Anti-slavery bugle. [volume] (New-Lisbon, Ohio) 1845-1861, 1853-08-27

The Federal Government has the power to carry out
and perpctuatc this right.
Aud how with regard TO fugitiyes from justiccr
The same provisions upon the same principle
Congress has lcgslatcd upon this rs they have upon
the provision for the rendition Of persons escaped
from labor or service. But the consttutionality OF
the legislation with regard to ftgivcs from Justice
has never been doubted The Governors Of some
States have refused to give up "fugitvcs from JUS
"ticc," but the refusal was upon the ground VI
insufficient "cousc;" never on that Of "unconstitu
tonality." No court has ever doubted the const-
tutionaty of legislation providing for the return Of
fugtives from justice.
1t is stated Of that provision in the Constitution
which says that full faith and credit shall be given
to the public acts and records of other States that
no power is conferred the Federal Government
TO enforce it.
Is this So? The fundamental law declares tina,
citizens of each State shall be entitled to all tho
rights and mmunitics of the several States Tn
doubtcdly Congress may lcgslatc upon these pro-
visions.
There arc various other provisions of this do
scriptOn. NOtunnagc duties shall be laid ON articles
imported from State into another. The States
can conclude no treaties, coin no money, cannot
make anything but gold and silver legal tender"
can pass erpost t1cto laws, or impairing the OBJ
legations of contracts.
These arc all prohibitions Of power to the Statos
Does it follow that because there is no express
provision in the organic law for the exercise Of
power on these subjects that none exists? In all
these eases a remedy is provided In ease of in
fraction by the States a writ Of error may lie taken
from the State Court 10 the Supreme Court of tho
United States, where laws conflicting with the Con-
stituton will be declared void Ii would be sing
uar it there no sanction To- the provision upor
this most difficult oC IN qupstions-a question 40
ably and extensively discussed at the thnt tht Ton
~tituton was framed; for slavery then existed in
about one half the States. Before the adoption Of
that instrument slaves had been reclaimed in yari-
ous ways. in many instances by comfy, in others
by unobstructcd force. There existed virtual.
practical compromise before the written compromise
Of the Constitution. But difficulties had arisen.
and Hercj5Tc this provision.
Nor can there lc doubt that the term persons
held to service or labor" applies principally W
persons held MS slaves. Madison, while asscntng
to the provision. objected to the of the term
"slayc' because il expressed n thing rcpugnant to
his scntimcnts-hc did not wish the idea that ono
man could hold property in another, recognized in
the organic law Of his country.
j This has been termed an &c pdrfe proceeding. IL
certainly is not. Had the counsel for McQucrry
been able to state that they expected to prove his
| freedom, should promptly have granted contin-
uancc, to afford ample time for the collection Of
such proof.
/ Occupying the sacred office Of Judge, have no
right here to indulge my sympathics. 1t would
have bccn gratifying TO have found that the defend
ant was II free man, instead of slave, because
such result is gratifying to those whose feelings
are opposed to slavery in the abstract. In such u
casc il is the stern duty of the Judge to use more
than ordinary caution.
/ 1t was urged against the constitutionaity Of the
laws of 1893 and 1850, that they denied the right
of trial by Jury II is my opinion. based upon
my judicial experience. that trial hy jury would
not decrease the number Of rcnditi0ns uf "pcr-ons
escaped from service or labor" In an instance
that call to mind. decided ant-slaycry man was
upon Il jury in case involving the liberty Of cs-
|,uh l.ln m lp nrsiI lp sul nf
his oath to support the law and tho constitution,
aud hc agreed With his brethren to give verdict
of damages against the persons through whose
nstrumcntIlity the slaves had escaped.
i This is not a final decision to the liberty of
the defendant. The question here is strictly
whether he owes service or labor to the claimant,
hut this decision will be bar to the question u
the liberty Of the man. lie may be sold; his CON
dition may be wrctchcd, but the fault is not with
the Judiciary.
1t isa principle universally admitted that law
may be in part constitutional, and in another part
void, and that eff may be given to those portions
which are constitutional | do not, by this, wish
to intimate that any part of the laws of '93 and 80
are in conflict with the organic law.
1t may not bc improper for me here TO suggest
that there is part of the law of 80 that does
not seem to be rightly understood. The clause al
lowing $40 to the Commissioner in case the ccrtif-
cate is made out to the master, and So If mo ccrtif
cate is given. was, think, intended merely 10
compensate that officer for the extra writing,
(which may hc considerable, and oven not covered
by the sum of so in consequence of the statement
oi the ease and the certificate. Sitting as Judg6
of the Supreme Court, aud not rs Il Commissioners,
may properly make this remark.
Thelnws of 1893 and 1850 rs regards this case,
are clearly within the provisions of the Constitu-
tion.
AN, TuGREroRE, BOUND TO REMAND THE FuGI-
, TIVE TO ms MASTER.