The daily union. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1845-1857, 1852-06-03


objections 10 ts details, that am aware which not
included under the general objection that the proceedings
summary, and not in accordance with the rules oil The
common law In TO this. will say that the pro-
visions Of the constitution contemplated summary pro-
ceedngs Such has been the decision Of the COURTS
we have already seen, and such was the construction
given to that clause Of the constitution by Judge Story
Al page GIG, volume g. oil his Commentaries upon The
Constitution. he says
rhs clause (the providing for the Of la'
gye sayes) was introduced into the constitution solely Tor
claim their fugitive slaves who should escaped into
other States where slavery tolerated. The want Of
such provision under the confederation was e grew
nconvenence by the slavehodng States, slnce In
many States no aid whatever woad be allowed 10 the
owners and sometimes, indeed they met with resist
II is obvious that these provisions for the and
removal of fugtives OF both classes plate
ministerial proceedings and not the ordinary course OF
dicaI ascertain whether complaint be
well Ionned or the claim OF ownership be established be-
yond all legal controversy Ia cases OF suspected crimes
the guilt Of The party 10 be made his
,fa and not upon te preliminary inquiry whether be sha
necessary is that there shoald be faeis evidence be-
tore the executive authority 10 satisfy its Judgment that
upon an ordinary warrant, would Justify his commitment
for trial a..
be the same necessity of requiring only praa facie proofs
Of ownership without putting the party 10 formal asser
tion OF his rights by suit at the common law Congress
appear have acted upon this opinion and accordingly,
in The statute upon this subject have authorized summary
proceedings before magistrate upon which he may grant
warrant for removal"
And that such the design is palpably evident from
The proceedings oil the convention which formed the
sution II is evident that the question OF freedom or
slavery designed 10 be raised upon the app
cation for the surrender OF the fugitive from service any
more than the question OF guilt or innocence is in the
case o fugitves from justice twoud have been harsh
and unjust had it been otherwise. The question OF
slavery in the and OF guilt in the other depends
upon the law of the State from which the fugitive fed
10 say nothing about the greater convenience for the al
tendance OF witnesses; where exact justice IS wanted,
the claimant OF h OF course, would be safer before tn
bunal well versed in the law OF the place. man with
bad will stand better chance before an incompe
tent tribunal because he may benefit by its bunders; but
man with good case IS safer in the hands Of COM
peteni one blunder fatal 10 him is less likely TO
occur
one, equally impartial (and in this connexon we must
sumo that they soy before which would negro
really free stand The best chance for decision in his
favor Suppose the OF negro really free in Vr
gnla, but who had escaped from man holding him
slave, and for many years had held him and treated him
slave without question from any one and that his father
had so held and treated him. and his right to freedom de-
pended upon question OF fact TO be proved by wit
nesses-such, for instance, whether be was born be-
fore or after particular date, and such questions fre
queny arise)-where would the negro have the best
chance for justcein Massachusetts the place OF his
nativityi The claimant could take on his Witnesses
But how could The negro compel the attendance OF
his In Virginia he do II without reward 10 the wit
ness fee to the officer summoning HIM. Is such the
in Massachusetts, Can her courts compel witnesses
10 attend from Virginia or even Ia Virginia. to appear
without lee before commissioner to take deposons
Sir. our laws in Virginia afford facilities TO negro in
asserting claim 10 freedom greater than allowed
white men in any case Ii any person conceives him.
sell illegally held as slave, laws provide that he
may complain 10 any judge justice Of the peace, who,
such cases, required to order the sheriff o the
y to take the complainant Immediately into custody and
to safely keep him al the expense oil the claiming
to be the owner, until he give bond with security IN
double the value OF the negro. supposing hun TO be
slave that he shall be forthcoming the trial before
such court the complainant may elect and in the
time 10 allow him reasonable opportunity 10 prepare Tor
trial The law also requires that the court shall assign
him counsel who, without reward shall aud him IN pros
wishes OF the negro in assigning him counsel and the
result almost invariably that he has eminent counsel
The law also provides that he shall have free OF costs
all needul process, services OF officers and attendance OF
witnesses that his shall be privileged the
docket; that shall be tried by jury free from excep
hon. and that the complainant shall not be embarrassed
by legal echnicalies In the eusnt e Jury find in his
fapor, they ouhozed 10 find for him damages for The
detention and the court is required 10 aDard him he dam
osss and COSTS
who charge that the fugitive slave law offers brbe Of
five dollars in each the 10 make the
surrender Of an alleged fugitive slave Our law offers
brlbe, If gentlemen choose TO call II such, OF twenty
times, and than twenty times OF that sum- to all the
officers OF the court TO eel him free, IL the negro is
found 10 be slave the counsel sheriff. Witnesses clerk
everybody, lose their fees B il be is found TO be free
man, oul OF the damages and costs awarded him every
body is paid. including the sounsel and have kaown
some OF The latter from that source, and The voluntary
service OF the negro afterwards TO get pretty round fees
Now, sir, tell me in what northern State he can have
all these facilities in asserting his right freedom II
impartial Justice and not fanatcal outrage, be the object
tell me II Il be not better, for the negro, that he
should be sent before tribunals where all these safe
guards are thrown around him.
But suppose another case which prejudiced persons
better appreciate although, far law is concerned
II is the same Suppose the same negro should
be seized IN Georgia-and 1t IS supposabe case, Tor
OF free negroes go TO the Souhl have known
them 10 20 TO New Orleans-where would he stand the
best chance for his freedom The Georgia tribunals
as impartial as those of Virginia But would the negro
have fair chance for justice far away from the place
of his birth home AT the time OF the formation of
the constitution nearly all the States were savehoding
AT that time. therefore, the Georgia would have
been the general Laws similar 10 those oil Virginia
exist in all the slaveholding States,
Besides the facilities afforded the negro in suits for
freedom by our law. the tribunals in administering II
have always given the negro the benefit OF all doubts
my opinion, 10 an unwarraniabe extent In that case,
where the identical negro concerned, they decided
one way when the controversy was between claimants
OF him as property, and different way when the suit
was one for freedom and leapng in favor OF liberty,
they allowed proceedings 10 be had which they would
have refused in any other case
Well. then, might Chief Justice Tghman, OF Pennsyl
yania say II he tbe fugitive) had really right TO
freedom, that right not imposed by this proceeding,
(,he issuing OF the warrant for his surrender) He
placed lust in the situation in which he stood before he
ed and might prosecute his right in the State TO which
he belonged"
We'll. then, might Judge Washington, in a case which
offered 10 show lha by the laws OF Virginia from which
he admitted he had fed he was free, respond, 81 am
well acquainted with the laws Of Virginia, and the char
acter Of her cours and II the fugitive be really entitled
to freedom, he can establish 1t better in Virginia than
here
a. 49,