The national era. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1847-1860, 1853-09-22

reconsdering it on his own view of the con-
s.ructon of that instrument | answer, Never;
and every intelligent lover of freedom and jus
tice will emphtically echo, Never. Judicial
courts are only authorized to construe the Con-
stitution and laws for the case in hand, and not
for any other. Whenever the decision Of Il
court, in any case, becomes a binding authority
on q future court, that decision goes beyond u
mere judicial act, and becomes legislation.
am aware that this maxim of proscriptive obi
cation is concurred in by all our courts: but it
is one derived from the Inonarchies of Europe,
with which il is cOngenial, and ia totally in
compatible with the principles on which the
American Governments are founded. II Judi
cal decisions IN this country, however unjust
are like the DEGREES Of the Modes and Persians-
final and irreyocable--our Revolution was a
iiilure--Our remuneration of the British Gov
crnmeut was in vain we arc still under its iu-
dical tyranny, irrefragible by the people.
But your honor says: " IL no respect is paid
to the weight of current authorities for half a
century, the basis of our social fabric will be
shaken-there win ensue disorder and cOnfu-
sion, nor will there be protection of rights"
This seems to me non Sequitur ! have seen
many Of these predictions of anarchy on this
suppositon, but never have been favored with
the slightest reason for them; nor can ina
CINE how a disregard of unjust presidents and
decisions of courts of law Is to unsettle any OF
our really valuable institutions or customs If
our social fabric is TO be shaken, it will be by
the virus Of those Judicial and political maxims
which lie like canker at its root eating away
every principle Of freedom, until the people,
! like those Of Europe are aroused to violent In
surrcctiOn
! | have nothing to say against the remark Of
your honor, that the legislation for the rendl-
ton Of fugtiyes from service or labor was not
incumbent on the States for | do not believe
that it is So But you proceed to refer to sew
eral clauses of the Constitution imposing other
duties or prohibitions on the States, for the exc
cution Of which no express provision Is made;
and you conclude on the whole OF them, that,
Undoubtedly Congress may legislate on these
provisions 1t is not necessary TO take these
in dctail-one simple answer applies to the
whole. If Congress is not expressly empowered
by the Constitution to lcgislate on these provi.
sions, then any legislation respecting them, by
that body is unconstitutional--as is the Fugi-
tive Slave Law-hOwever undoubtcd such egs-
latOn may heretofore have been. Indeed, the
judgment on one Of the provisions you have
cited is opposed to your conclusion: ! refer to
lIllJ WuICH Jllul CIllIGDo Vi tdCH Nlutc
shall be entitled to all the rights and immun-
ties of the several States" This provision is
perpetually dsregarded by the law Of South |
Carolina for the imprisonment of colored sea
men. All the strong luminosity between the |
States, and all the danger Of collision with for
eign Powers arising from this law might be
averted by law of the United States, enforcing
this provision but Congress has never yet seen
hot fbau oprll itt llt p,aka c,tch a
aw.
The provision for the rendition of fugitives
rom service, your honor says was the result of
compromise for which you have the author-
y of Judge Marshall No person doubts this;
lut what have the people or the courts to do
With this compromise 1t was compromise
between the States, in the Convention which
ormed the Constitution. In adopting that in
trument the people only assumed the provision
If the Constitution itself accoId ding to the strict
meaning of its language. If this does not confer
power on Congress, no previous compromise
lebates, State resolutions, or usages can au-
horize such power 1t is however true, that
IN this provision, though not on a compromise
the right Of rendition is one which the citi-
.ens of one State may claim and must receive
If another State" and it is also true that the
out and perpetuate this right " but this power
IL not given to Congress.
This brings me to the argument most appa-
rently cogent in all tho vindication of your hon.
or's decision 1t is said there can be no legal
defect without n rcmedyX1nd no law without a
mode OF execution or, as ERIN it, sane
ton" But it is not perceSedI bw this unques-
tionably true maxim authorizes such execution
by any particular department of the Govern |
ment, to whom the power is not granted In |
this case, there is not that deficiency of express
remedy your honor assumes If you will turn
to the third article Of the Constitution, you will
see that among tho cases TO which the judicial
power extends are to controversies between
two or more States and between citizens of
different States" This power clearly covers |
the cases of fugltives from service or labor, and
az plainly authorizes the Judiciary to decide on |
such cases, without the necessity of any law |
whatever. 1t is remarkable that you have
yourself referred to such IL power in the Judi. |
ciary, in saying that SIN case of nfracton by |
the States II writ Of error may be taken from |
the State Court to the Supreme Court of the
United States, &c.; and yet while your honor
has thus asserted such power of action in the
Supreme Court Of the United States, without
law, in other constitutional provisions, you have
strangely overlooked this power in the case of
fugtlves from service; and, on the assumption
that no power is elsewhere granted, have
claimed it as right in Congress Every power
granted by the Constitution to any one depart
ment only of the United States Government *
properly considered as an exclusive power To
that department; and therefore the grant of
this power to the judiciary, without any ASSIGN. |
ment of it to Congress shows that it belongs 10
the Judiciary alone, and is not subject of
legislation. In the enactment of the Fugitive
Slave Laws of 1898 and 1850, Congress has
therefore usurped power which is not con.
ferred upon it; and those laws, consequently.
are decidedly unconstitutional; all CONFRONT,
SEES decisions, and authorities, to the contrary
Notwithstanding
The recovery of truth and justice, though
the principal is not the sole motive for this ad
dress to your honor; and If | am anxious for
the removal of these tyrannical and cruel Fu-
gitivo Slave Laws-although perceive that
they are working their own cure, by rapidly
augmcnting that spirit Of freedom in the land "A
which will oycrwhelm them-it is becaSo, ,
conflicts which must in this wan the
abolition must be ombittcrca % ~. effect their
But wish to rresa,-'iot,hG1 and calamitous.
honor, consear . ON the attention Of your
laws, .4ences of persistence in these
enc" md especially the mode in which they
arc judicially defended, of far more profound
character, of which you ,iro probably not
aware. The enactment of these laws, and the
trials under them, are not only awakening the
people to tho enormities and injustice of Slave.
ry, but impellipe their minds back to the cx-
animation Of the governmental power ITSELF by
which it is supported. They begin to question
the moral obligation of obedience to Govern
mont however legitimately formed, which is
based on principles opposed to what thOy deem
tho higher law Of God and when they see ju-
dcial decisions in support of so obnoxious an
enactment as that we are now considering,
founded not on independent Judgment, but SER
vile conformity to improved former opinions,
they naturally ascribc such judgment to the
Ia lAc hiasir1x xan,rar t;a., nj