The Camden journal. [volume] (Camden, S.C.) 1836-1851, 1850-05-17
political department.
COMMITTEE OF THIRTEEN.
REPORT.
CONCLUDED.

governments for Utah and New Mexico. The
definition and establishment of the boundary
between New Mexico and Texas, has an inti-
mate and necessary connexion with the estab-
ishment of territorial government for New
Mexico. TO form territorial government Tor
New Mexico, without prescribing the limits OF
the Territory, would leave the work incomplete,
and might expose New Mexico to serious con
troversy, if not dangerous collisions, with the
State Of Texas Aud most, if not all the con.
siderations which unite in favor Of combining
the bill for the admission of California as
State and the territorial bills, apply to the boun-
dary question of Texas. By the uuion OF the
three measures, every question OF difficulty and
division which has arisen out OF the territorial
acquisitions from Mexico will, it is hoped, be
adjusted, or placed in a train of satisfactory
adjustment. The committee, availing them
selves of the arduous and valuable labors OF
the committee on territories, report bill, here
with annexed, (marked Az embracing those
three measures, the passage of which, uniting
them together, they recommend to the Senate.
The committee will n3w proceed to the con-
sideration OF, and to report upon, the subject OF
persons owing service or labor in one State es-
Gaping into another The text of the Constl-
tuition is quite clear: g No person held to labor
or service in one State, under The larS thereof,
escaping into another, shall, in consequence of
any law or regulation therein, be discharged
from such service or labor, but shaH be dellrered
up on the claim of the party to whom such SER
vice or labor may be due'' Nothing can be
more explicit than this language--nothing more
manifest than the right to demand, and the ob.
legation to deliver up to the claimant, any such
fugitive And the Constitution addresses itself
alike to the States composing the Union and to
the General Government. If, indeed, there
were any difference in the duty to enforce this
portion Of the Constitution between the States
and the Federal Government, it is more clear
that it is that of the former than of the latter.
But it is the dutv of both 1t is now well
known and incontestable, that citizens IN slave
holding States encounter the greatest difficulty
in obtaining the benefit Of this provision of the
Constitution. The attempt to recapture a fug!-
tive is almost always ubject of great i-rita-
ton and excitement, and often leads to most
unpleasant, if not perilous collisions. An own
er of slave, it is quite notorious, cannot pur-
sue his property for the purpose Of its recovery,
in some of the States, without imminent per
sonal hazard. This is deplorable state of
things, which ought to be remedied. The law
of l7y3 has been found wholly Intellectual, and
requires more stringent enactments. There is,
especially, a deficiency in the number of public
fnnctionaries authorized to afford aid in the
seizure and arrest OF tugitives. Various States
have declined to afford aid and cooperation in
the surrender of fugitiyes from labor, rs the
committee believe, from a misconception Of
their duty arising under the Constitution Of the
United States. 1t is true that q decision Of the
Supreme Court Of the United States has given
countenance to them in Withholding tlier as
sistance But the committee cannot but believe
that the intention OF the Supreme Court has
been misunderstood. They cannot but think
that that Court merely meant that laws of the
several States which created obstacles in the
way Of the recovery OF fugitves were not au-
thorized by the Constitution, and not that State
laws atfortiDg facilities in tEe recovery ol fugl-
tives were forbidden by that instrument.
The non-slaveholding States, whatever SYM
pathies any OF their citizens may feel tor per-
sons who escape from other States, cannot dis.
charge themselves from all obligation to enforce
the Constitution of the United States. All
parts of the instrument being dependent upon,
and connected with each other, ought to be
fairly aud Justly enforced. Ifsome States may
seek to eXonerate themselves from one portion
of the Constitution, other States may endeavor
to evade the performance of other portions OF
it; and thus the instrument, in some OF its most
important provisions, might become imperative
and invalid
But, whatever may be the conduct Of ind.
vidual States, the duty OF the General Govern
ment is perfectly clear That duty is, to amend
the existing law, and to provide an effectual
remedy for the recovery Of fugitives from SER
vice or labor. In devising such a remedy, Con-
gress ought, whilst on the one hand securing to
the owner the fair restoration of his property,
efectually to guard, on the other. against any
abuses in the application Of that remedy
IN all cases Of the arrest, within State, of
persons charged with offences; in all cases of
the pursuit OF tugitives from justice from one
State to another State; in all cases of extradi
ton provided for by treaties between foreign
powers-the proceeding uniformly is summary.
1t has never been thought necessary to apply,
in cases Of that kind, the forms and ceremonies
of final trial. And when that trial does take
PLACE, it is i'll the State or country from which
the party has fled, and not in that in which he
has found refuge. BY the express language of
the Constitution, whether the fugitive is held to