The daily union. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1845-1857, 1853-08-23
the country all our civil virtues have ourished uDdsr

10 depend on The States Tor Its execution VIII ask me
gentleman who read the able and ingenious argument 10
support OF this proposition ii that is law which provides
no penalty Tor its niraeton' He is too good iheolo
gian 10 admit The consequences OF his Argument
There be no l1t0 wuhoai sdntion. THIS spplies
10 human as II does To Divine law. The legislatures oil
the several States prohibited from passing law OBJ
slruciing The master IN pursuit OF his escaped servant
who must be given up proof by the claimant that ser
vice or labor 10 due Suppose State Ia pass law d.
recy opposed to this clause, and inhicng penalty
That was the case IN pgg g' The State OF
mug atory; in opposition TO the constitution, and
therefore void Had The power enforce The provisions
OF the constitution been left with The States, this ACT OF
Pennsylvania would not have been void. But for the
clause in the constitution that have eced every slave
would be- free touching the soil OF State whose laws
did not recognise saveryjsr slavery can only ersi by
authority Of lao.
The provision in the constitution is prohibory, and it
positive as to the giyng up" OF persons escaped IRON
give up these fugves by law OF Congress, but the pro-
vision is found in the consiiuton-lhe organic law oil
the and-and il is more than a recommendation am
that The word slave" is not In the constitution
but the subject debated in The convention, and 1t
caused deep excitement in the public mind. The con-
slituonal provision N I'M, regard was me result OF
Chief Justice Marshall This right OF rendition, them
is one which the citizens of one Stale may clam and
must receive Of another State The federal government
has the power carry out and perpetna,e this right
And how with regard 10 fugtives from justice! The
same provisions upon the same principles. Congress
has legsaed upon this they have upon The provision
for the rendition of persons escaped from labor
vice. But the conslitutional,y OF the legislation with
regard 10 fugyes from justice has never been doubted
The governors OF some States have refused TO give up
"fugves from Justice" but The refusal upon the
ground OF insufficient cause, never that OF "uncon-
siulionality" No court has ever doubted the cons,u-
tionali,y OF legislation providing for The return OF fugi
lives from justice
II is stated Of that provision in the constitution which
says tina, full faith and credit shall be given to the pub
lie acts and records OF other States, that power
conferred the federal government to enforce it. Is
This So The Fundamental law declares that citizens of
each State shall be entitled TO all the rights and mmun
ties OF the citizens OF the several States. Undoubtedly
Congress may legisate upon these provisions. There
are various other provisions OF This description. No
duties shall laid on articles imported from one
State into another. The States can conclude ea,ies
coin no money, cannot make ythipg but gold and sill.
yer illegal lender, can pass post tutto laws or
laws imparng The obligations OF contracts. These are
all prohibitions OF powers to the States Does il follow
that because there is express provision in The organic
law Tor the exercise OF power on these subjects that none
exists! In all these a remedy is provided In
of nracton by the States writ OF error may be
from the State court TO the Supreme Court OF the United
States where laws conflicting with the constitution will
be declared void 1t would be singular if there
sanction TO the provision upon this most difficult OF all
quesons-a question 30 ably and extensively discussed
a, the time the constitution was framed for slavery then
existed in about half the States. Before the adop
ton of that instrument slaves had been reclaimed
Ious ways-ln many instances by comfy, in others by
unobsiructed force There existed virtual, practical
compromise before the written compromise OF The
suiion But difficulties had arisen, and therefore this
provision.
MOI mere DE 0Ou0t mat Inc term persons held
TO service or labor applies principally persons held
slaves Madison, while ting 10 the provision, OBJ
jec,ed to the of the slave," because express
ed thing repugnant 10 his sentimentshe did wish
The idea that could hold property in another re-
cognised in the organic la of his country. This has
been termed an tr parte proceeding 1t certainly is not
Had the counsel Tor McQuerry been able TO state that
they expected 10 prove his freedom should promptly
have granted continuance TO afford ample time for the
collection Of such proof Occupying the sacred Office
OF Judge, have right here 10 indulge my sympahies
il would have been gratifying TO have found that this de-
PENDANT free man instead of slave, because such
result gratifying 10 those whose feelings opposed
10 slavery in the abstract In such case il is the stern
duty OF the Judge TO use more than ordinary caution.
IL was urged against the consn,onality OF the laws
of 1898 and 1850 that they denied The night of trial by
jury Ii is my opinion, based upon my Judicial exPe-
rienee, that trial by jury would not decrease the
Der OF rendons OF "persons escaped from service la
bor" In an instance tina, call TO mind, decided anti
slavery man was upon jury in case involving the
liberty OF escaped slaves But he considered the soIem
nifty OF his oath to support the Law and the constitutions
and be agreed WIN his brethren TO give verdict OF
damages against the persons through whose instrument
tay the slaves had escaped This is not final decision
TO the liberty OF the defendant The question here is
strictly whether be service or labor TO the claimant
but this decision will be no bar TO The question to the
liberty OF The He may be sold his condition may
be wreiched but The fault is not with the judiciary.
II is principle universally admitted that law may
be in part constitutional, and in another part void and
that sfee may be given TO those portions which
stituuonal ~ do not by this wish TO intimate that any
part OF the laws OF 1855 and 1850 in conflict with the
organic law Itmay not be improper for here to sug
that there is one part oil the law OF 1850 that does
not seem TO be rightly understood The clause allowing
81 TO the commissioner in the certificate is made
out 10 the master and s. if no certificate is given. was
Think intended merely to compensate that officer for
the writing, (which may be considerable and even
not covered by the sum OF So IN consequence OF the
statement OF The case and The certificate Sitting
Judge OF the Supreme Court and mol a commissioner,
may properly make this remark.
The laws of 1898 and 1850, as regards this case
clearly within the provisions OF the constitution.
i ON, therefore, bound 10 t0aoni The fusiiiUs hi,
master.
Alter this decision. Mr.. Jolifs moved for WIN, of
etrnorori 10 the Supreme Court
The court said that there could be no appeal from The
decision of Judge OF the Supreme Court of the United
States made al chambers The point bad be was quite
certain, been decided by The Supreme Court. He was
willing, however 10 give any reasonable time for coun-
sci 10 Investigate the question
At the suggestion OF the court il finally arranged
thatibe claimant, Mr. Miller, Should enter into a bond
for two thousand dollars conditional upoa his returning
McQuey TO this Stase in IL should be decided that
the case could be taken TO the Supreme Court
AT the conclusion OF his argument, Mr.. Ware stated
OF 81 400, and donate $50 himself to fund for that
purpose be would take the apprasement OF disinier
ested parties al Lexington
Mr. Miller remark ed that he was willing 10 give bonds
in the OF $50 900 that he would produce the slave n
this State in wr, OF eeriorri allowed by the
Supreme Court
Washington MoQuerry then delivered up 10 his
claimant by the United States deputy marshal, and, with
out hnderance or molestaton, Immediately conveyed
where be will remain until the is ready proceed
to his home.