Indiana State sentinel. [volume] (Indianapolis) 1841-1853, 1851-01-09
Extra Papers
DR.. simpson and the Fugitive Slave Law.


which he follows up with long and plausible argument
sustaining his former positions The Advocate reached
the editor on the eve of his departure for Washington
resume his duties a member Of Congress, which pre-
vented an earlier reply The Drs first position copy
in his own language: "There no controversy between
us as to the proprety or Improperly of the fugitive
clause in the Constitution This have not discussed
Second nor have we argued nor do design argue
the constutionality or unconstitutionaty OF the law
This we leave for iursts Third do call in ques
tioa the duty Of Congress pass fugitive slave BILL
carrying out the provision Of the Constitution. Fourth
nor do we inquire whether the law recently passed.
is not better than certain other Fifth:
do we complain Of it in reference Its bearing upon
tual fugtives."
Here is admission, which, in our opinion yields the
whole question. He raises issue to the fugitive
clause in the Constitution. Whya Because he knows
that it the main compromise feature in that nsru
ment The of such provision in the articles of
confederation was Of their great defects and
of the moving which led to the cell for Conven
ton The debates that clause doubtless familiar
DR.. Simpson, and a mind like his, must have been
conclusive Well does he know, that without such
clause the Constitution could not have been formed
the union of the States sonsummated; and hence he
makes controversy He does argue the constitu
tionay or unconstitutonality of the law He leaves
that to iurists. Why does he argue it! Because
ursts and Judges have decided that the law was cons
tutional; and his knowledge OF the law and the
Constitution tells him that is constitutional and there
fore, he makes argument-very judicious. He does
not call in question the duty Of Congress pass ug
tive slave bill. Why! Because he understands too
we'll what is tn duty of Congress. He does in
quire whether th saw is better than certain other
actments. Very judcious again. For to institute a
comparison would make most conclusive argument
against hmse and induce his readers ask, why has
DR.. Simpson, at this time, when the nation is agtated
by the throes Of dissolution thrust forward this question
through the columns Of his religious Advocated Such
comparison would show hst the present law gives great
er security the free than either the law Of 1893
the of the State of Indiana the Constitu
ton, construed by the courts, in the absence of all
laws Nor does he complain Of the actual bear
ing of the law on fugtves Why! Because he cannot
complain of that, without making the Constitu-
ton. The objections which he makes this law,
applies with greater force the 1793 which
received the sanction of Washington. His objections
are, therefore, narrowed down to some of the details,
which were changed by the late act Frst the
want Of a jury trial. To this, we that Jury
trial was never admitted under any law that no right
previously existing, is taken away. Besides slavery
State institution authorized and recognized by State
laws and under these laws should the slave claiming his
freedom be tried The trainers of the Constitution
err contemplated such trial, than they did in
the case of a fugitive from justice. In the case,
the Constitution provides that ugiiives from justice
'sha on the demand of the executive authority Of the
State from whence he fed, be delivered up" In the
other case lugtves from labor "sha be delivered mp
claim Of the party to whom such service labor may
be due" These two provisions are in the section
OF the Constitution. In the of fugitive from JUS
ce no one would contend that he should be tried the
Indictment where arrested but where the offence was
committed and where all the evidence could easily be
produced. All the States Of this Union have ample
laws for the fair and impartial trial of slaves who may
claim their freedom. Counsel is assigned and the slave
is taken Of the custody of the person claiming bis
services and placed in the custody of the law. fan
and impartial jury uial is awarded him. The Consttu
ton requires that he "sha be delivered up claim.
not on trial and proof Of ownership. Under this law
fugitive when arrested is taken before the Judge OF
Commissioner and proof of the claim according the
rule or common law evidence regulating every specie:
of property The rights of the negro and the rights
Of the owner are equally protected. 1t would require
the same evidence establish ownership before jury
that 1t would before Judge commissioner. But the
learned Doctor wishes guard against the corruption o.
Judge and commissioner He says that there arc
mighty mean men and he should nowhere look for them
sooner than among those who would accept office
under the law. Now be permitted to say
that this is "mighty mean" argument, for he adj
that there objection the fugitive clause in
the Constitution and that Congress should pass fug
tive slave law law without officers execute it
would be dead letter the statute book. This DIR
Simpson does desire, for that would fulfil the
QUESTIONS Of the Constitution. Officers must be appoint
ed by the district court and why he should suppose that
men would be appointed, cannot imagine
There may be dishonest and corrupt Judges and there
may be bribed juries but it is no good argument
against the system The purity and patriotism of q
Washington a Green, was furnished by the trea
Of Arnold But there is another objection to the
trial by jury on the first Ii you make the na
trial them seals forever the fate Of the fugitive, if the
verdict and judgment should be against him. 1t could
&c plead in bar any action he might afterwards bring
for the recovery Of his freedom So much for the jury
trial.
To cur Statement. that he asserted that the writ o
hsbeas corpus was suspended, he puts special demur
rer and declares that he did say the writ wa.
suspended but that il was refused. He can take udg
tia demurrer and we will amend by admitting
that he said refused; but it certainly fine spun dis
fncon. 1t is splitting hair tvixt north and north
side" The Office OF the writ of habeas corpus i
not TO release those that legally bound. wit
IDEAS corpus may Issue in every case of Of ia
gitiyc slave The writ will require the person having
custody Of tho slave, to bring him before the judge with