The miners' express. (Dubuque, Iowa) 1849-1854, 1850-10-30
DUBUQUE:
WEDNESDAT:":::"O 23. 1850.
The Fugitive Slave La,y.-.i necessity OF
the Constitution.

The Fugitive Slave L"'v.-A necessity OF
the Constitution.
| Was the Fugitive Slave Law based upon no
other foundation than q consideration Of Justice
| to the slave owner, there would be some excuse
| for dcnouncing it when weighing in the same
balance the claim of the owner to the lifelong
service of the slave and the inalicnablc right Of
the slave to man inhcritancc, but being based
upon legal compact, the people Of the northern
States, as parties to that compact, have no right
| to the advantages given them by the Constu-
tion, if they refuse to the other parties to the
same compact, the interests guaranteed by the
same instrument. To attack law which is
merely dccaraory of the Constitution, is no.
thing less than attacking the Constitution itself:
Now, the Constitution is not less explicit upon
| this subject than is the late law, which merely
provides the ways and means for carrying into
effect the Constitution itself: Hence, if either
Of the laws unjust, arbitrary, or tyranncal:
or if either should be opposed, denounced, or re-
pcalcd, it should be the Constitution, and not
the late Fugitive Law.
- VI litt otdltS, iItdll 10 dtL III
good faith with the southern, or slave States,
they will give the latter all what is guaranteed
| by the Constitution. Now, in order to have this
guaranty before our eyes, let us rccur to the
Constitutional provision III reference to flgitivcs
| from labor or service
In the VI article I'd section of the Constitution
of the United States, is found the clause, 'sNo
person held to scrricc or '0bor in State, un-
der the laws thereof, escaping into another State,
in consequence Of any law or regulation therein,
shall be discharged from such service or labor,
but shall be delivered up on claim ofthc party;to
whom such service or labor may be due" This
is the constitutional provision, which secured
| the corporation 0: the southern or slave c-hodnC
States in the formation Of the Federal Govern
mrnt, and without which proysion, there never
could have existed union Of the States Pco-
pie nowadays may regard this as an unjust
compact; but such was not, could not, be the
sentiment of those who framed and adopted the
| Constitution. Is it not seltcvdrnt from read
ing Of the constitutional provision in relation to
fugitive slaves, that the Constitution meant to
protect the interests Of the slave hodcr? And
how could this be done, otherwise than by plac-
ing the officers Of the Federal Government at
his service, when his legal claim to the possess
sion Of the fugitive either resisted denied;
If; be assumed that there is a 'hghcr law a.
bove the Constitution, and that this higher law
guarantees to each and every man th1t freedom
which places his actions brvond the reach fhl-
man control, it may become Il question with
conscientious men, what would be tIlr strict line
Of duty to pnrsur when these laws should come
III conflict; but, would not these conscientious
Scruplrs prevent such nrn from entering in:o a
compact, which, by the same considerations,
would be 4 violation Of the ''liirhcr lav.' Nvw,
the crime Of these men would not be 50 GREAT, if
they did not enter into the compact, which
makes their opposition to its conditions now
crime. Having entered into the compact, they
are bound by its conditions, one of which makes
the fugitive slave law u necessity, as we have
shown. What would be thought Of the man or
nation, who would make bargain with his trl-
bowman, or fellow nation, on certain stipulated
conditions, and Immediately on securing the de-
sired advantage which he or it expected, turn
round and refuse to secure the other party the
reciprocally guaranteed interest? What would
be thought of such man or such nation3 And
admitting that the bargain was in violation of a
''hlgher law, can one party claim the advantage
OF the bargain, and refuse to the other the sipu-
lated advantage, on the ground that the bargain
should not have been madc' We know how
these questions will be answered bv every hon
est mind, and we put it to them to say whether
the northern States have not been benefited by
the compact called the Constitution; and if So,
whether it is honest to turn round after securing
these advantages, and deny the legality of the
compact or bargain? Would the "higher law
to which they appeal, allow them, only, to profit
by an un ust bargain? If the constitution is Just
If obedience to it be in accordance with the
the late fugitive slave law equally JUST and obe-
dience to it is as emphaticaly enjoined, even by
the shgher law If the Constitution is unjust
by sanctionng principle antagonslic to the
| Divine law-even so, those who derive advan-
tages from its existence cannot consistently de-
ny " tiltl PdlLlitiS LHoSc a.
| rising from their united excrtions
Again we assert, that if there be any crime
committed by the United States against the
'higher law" it has been committed by the
Constitution, and not by the late act of Congress
providing for the rccapture Of fugitive saves;-
and if those who are 50 strenuous in their oppo-
sition to the law, mean to act with any show of
sincerity, they will devote themselves to a repeal
of the Constitution instead of endcavorng to re-
peal or oppose what is but consequence or ne
ccssty ofa long-made bargain To oppose the
execution Of the law, is treason; to labor for the
repeal Of the obnoxious provision Of the Const-
tuition, may be right; but to shirk the odum
which may be presumed to be the consequence
ofan avowed disloyalty TO the union fthe States
is no less trcacherous, because it is indirect and
covert than it would be if made in the face of the
Constitution itself No one likes to come bold.
ly forth and attack the Constitution; yet thou
sands doing it indirectly by denouncing