not national. unless made the latter by an
express grant. -
9 The terms of the provision itself manilesty
points to the agency of the States and not that OF
the general Government. To show this let
transcrbe the clause: &" No person held to service
or labor in one State under the laws thereof esca
ping into another, shall, in consequence of any law
or regulation therein, be discharged from such ser
vice or labor, but shall be delivered up on claim
ofthe party to whom such service or labor may be
due" What is this A grant of legislative
power to Congress in the premises Nothing OF
| the kind is expressed or even limited at The
only parties referred to are the States between
| whom it is obviousy clause OF compact 10
| whom does the provision speak when 1t declares
that the fugitive into another State shall not
{" in consequence of any law or regulation THERE
| IN' be DISCHARGED from such service or labor -
Clearly to the State; it torbds the State so to ex.
ercise its sovereign poweras to emanclPate the
| Slave it makes any law or reSulatloa con
templating this result unconstitutional 1t is re-
striction upon the legislative power OF the State.
In this restriction is not the slightest grant OF
! power to Congress, or even a reference to TINS
! body in the remotest sense. The other branch OF
! the clause declares that the Slave shall be de-
| liyered IN Bv whom BY the party already
! described in the compacs-the State into which
! The fugitive has escaped The State is to pass
no laws dscharging the fugitive but is to deliver
him up on claim, &c. This is the natural and
| obvious Interpretation OF the provision Had II
! been the design to commis the act OF seizure and
! delivery TO the Federal Government nothing was
more EASY than to have added qualifying clause
! expressive of such design. II the trainers had
in view Federal LEGISLATION IN respect 10 the de-
| livery they have not only not given the slightest
hint to this effect, but have constituted the pro
vision so as to presume the opposite 1t is worthy
ofremark. as adding to the force ofthis argument
that whenever the Constitution brings the power
of Congress or that of the State to view 50 as to
qualify the one by the other Is does so in express
terms In Article I. Sec. 4, Clause l. it is Proyid-
ed. that 1.-The times, places and manner Of hold
ng Elections for Senators and Representatives,
shall be prescribed in each State by the Legisla-
tare thereof; but The Congress may At any time
bv lac make or alter such regulations. except as
to the place of choosing Senators Here we see
the relative position ofthe two authorities not by
inference, bat in express words. Again in Article
, Sect and 1, it is provided that each STATE shall
appoint in such manner as the Legislature thereof
may direct, the Electors of the President but