Jeffersonian Republican. [volume] (Stroudsburg, Pa.) 1840-1853, 1852-01-22
No 10.

8 ~ g.. I.
Justice Wayne says, " In that opinion il j.
decided 8. That the legislation by Congress
upon the provision, as the supreme law .of,
the land, excludes all State legislation upon
the same subject; and that no State can pass
any law or regulation, or interspose such as
may have been law or regulation when the
Constitution ofthe United States was ratified,
to superadd, to control, qualify, or impedea
remedy enacted by Congress for the delivery
of fugitive slaves" then adds, after a LEANED
sustaining this view: 81 consider
the point have been maintaining more im-a
portant than any other in the opinion of tho,
Courts" alledging as con6rma ton, that this
was point decided. that only three Of the
nine Judges composing the Court dissent
ed. .-. ........,s4
Justice Mclean makes the inquiry, "does
the provision i'll regard to the reclamation of
fugitive slaves vest the power exclusively
in Congress % and answers, "The nature of
the power shows that it must be exclusive
" 1t is contended that the power to execute it
rests with the States. The law was designed
to protect the rights of the Slave holder a.
gainst the States opposed to those rights, and
yet by this argument, the effective power is in
the hands of those on whom it is to operate."s
" 1t is essential, to the uniform efficacy of
this Constitutional provision, that it should
ho IL, c,Io
This, Judgement of the Supreme Court Of
the United States determines the law for my
guidance, and for yours, whatever may be
our individual convictions upon the subject.
If, then. prison cannot be built, under
State laws, for the detention of fugitives
If prison already built and subject to State
regulations and rules, respecting its inmates,
cannot be used-and if, in short, all States le-
gislation, OF whatever kind, is prohibited by
a solemn decree of the Supreme Courts it
not more than idle to pass an act restorative
of laws thus expressly declared and known in
advance to be unconstitutional! The writ OF
habeas corpus would run into these unconsti-
tutional places Of detention; the federal Judi
ciary would themselves have to decide the
question. The State Judges, in counties where
there is 10 united States Judge, and whero
the fugitive is committed by a mere Com
missioner, would be required to issue the writ
of right; and that which the friends of this
repeal have claimed as a great boon to the
claimants, would be worse than mockery.
The claim he now has on the Marshal, and
his sureties, for indemnifcation for the escape
of his servant, would be converted into bar
rem claim against county jailor, whose first
duty would be TO discharge prisoner thus
held if he claimed his liberty. Not so was
the law formerly, and before it was decided
that all State legislation on the subject is
prohibited-not SO will it be hereafter, if tho
principle of the decision ofthe supreme Court
be practically carried ont, and this whole
vexed and yexatious subject be left to the
administration of the United States officers
The Act of Congress of 18th September.
1850, commonly known as the Fugitive Slave
Bill, would seem to favor the same views
entertained by Judge Story, and pronounced
in the decision to which reference has been
made. Its whole tenor shows this, and more
than one of its detailed provisions confirm it,
The custody of the fugitive, by, State author
ity, is almost forbidden. cd
The Marshal and his sureties are made
subject to pecuniary liability, for an escape :
which, as the Supreme Court of the United
States have decided, in precisely analoguos
case, is defeated the instant the prisoner is,
transferred to a local Jail. .- ~.
In counties where there IS no Marshal, the
agent of the Commissioner is charged with
the exclusive custody of the fugitive, and is
allowed, by the sth section, his expenses for
keeping him in custody and providing him
with food and lodging during his detention.
Surely no one can pretend to say that this
is not full and exclusive exercise of federal
power on this subject. Ifso the principle Of
constitutional law, to which have referred.
is interposed and the legislation of State to
transfer this custody to local prison is pro-
hihted. Is it not then most conductive to
peace and good order. aud the harmonious
of the law, that this whole
subject be left where the Constitution places
it, in the hands of the United States authori-
ties ealei L
have thus frankly stated to the Senate nv
reasons for Withholding my approval of this
bill. | have limited them strictly. guarding
myself against any expression liable to mis-
construction, TO considerations of fconsttnton-
al law ask for them candid and careful
consideration,