The daily union., 1855-10-17
THE DAILY UNION


for many years after annexed to Pennsylvania and gov
erned by the law continue 10 recognise slavery up
the present hour II survived in Commonwealth
legayproeeted institution until some time after the CEN
of lS40 cautiously did the act Of 1880 for its grad
ua abolition among us operate upon the vested Interests
of our saye-owners.
That act excepted from the operation of s provisions the
domestic slaves OF delegates in Congress OF foreign minis
ters OF persons passing through soRtng in the State
and becoming residents therein provided such slaves
detained in the State longer than six months The act
of l847 regarded much OF the act OF 1880 authorized
masters and of slaves TO bring and retain their
slaves within the Common wealth for the period OF six
months for any period Of time whatever But il did
aec, vary rescind the right of slave-owner
passing through territory It applied to persons resident
and persons soolanng who brought and sought retain
their slaves hereOr such persons and their rights OF
property the State had lawful dominionbu il left the
right Of transit for property and person over which il had
Jurisdiction Just il before and 1t stood under
the constitution OF the United States and the law of
| tioDs
This brings me TO the second part Of the position affirmed
in the courts opinion namely The right citizen Of
State pass freely with his slaves through the territory OF
another State in which the institution Of slavery not
recognised.
need not say that before the compact of union was
formed between the States each of them absolutely
sovereign and independent community and that except
far their relations each other and foreign nations
have been qualified by the federal constitutions each oil
them remains As sueh it is bound BY that great moral
code which, because OF its universal obligation is called
the law of nations. What il could NOT do If freed from fed
eraye restrictions il cannot do every restraint upon
its policy which duty 10 other States would in that case
involve binds il still Just il the Union had been dis
/ solved or had never been formed.
All the stasts unite in regarding the right of transit
for person and property through the territory of friend
y State as among those which cannot under ordinary
circumstances, he denied. (Vate b. 3 ch 10, 1872
3, Puhendorf, b. 3 ch B. 8, 61 Ruherf Inst, b. 2
ch Kent Com, 80, 35 lis true that the right i
not an unqualified one The State may impose reasona
BILE conditions upon its exercise aud exact guarantees
against lis abuse But subject TO these limitations il il
the right of every citizen Of friendly State.
The right is the same and admits just the gual
al IN nd IN lhI zapla4
ment that denies the right OF peacefully transmitting ones
property through the territories of State refuses the rgh
OF passage to its owner And the question: hat to be
deemed property in such case refers itself necessarily &c
the law OF the State from which the citizen brings III
different test would sanction the conhseaton Of property
the will of the sovereign through whose territory il
seeks pass If one State may decree that there shall bs
no property, right of ownership in human beings,
other in spirit of practical philanthropy, only little
more energetic may deny the protection Of law the
products OF slave labor and third may denounce sim
lar outawry against all intoxicating liquids. And il the
laws OF State control the rights of property Of
strangers passing through its territory then the sugar
New Orleans the cotton of Carolina the wines Of Ohio
and the of New England may have their markets
bounded by the States in which they produced and
without any change OF reasoning New Jersey may refuse
to citizens OF Pennsyl the right of passing along her
railroads to New York The doctrine is tha,
poded in Europe than four hundred and fifty years
ago and finds now found very lately It's parting illus
traton in the politics OF Japan.
II 1t because and only because, this right ac-
knowledged by all civilized nations and had been
doubted among the American coloniesbecnse each colo
ny had at all times rendered its hospalities freely the
rest chershing that liberal commerce which makes broth
erhood of interest among alien Satesi because
Of this that in the convention country thought
Of making the right of transit subject of constitutional
guarantee Everything in and about the constitution inn
plies it. Ii is found in the object Ito establish more per-
feet union in the denial the States of the power lay
duties on imports and in the reservation to Congress Of the
exclusive right to regulate among the States
This last power OF the general government according
the repeated and weconsdeed decisions OF the Supreme
Court of the United States, from Gibbons Ogden
Rep, TO the passenger Howard applies inter
well rs navigation TO the transportation of
well as goods of who pass from State State in
voluntarily who pass voluntarily; and it excludes
the right Of any State to pass laws regulating controlling
forrors prohibiting such intercourse transporta
ion do not quote tie words of the eminent judges who
have affirmed this exposition of tile constitutions but it is
impossible TO read their elaborate opinions they are
found in the reports without recognising this the fixed
| law of the United States
1t needs reference dsputabc annals show that
when the reconstruction formed 1897 slaves were rec
ognised property throughout the United States The
constitution made them distinct element in the dsrhn-
on of representative power and in the assessment Of d-
rect taxes They known and returned by the
three years afterwards in sixteen Out Of the
States then embraced in the Union and late The year
1880 they found in every State of the original thir-
teen How is it possible then, while the binding
force of the constitution by claiming rights under it,
gard slave property less effectively secured by the pro-
visions of that instrument than any other property whi
is recognised such by the law of the domic
How be that State may single out this of
property from among all the rest and deny il the right
ot passing over Its sopasstDg with It's parcel OF
his travelling qupment much the horse e rides
| on his great coat his carpet bng2
We revolt in Pcnnsyvania--and honestly no doub--at
this association of men with things the subjects Of prop
erly for have accustomed ourselves for years
now nearly hfeen--to regard men, and things as
things sub Aiodo however for distinguish against the
negro much toreathers did and perhaps with
quite much They denied him civil right as a
slave; we exclude him from political rights though free
man.
/ Yet no stranger may complain of this Our consitu-
/ or of
reflect sympaihes and define our rights, But as to all
the Of the wordthose portions of il especially to-
wards whom bound by the Supreme law of the
federal constutionhey independent of our egsa-
ton, however wise viruous it may be- for they
represented conventions aud assemblies and do
not permit them TO legislate for
Whether any redress is provided by the existing laws
of Pennsylvania for the citizen Of another State whose
slaves had escaped from him while he passing through
probable that be may be denied the courts
much the husband father, guardian whose
wife, child ward has away. He may find him
sell referred back those rights which annex themselves
inseparaby the relation he occupieshe rights
ucaption and detainer These appehend that be may
and exercise any where and with such reasonable
force circumstances reader necessary and do sup
pose that the employment of such reasonable could
be regarded breach Of the peace the right to
poy as less directly incident his character
than might be 10 the corresponding character either
of the analogous relations. In word | adopt fully on
this point the views well enforced by Judge Baldwin
the case of Johnson rs Tompkius. Baldw., 5Ts, o:
The right of the arrest his fugitive slave is
solitary in the law. IL may be exercised towards
fugitive apprentice redotnpioner to the extent
and is done daily without producing any excitement An
cla