The daily union. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1845-1857, 1850-03-28


misled and the slave 10 not 10 be gwen up until those
things are satisfactorily proved Now let US look al
provision which provides or the delivery up Of criminals,
identical. and Thai The practice under The former should
ass'm'lais with that uadsr the latter. Here Isl
"A person charged y STATE with usasGH islo%y %
smother Sis shall on demand of the Executive authority
Of Vie state isom which he He'd 20 delivered w, up
Sir s there no distinction between the two sections
In the case The constitution makes the PLAIN cues
tion 10 be slave. fugitive and me claimant ms own
been charged with crime, and has be fled II 90, ne
not TO be tried where found, but IN ne Jurlsd,cfcn
where alone be could be tried and that Is where the
crime was committed BY the Of 1893 you produce
an affidavit copy Of indictment duly au,henticated
charging him with crime he is to be delivered up But
ion comments upon The passage charged with treason.
felony or other crime who shall flee from justice"
70 another STATE , Fleeing from Justice, says the
and yet he is not permitted TO show it, But, sir,
this is no fair construction Of the clause, The
meaning OF i is indicated BY The previous part Of the sec
that Is all Sha flee from justice" is equivalent only
to shall fee from the charge the trial; then he shall
be delivered up And that is the obvious construction
IRON North Carolina, [r BADcER and the senator IRON
Kentucky, Mr. UEDERwooD, there extraditon trea-
ties which equally compel us 10 render up who
are charged with treason merely upon Prfmd facte evil
dence. And we refuse to do to sister State what
we have agreed to do to foreign governments Sir
agreements, CONSIDERATION,
and in the express language Of the constitution agreeing
to surrender up criminals (no! slaves when they are
charged provided the evidence be sufficient. according to
laws, to justify the commitment of the men so
charged for trial. These treaties obviously contemplate
trial and hearing as to the fact of guilt such
being possible in another Jurisdiction. Can It be said
under circumstances, that there is any analogy between
these two provisions OF the constitutions And. If there
be the whole argument and complaint to change
Of venue in case Of fugitive slaves and the necessity Of
PriG fdcic only, fall to the ground, because that
argument is based altogether upon this assumption Of an
Nj. UNDERWOOD. With the permission Of the
question. II understood him Alright, he says that one
Of the inquiries under the constitution to be gone into
before jury, the investigating tribunal by which the
fugitive shall be arrested is The question Of slavery and
il must be established before that tribunal be il of what
character il may, that the man arrested is slave To
that extent the constitution gives the Congress OF the
United States the right to legislae and 10 institute pro-
csedpg to make the inquiry Now,my question, under
that view Of the subject is i that tribunal be 50 con;
stituted by the legislation of Congress, and that tribunal
decides the man is or is not slave is not that decision
binding!
Mr. DAYTON. had answered the gentleman's in
quiry before it put said it was PROFESSIONALLY
binding for the purpose OF that trial; unquesonably
binding far respects the judges Order which is to
which be Affect the abstract right Of prom
ery That may again be presented there the same as
this question: under the constitutional provision, had never
Mr. UNDERWOOD. think not
MIR DAYTON. How 50! The trial was for single
object only; How could it be peadedl What is the
record aud what is the Judgments Is it, il be pre-
tended that the tribunal hear and fairly examine
the question, whether the negro be fugitive from the
service OF the caiman Must he order him delivered
and heard by evidence And II SO, you limit his
rghtl Can you say by hov much evidence he shall be
heards Sir gentlemen push their claim OF right 10
extreme when they deny full and fair hearing Butt
% said that the right Of trial BY Jury is llusory and will
abort remedy to claimants. This is mistake, and
the extreme opposition to jury trial originates in want
nj Enoxv ada NJ and hahl of0
have before said it was much better tribunal in refer
ence to this quest than composed Of Judge
commissioner. and desire upon this point 10 make few
additional remarks.
You call jury OF twelve men together, and put them
upon oath then and there in reference 10 the precise sub
,ecf before them. That oath has an immediate and bind
ing influence their minds far beyond that OF The more
general oath OF commissioner for the performance OF
Official duty entered into, perhaps years before he is call
"a upon TO act II has present binding operation. Sc
lect this jury from any community and you will not find
twelve men who are fanatics on this question. Where
can you select in this country. in the ordinary way
jury unanimously disposed, without regard 10 their
oaihs, to override the plain law and the constitution
You select twelve men, tfreeholders in most Of the
States: and they uniformly give impartial yerdict, even
Independence because they support each other against the
exciiement OF the community in which they live Their
decision has, too effect, and is binding in the
estimation Of the community, because Of kind Of sacred
verdict Gsa sSPs avi da ss gSs' se
jurymen sustain you against mob. Sir, we have had
some little experience on this subject In the very case
out Of which this bill more especially grows the case in
Michigan OF the failure Of an agent nom Kentucky to
get fugitive slaves, II subsequently presented 10
jury OF the vicnage But let read from the evidence
oil the agent, laid before the Judiciary Committee He
says
"Afsnt then called upon Of the most active mem.
beis OF the mob TO give him their Names and inform him
hey considered themselves rssPonsble for their words
names afianl and he told them capital
letters and bear the back Kentucky the land OF
~, evidence Of their determination persist in
a mt adv he
resolution was then offered
."'Rssoved, That these Kentuckans shall remove
from this place these manning the save) by moral phys
an was carried by general reclamation"
This was the state OF things in Michigan when the
agent ntehered with in bringing away these fugi.
hves The slaves went of and the claimant gave them
mp what was the consequence This citizen OF Ken
lucky went TO that very place. (Michigan) and com.
menced suit against these very individuals who had
given their names, and recovered before Jury or the
citizens OF that place, nineteen hundred dollars The full
cir, that trial BY jury illusory and Elusive Why the
facts in this epel the allegation Suppose that in
stead OF jury OF twelve men, you had had Of your
petty commissioners collectors there do you think he
would have faced the storm OF public sentiment and Civ
to the claimant full value for his properiyl Not AT al
he would have covered before popular excitement There
have BEEN understand two other cases ia Michigan in
both Of which the jurors did their duty have letter
10 that effect, from the district Judge oil that State before
that State jury to fail in the discharge OF its duty upon
this question Well sir in the State OF Pennsylvania at
PttsbuH or near it, informed jury, under like cir
cumstances did their full duty 10 the claimant and the
senator from Pennsylvania [Nr CooPERJ now informs
me there another and more recent at Carlisle