Kenosha telegraph. [volume] (Kenosha, Wis.) 1850-1854, 1852-07-16
VOL. XIII-NO. 4.

JdcS .AduISOl, OI IrnlIlld, WHO ucS!feu gram
OF power, and favoreda commitment for that pur.
pose; Gouyerneur Morris, 4 heightened federal
list, who could find constructive powers whcnev-
er Hamilton could find them, but co lid find
none here, and therefore asked for an express
grant. Allthese clauses were in the contcder-
alton originally, and articles of compact there,
and nobody had ever pretended that they were
anything else there. All the four clauses are
still IN their language, in terms, in their obvious
one might almost say, in their only possible
construction, articles of compact. Still it is
agreed 10 attach 10 one Of them grant of pow
/ err and not to the other three. The convention
takes out thatone fourth clause makes it the first,
and says that Congress shall have the power TO
determine the effect to be given to the public re-
cords Of the states. Where did Congress- get
that power from, in either Of The above clauses of
compact, where il is not given? Why did Con
gress have that power given to them by express
words in that clause, il the government had il al
ready in all tho clauses, as they must ifthey had
it in either These were not the men to waste
words. There is not a document 10 the language
Of any human race which trcads the face Of the
globe, so carefully considered in the effect of ev-
cry word, as the Constitution of the United
States. When the Constitutional Convention
saw they had not made Z grant of power in ei-
Their of these four clauses, they came to the con-
cluslon that they had better make it as to one Of
them. They knew wha. TO do. They picked
out that clause, put it at the head of the article,
and said Congress shall have power to determine,
BY law, what shall be the effect gwen to public
records. Why did they not say Congress
shall have power to provide for the rendition of
fugtlves from labor p
That is what they would have said had they so
meant. They did not so mean, and therefore
they did not say it. And this is the only reason
which the ingenuity Of man can divine for the
omission to express q grant OF power in this
clause of the constitution, which grants no pow
ers except those given in so many words, or
those which, being subsidiary in their nature, are
essential to the carrying into exercise of powers
granted in so many words. Where they desired
a power, the clause was changed. Who made
that change John Rutledge was chairman Of
the committee appointed on the Goth Of August,
that reported that clause as altered giving the
power to Congress. Mr.. Pierce, Butler, Gen.
Pinckney and Mr. c. Pinckney, the three other
members from South Carolina for there were
four in al-each of them, had his attention called
to this subjecton theyeryday. before that onwhich
the committee was appointed, they had, each of
them, alluded to it in the Convention and nobody
else had done So in the debate of August 28lh.
Three members from South Carolina-each hay
ing his attention specially called to the subject of
tugtlves from labor, on the 2Sth Of August-that
subjec; brought up again on the 29th. John
Rullcdge was chairman of the committee Of five,
appointed on the 29'h, when Mr.. Battan moved
the clause Of fugitives from labor, and that com
mitteo of five who reported this clause on the
first Of September, took the ground that tho pow
er to legislate on the proof and effect Of public
acts must be expressly granted. On the 81 of
September another debate took place, on grant
ing this power, in which Madison, Gouverncur
Morris, Colonel Morris, Colonel Mason, MIR.
Wilson, DR.. Johnson, and Mr. Randolph partic-
ipated with various views. No one suggests that
clause will give power, although mono be ex-
pressed. The doctrine Of implied powers has not
then been strained so far. No one suggests a
power over fugtiyos from labor Slavocracy
had not then vontured so far. 1t would have
been rejected at once. But the clause as it
stands passed unanimously.
Does il not make a clear case? would like
to see those profound lawyers Of New Iiamp-
shire, or Virginia, or anywhere else, show US
how the power was put into this clause of fngi-
tive from labor, which was not originally there;
and who put it there and where, and how
Roger Sherman and Eldridgo Gerry were india
ced 10 putt there. John Rutlcdgo put it there
in the clause of faith and credit to records; but
a reason for putting it in the one clause, and he
had reason for emitting it in the other clause.
When Col. Mason, on the 22d of August, only
week before this clause was unanimously adopt
ed, told the world that "cvery master Of slaves
IS born petty tyrant; they bring the judgment
OF heaven on country; its actions cannot be
rewarded or punished in the next world; they
must be in this, by an inevitable chain of causes
and ELECTS, Providence Furnishes national sins
and national calamities" X che
held it essential, in every point Of view that the
general government should have power to pre-
vent the increase Of slavery; when that far see
ing NlrElnian, who seems to have anticipated the
history OF Virginia in the nineteenth century, ut
tered these memorable words in the Convention
do you suppose that he was contrvng a govern
ment that should be used as a great negro catch
ing machine, and that should BE- good for nothing
else--to be broken up tho moment i; ceased to
perform that function, as seems now to be the
prevailing opinion among the demagogue5 Of
both parties? Do you suppose for moment that
james Madison, Thomas Jefferson, Patrick Hen
~, George Washington, George Mason, anioth-
er a5oliuonists Of that day-to use the word as
we hear it used every day in grcss-imnri-
ned that provision SO a5horent 10 their general
views had been Inserted in the constitution, and
did not make it the subject Of indignant comment
in the Convention or out OF the Convention? Mr.
Madison would not suffer the black and odious
name Of slave to be named in the constitution.
Is it conceivable that be meant to enroll the hun
ting down of the fugitive slave among the high
stduties Of the government founded under that
Constitution, as our present administration es-
teens il TO be?
Are we to believe that one half Of the Convcn-
ton, being honest and firm men, ba,icd all the
instincts Of their hearts all the prejudccs, if you
choose so to phrase it, of their education, oil that
devotion to tho principles ofhbcriy in the abb tract
which the revolution had Developed and made
themselves parties, without particle Of induce
meut held out to them, without word Of ramon-
STRANGE from one of them, TO an eternal national
slave hunt? Are we to believe this, not only
without evidence. but against oil the evidences?
Let me remark upon the stranEeness Oft this fact
Among the thousand letters which were written
by leading members Of the Constitution Ccnyea-
ton, or of the State Convention at the South,
and at the north, never was yhere anything pro-
duced that would lead one to suppose for mo-
mcnt that the Convention, Of any man in il, or
any man out Of il, in the year 1877, suspected
that the clause relative to fugitiycs from labor,
contained gran, Of power.
Not solitary letter, speech, journal, memo
re~ilrn rr record Cf my dissertation has bann