Richmond enquirer. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1815-1867, 1852-06-29

IL thu Constitution should be carried into elect,
= cIr lis execuon-hc States or Consfcssf u
@ sar if left to the former &c great purpose of the
provision might be defeated in spite OF le s
Tie might omit any Legislation on wv, uS, 'nu
,b,-,Iy leave the owner without any KNOWN thGais "
Lic ~ assert his rights; or they might SO incumeer nnd
r,har,asa the prosecution of them, as lhh W
~ the SUBJECT would be tanlaToun. 10 do,d;n ~, In
his coui no; he DONE omitted w,ou. tt
o;,ii n The Constitution Is true, but inc P'u' ac'i y
nurlad unnn the assumption that wit!o'. :. M ~ n
T;r,,s or the owners would not DC Observer VI pr"
.os.a s'' - de in express terms guard against pos
sbl. arr Of Injustice By the Stale an.no. Id -, ,,
that tic r,:ncrs of the Constitution hcn rho nIovis;nn
ian oi this subject ~ the States, "!c tic PROVISION
snrung out Of their fears OF partial and un-
MI .reisIao by the States In rcspect 10 -, ~ S
10 a,nsd II would present an inconsistency Oh acu'n
md IN unssilfuness in tire adoption of means lor Tue ena
in yj.v too remarkable TO have been oVefookea uy uc
less wise body of men ley mus, - ers, in the Sotss
h ;,aac this provision cXpedient, would DC aoic 10 rus
t m obct in regulating tho mode and manner OF carry
o il INFO ELECT that the remedy OF the evil ano lhe secu
T;.,s would not be complete, unless this power was
oIe, Vested in the National Government
The case was taken the court Of last resort ana me de
;einn III Juto, Nelson affirmed But Chancellor " all
look IN. ground which Is now INSISTED upon .a he
clause OF the Constitution under discusson ipJeI uuJ
upou The States but conferred no power han as ,u
Government But he told me, no longer ago hah last WIN
Wv t he had Welded that opinion in Difference to the de-
; If The supreme Court But although he held the law
of 93 unconstitutional in delivering his opinon no
Cd sensible views upon the subject of slavery 10 which
call The attention of gentlemen from New ORR
"Howcvcr nuch therefore, may dcpoo inc existence. o
Ioca evil vet as the right OF the master 20 lccain MS
uaj,yc slave is secured him by the Federal
no good Citizen whose liberty and properly - soses y
- PROSTITUTION will interfere 10 prevent us PROVISION
tn Lcnp carried into full effect according 10 us sPiri,
.nJ eject and even where the forms OF Ia" are eso!Ieu
10 for the purpose of evadins lo ,oi ,nrn
~ N drav the remedy of the master IN obtaining
~ his fugitive slave, it ia undoubtedly inc nsi', nu lha!
hcromc the duty of the court IN "hch any pLooeeaes o
rrnosc are instituted, TO set them aslGe II !cy are
49,, nnn,cncrd and carried on in good ialth, ana upon
robnbc grounds for believing that the claim OF e master
10 the service of the supposed slave is lhyaa ;r ~
In the case Of the Commonwealth vs. urun Cie JUS
,ica pnrsor nf Massachusetts, holds this language:
This brings the case single point whether the STA
ru,r Of the United States giving Power 10 seGs save
@ Ihis for persons who not inhabitants of slave
iodine States 10 prevent prejudice from having too strong
-. nc: on their minds. We must reflect however, that
the Consultation made with some States IN which !,
I'D no, occur 10 the mind TO inquire whether slaves were
very serious ba G Gono ry ha
slaves They might have kept aoo troul the Constitution
Tnat in ,,rurcn compromise. II was compact by
yir; aIl are bound We 10 consider Them what was
rhr Intention nf the Constitution. The words Of it were
mss, on, Of dcacy not 10 offend some in the Con-
yentan whose feelings were abhorrent 10 slavery out we
;er& entered into an agreement that slaves should % cons
dcT.d property. Slavery "oah sun nave cohlhucu II Eo
| Constitution had been made.
Ihc Constitution does prescribe the mode OF reclaim
;rn slave but leaves it be determined by Congress
il ycrr clear that intended That application SHOULD
81 made the executive authority OF the Stale II is said
that tic act which Congress has passed on this subject IL
1 I
tile pcie in their persons and property against sUlzures
Sc without complaint upon OATH But all the parts O.
The instrument are 10 be taken together ~ very oov
aus That slaves parties to the Constitution and the
am. nanent has relation 10 the parties
al, said that when seizure is made il should be made
conf,rr,,hy to our laws This does follow from the
Cons ,i.,n and the OF Congress that the person
to whom, the service il due may seize &c. Whether ht
statute ia harsh one 1t is not for us 10 determine.
ru il is objected, that person may In this summary
manner freeman. 1t be So but this would bt
attended with mschcvoIs consequences to the person ma
| King ;lie eci.nrc."
lie Ill Emaw that The Supreme Court of the United States
has ouncej law constitutional; bur the gentleman
rom York Mr. FLcYDl and Others have assaulted Tia!
court ard destroy confidence in it's decisinn
Eavc from choice referred the decisions OF other uriss
for whose DECISIONS presume, he has more respect.
coud multiply references TO similar opinions almost In
TIE highest authority and entitled 10 The most proount
IcSrfc , .
slaiI no, refer them by one, because my time vii
not permit it, and because il is not necesaay for all OF then
reso!vr themselves into point which Is that the proceed
nrs under summary and not according 10 the usua
rules u proceeding There objections 10 lis details
that an aware which not included under the genera
objection that the proceedings are summary and not IN &C
cocdaacu with the rules of The common law. In answer u
thr viii saw that the provision of the Constitution con
leu:"a summary proceedings. Such has been the decis
ion Of IL" courts as we have already seen ana su:n vas W.
construction given that clause OF the Constitution o.
JUDGE SnTr At p1ac G76, volume 8 OF his Commentare
upon >c Constitution, be says: ..,
tive !av"s was Introduced into the Constitution svIeiy
the The .aveholding States TO enable them 10 re
claim their fugitive slaves who should have escaped int
other States where slavery tolerated The want
such provision under the Confederation was felt as griev
Gus Inconvenience by the slaveholdng States since,
many Satcs no mid whatever would be allowed to the own
c-s ard s,c;imes indeed they met with open resistance
obvious that these provisions for the arrest and remoya
Of funilirrs both casscs contemplate summary mnIse
rial proceedings, and not the ordinary course OF nica ~
vas.igat;ors 10 ascertain whether the complaint be wei
founded or the claim Of ownership DC established oeyon
all LEGAL controversy In cases OF suspected crimes me gun
be made out OF ms irla ant
not uana preliminary inquiry whether ne sa Oo ocs
All ha! would seem in SUCH cases 10 oe hecessn1
ia ha there should be pr,nG faee evidence before Inc OK
eivc authority satisfy it's Judgment that there is prooa
bic believe the party guilty such ns upon an odl
nary ,varraut would Justify his commitment for trial.
Ana in The of fugitive slaves, there would seem
be the same necessity OF requiring only prina faeie proof
of ownership without putting the party to formal Insertion
o; his rights BY su the common law. Congress appca
TO have acted upon this OpnlUn; and accordingly III ih
statute pon this subject have authorized summary proceed
ngs before magistrate upon which no may grant war
rant for removal"
Ard that such was tho design s palpaby evident from
the proceedings OF the Convention which formed the Const
tuition is evident that the question OF freedom or slave
y designed to be raised upon the application io
surrender of the fugitive from SERVICE any more IMAM ht
question Of guilt innocence ID IN The case OF ueye
from Justice 1t would have been harsh and unjust nad
been otherwise The question of slavery in the one cast
and Of guilt The other depends upon the law OF Inc STATE
from which the fugitive icd TO say nothing about the great
ar conyt nienre the attendance Of Witnesses where exac
Justice is wanted The claimant OF il OF couse would be sale
before tribunal well vescd in the law of the place. mar
with a Viii stand Oettcr chance ucIoc an hCo!i
n.cu tribunal because he may benefit by its bundesi bu
a man with good is safer in the hands OF competent
one as hlunder fatal 10 him is less likely to occur
Surprising Northern tribunal and Southern orc equal
~ IMPARTIAL land in this connection must assume tina
they are 81 before which one, would negro really tree
stand the best chance for decision 10 his aVor2 Suppose
the case Of negro really free In Virginia. but who had es
capped holding him slave and for many years
had held him and treated him slave without question
from any one ana that his father had 80 held and treated
him his right freedom depended upon question oil
fact TO be proved by wtnesses--su for instance as
whether he before after particular date, land
such questions frequently arse)--where would the negro
have chance for justice, in MASSACHUSETTS, or The
place nntvity7 The claimant lid take on his wit
uttnw could the negro compel the attendance oil
hist In Virginia. he do it without reward the wit.
ness, &c The officer summoning him. is such the
in Mas :achnses? Can her compel witnesses
tend Firgina7 Or in Virginia, 10 appear with
out Ice before commissioner to take deposons Sir
laws Virginia afford facilities negro in asserting
claim freedom greater than allowed white In any
case. Ii any person conceives himself illegally held
slave laws provide that he complain TO any Judge
justice Of the peace; who, in such cases. is required
10 order the sheriff Of the county TO take the complainant
Immediately into custody, and to safely keep him al the
pcnse Of the claiming be the until he give