The mountain sentinel. [volume] (Ebensburg, Pa.) 1844-1853, 1851-01-16

power and duty OF enacting laws TO carry
into effect the constitutional direction,
being ruled TO be in Congress and in
Congress only, any interference on the
part of the State authorities is unauthori-
Zed and without binding force.
If the Constitution implies duty to be
performed by both National and State
Governments, and vests each with power
over the subject. the trainers of that in
strument failed to express in clear terms,
as in other cases, the obligations of the
parties. The latitude of construction re-
quired to give such powers TO the State
Legislatures, would authorize the passage
of laws, and the enactment of regulations
upon every delegated power of the Ma
'ional Government. wilhon. regard to the
action or non-actiop OF Congress. The
General Government is admitted 20 be one
OF ascertalned powers, but Is ceases to be
so the moment cOncrrrent jurisdiction
vests IN State soverelgnlies. In the prac-
tical workings Of the system of concurrent
JURISDICTION much evil would arise. Thirty
one so'ereignIies might prescribe different
ru!cs of aclion-each meant to make ef-
fective national legislation, and the dangers
resulting fom conflicting enactments, and
the consequent destruction of harmony and
order, could not fail to alarm the patriot.
Whenever power subject matter is vest
ed by the Constitution in Congress, and
the power has been exercised, the author.
ity of the States has been judicially de-
clared, as above stated, merged and abol-
lished. This is the rule of law as well
as that Of common sense.
An opinion has been expressed by men
of eminent legal learning and patriotism,
that legislative action on the part of the
States is expedient TO aid in the execution
of the powers of the general government.
In This opinion | cannot concur. To ad-
nit the position would imply an inability
on the part OF the national government to
execute its powers, and would prove de-
struclive of the theory so zealously main-
tanned by our republican fathers, that The
National, and State governments are inde-
pendent sovereignties, each acting within
its proper constitutional sphere.
1t was doubtless conviction OF the
soundness of the foregoing views. whice
induced my predecessor, Governor Skunk
10 sanction the act of the 3rd of March
lS47.
| The power to act on the subject of the
extradilion of fugitive slaves, being thus
vested solely in the National Government,
il is the plain duty o: the citizen to submit
to its enactments under the Constitution.
To act differently would be clearly rebel
lion TO the Government.
If the word :. claim was intended 10
express an ascertaining right OF property
TO the person of the fugitive vested in the
claimant, then mach of the difficulty SUR
rounding the question is settled, and the
mere demand for the person of the fugl.
tive fixes his destiny by the terms OF the
Constitution. His extradition would be
determine wit lout proof of ownership q n
the part of the claimant, and without evil
dence of the identity or flight of the per-
son claimed. If, however, the term used
in the constitution signifies challenge OF
the property belonging to the claimant,
and withheld from him-anG the enact
merits on the subject requiring proof OF
right to substantiate the claim, and the con-
curing decisions of the Supreme Court
affix this meaning to the term, then the
question arises, how, and through whom,
shall The claim be made, and by wha,
evidence sustained?
In the adoption of the proper remedy
to assert this clear right, patriotic citizens
may differ, and the privilege to maintain
and express that honest diversity of opin.
ion must not be impaired. 70 surrender
lit. under violent threats and denunciatory
clamor, would he an abandonment of the
deeply cherished privilege of liberty ol
thought and speech. When the enactment
of the National Congress fail 10 convince
the people of their justice and propriety,
il is their duty to seek their modification
and amendment. The recently enacted
: fugitive slave law, while il remains sta
tute, demands the support of all the citi-
tzens, and unless our written constitutions
are worthless parchments, until the judi
ciary declare i, otherwise, must be esteem
ed constitutional enactment. Are its de-
! fects of such a nature as TO warrant the
public in urging its amendment!
That part OF the law which authorizes
the creation of a new and irresponsible
tribunal under the name of commissioners,
is liable to exception. Waving the in
quiry whether the Judicial power of the
! United States can be vested any where but
in regularly organized courts, with the
records of courts, there are objections of
serious import to the institution Of this
tribunal. All history shows that special
tribunals clothed with discretionary pow
ers over person and property, are liable
to abuse, and have been instruments of
oppression. If in these, the early davs of
the Republic. when no reason of urgent