The republic. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1849-1853, 1850-11-01
From the Boston Daily Adoutissr.
Mr.. Eliot's Letter ON the Fugitive Slave

| SouSA w DC u very IOrClDle, III
gunent In support OF the propriety and necessity
OF THIS law The argument rests, of course, not on
the ground OF expediency or Of policy as specially
aHecung the interest OF his constituents, but Of
positive obligation between one portion of the
Union and another-an litigation which arises not
only from the nature Of the relations which subsist
between the northern and southern portions of the
Union, Tor their mutual benefit but from our POSI-
| tive engagements under the Constitution, from
which as members of the Union we cannot escapc
The nature of this obligation is stated by Mr. Eliot
with great clearness and force, and we do not see
how any one capable of understanding the state of
facts, and the of reasoning, escape from
the combustion at which he arrives.
Mr. Eliot very properly in this communication
does not go into consideration of the special pro-
visions of the law. That is a subject which has no
| connection with the object which he had in view,
which was defence Of his vote upon the bill I'M
der the circumstances in which il was given. II
| is well known that these circumstances he
| had no CONTROL and that the only question pre-
sentcd for his decision whether he should vote
| ior this bill or against it, well knowing that if
1t were rejected there would be no opportunity
| OF aHording substitute for it. There is the
| strongest reason TO believe that if Mr.. Clay's
or Mr.. Webster's plan of compf onisc had received
| the countenance OF members from the free States
| and had not been resisted with hostility and acri-
mony aimed against all peaceabe ad justment with
the slaveholding States, bill Of very different
| character would have passed in the Senate, and
probably one entirely unobjectionable in the form
OF Its provisions for carrying into effect the stpula
ton OF the Constitution on this subject From the
want OF cooperation on the part Of members from
the Tree States, in framing bill which should be
exempt possible from objections in point of form,
| and which should secure the object demanded by
the provision Of the Constitution, and that only,
the bill came to the House of Representatives in the
shape In which it was framed by members of those
States which aremmediately interested in Its pro-
visions It came at period of the protracted SEES
sion at which it was impractcable TO remodel and
improve it, even had there been any disposition to
do SO on the part of members opposed to it it
stands 1t came also one of series of measures,
all violently opposed by the Free soil party, and by
many other members from the North, which it was
hoped might restore peace to the country and avert
the danger of disunion. To reject the bill under
such circumstances would have been to abandon
the hope of pacificaon, and to expose the country
to consequences more deplorable even than the
present agitation.
What would have been the consequences of the
rejection of these bills Of the Fugitive Slave bill
| alone, tell But if there are any who
feel confidence that such event would not have
been attended with imminent danger Of dsunion
civil war; it is because they have shut their eyes
to the evidences Of disaffecon at the South exaspe
rated as 1t Is by the evidences OF bitter hostility
hibited by too many of the people of the North.
The refusal to pass any law for giving effect to the
provision of the Constitution for the recovery of fu
gitive slaves would have been regarded denial
of justice, which one who reflects the nature
of the provocation and considers that they
people Of the same blood as ourselves can believe
that they would have quietly submitted to- 1t would
have been remuneration of an express obligation
of the Constitution, which they might Justly have
insisted upon as point of honor, and provision
deeply affecting their pecuniary interests. 1t is
apparent, from these considerations, that the only
question which Mr.. Eliot called to meet
was, simply, whether he would give effect to
provision of the Constitution SO important to the
South which had been rendered null by the legis
ation of the free States, or whether he would re-
fuse to do SO. He did not shrink from the obga-
ton of standing by the Constitution, and, in
doing, he adopted the course which
adopted by the people Of Massachusetts in l7S6,
when thew accented the Constitution.
For the purpose Of informing ourselves upon the
position which was taken by the people OF this State
upon this clause of the Constitution, we have re-
Cured to the report of the debates in the Massa-
chusetts convention of 1888, for the adoption of the
Constitution of the United States. Ii is well known
that this instrument then underwent thorough
scrutiny by the jealous friends of freedom of that
day. The convention took into particular consid-
GRAFTON the whole Constitution, discussing it sec
ton by section There was much opposition to
many ofthe provisions of it, and although converts
made in the progress of the discussion, il was
finally passed by majority OF only 1877 against
l63. In the discussion by sections, there was
good deal of debate the articles which relate to
the apportionment of representatives and direct
taxes on free and slave population, and to the pro-
hibition of importation of slaves. Several members
objected that Congress was restricted from pro-
hibitng the migration or importation of slaves
until 1905. But strange it may seem, the sec
ton which provides that slaves lawfully held in one
State, escaping to another, shall not be discharged
but shall be delivered up, was passed over with
out opposition and without remark. On a subse-
quent day, however after all the sections had been
read in order, and had been commented on at
the pleasure OF every member General Heath, OF
Roxbury, arose in the course of more general dis
cussion, and after remarking that, in Consequence
of his absence for some days from indispositon he
had been deprived of the opportunity OF expressing
his sentiments on some of the subjects which had
in the mean time passed under review, he proceed
ed to remark upon the article which relates to the
extradtion of slaves, in conncxion with that which
relates to the importation Upon these subjects he
spoke as follows:
al apprehend that IL is not in our power to do
any thing for against those who in slavery
in the southern States No gentleman Within these
walls detess every idea of slavery more than do;
il is generally detested by the people of this Com
monweath; and ! ardently hope that the time will
soon come when our brethren in the southern
States will view il as do, and put stop to il;
but to this we have no right TO compel them. Two
questions naturally arise if ratify the constitu
ton; shall do any thing by acts to hold the
blacks in slavery shall we become partakers OF
other mems sine think neither Of them. Each
State Is sovereign and independent to certain de-
gree, and they have n right and will regulate their
own internal affairs, TO themselves appears prop
and shall refuse to cat, or 20 drink or to be
united, with those who do not think or act Just as
VIC do? Surely not. We not in this par
takers Of other meme sins, for in nothing do vol
unfairly encourage the slavery OF our fellow men.
A restriction ia laid on the Federal Government
which could not be avoided and union take place.
The Federal convention went as far they could.
The migration or importation, SC, is confined to
the States now eristing only; new States cannot
claim it. Congress, by their ordinance for erect
ing new States, some time since declared that the
new States shall be republican, and that there shall
be no slavery in them"
We have here quoted from the debates avery thing
that appears TO have been said upon the article in
question, in a convention which continued its de-
bates in daily forenoon and afternoon sessions for
more than four weeks This fact shows clearly that
the provision in question was regarded not as
oversight or a measure which depended upon
the option Of the people of this State, but in
dispensable condition Of the union Of the States
the acceptance of which they made their election,
in deciding that they would become members Of
| the Union
The same necessity for this provision of the Con-
stituton exists at the present time, connected with
all the motives TO the continuance of the Union,
which then induced ito formation; and we
bound in addition, to lite observance by our accept
ance of the Constitution, by an engagement which
we cannot annul, and which We have sworn TO obey.
! When those Of our citizens who have exhausted
their themas upon this law, and have denounced
Mr.. Eliot for his support of il, as destitute of the
common feelings of humanity, shall have reflected
| upon these facts and shall have candidly consid-
! cred his statement Of the case, they may perhaps
1 AZ wa N Of