The daily union. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1845-1857, 1855-06-05

the history of the fugveaye Law II was written in
consequence OF article which lately appeared in our
columns copied from the Detroit Free Press in which The
part taken by Senator Mason upon the passage Of that law
was not stated as fully the real history Of the
ton rendered necessary for the understanding Of
his position. The letter is only valuable account
Of its setting right important matter of history, but
because it furnishes the strongest proof that the aa prop
oson to amend the gtiye-slAye law would revive
the slavery agitation The proposed amendment origi-
mated with know-nething whig organ in the Southwest
but as far as we observed it has met with
tenance from any democratic journal.
II was suggested as part Of a new compromise on the
slavery question with the view of trying to relieve know
nothingism from its completely with aboonsm, and in
all probability il may be the subject Of discussion in the
grand national council of know-nongs which assemblies
in Philadelphia to-day The democratic party has no oc
casion entertain any propositions for compromise
the subject of slavery II claims TO have brought the
federal government back to the only compromises this
subject which be safely entertanedte compromises Of
the constitution Its position is unalterably taken upon the
great principle of congressional nonnervenon and upon
the doctrine to the ugtve-slave lawthat "beng de-
signed carry express provision OF the constitutions
cannot with fidelity thereto, be repealed changed
TO destroy impair its efficiency" Senator Mason
shows that If the amendment suggested had been in
serted in the BILL would have been less efficient if not
practically invalid and that account would not have
received his vote and probably those of other southern
senator's Our true policy, them is to abide faithfully by
present PLATFORM resisting with earnestness l at
empts at renewing in Congress or out of IL the agitation
of the slavery question under whatever shape color the
attempt may be made We commend Senator Mason's
letter to the careful attention of our readers:
TO the Editor Of he Union
In the sem-weekly Union Of the Goth May ut, in an
editorial entitled Amendment of the Fugitiye-save
law article quoted from the Detroit Free Press the
object Of which to show that when that law under
consideration in the Senate in 1850 amendment origin
ally proposed by General Cass and intended TO to
the fugitive jury trial IN the State from which he fed
should he rendition there asset. right to freedom
had been rejected by the Senate and the remarks Of the
editor and subsequent remarks of General Cass made
in the Senate in 1852 cted by the editor) intended
show that had this amendment been adopted, the law,
whilst equally beneficial to the South would have been
far less Objectionable the North leaving the pregnant
inference that southern senator's unreasonable and
acting in their opposition to this amendment.
have desire to provoke controversy in this matter
but the strong language used by the editor of the Free
Press introducing the remarks Of General Cass in the SEN
in 1852 and his failure to give the full reply contained
in the debate make it right and due well to "hs-
tory" TO the subject that notice should be taken
of it.
The Detroit Free Press says
The history of this matter was incidentally discussed
in the Senate August 26th 1852 when General Cass
marked that he had often been repoached with not having
voted in favor of the ugitivesave law and he said that
his failure to for it did not arise from any objection
the efficient provision for the rendition of slaves,
but the fact that this just and proper provision, for this
jury trial, struck from the bill. He said
"sWhen the committee of thirteen the compromise
measures began their abors gentlemen here know there
proposition made for stringent ugtiveslave law.
One reported by that committee which seemed to be
acceptable great majority Of the people and it contain
ed the main features of the law it is with prov
ion that if when fugitive taken he should assert he
not slave the commissioner after he made his decs-
ion in favor Of the master should repeat the question to
the fugitive: Do you persist in denying that you
slave and if he said he not slave the provision
that the master his agent should give bond in $1,000
without security, that within given period after return
that slave should be entitled to trial by jury in the
county from which he had escaped. Now, could never
conceive, and mortal could explain to me, why
that should not have been put into the bill.
sMr. CLEMENS. 1t was the law already in nearly if not
all the southern States.
asMr CAss. Then, why, in the name of all that is just
and proper it not put into the bill 1t was said BY
southern gentlemen that there such provision in
their State laws Then, why not put it into the bill OF
could not interfere with State laws We only
propose to require them to give the fugitive the benefit Of
the State laws That the sole and simple provision
Mr. President you know it, and every gentleman of the
Senate knows it. that provision had been inserted the
bill as il finally passed. would have taken away great
many of the objections to the law. Mr. Clay in favor
OF it. and number of southern gentlemen in committee
were in favor of it. General Fooe and Others for
it, sad in the outset, you put that provision in
will agree to almost anything else You may put in the bill
but if you do not will not vote for it, That is what said
in the beginning in the middle and in tho end and what
| say ! would not yield the point. That was the
whole fact about It, When prepared to give the
South stringent law the constitution demanded
why should they suffer such appearance that If
you may cali it, to be sacrificed unnecessarily, pareu
lay when it known that that provision had been in
the northern mind to which the b it passed has given
rise2 That the state of the
q believe there is hardly feature in the bill for which
individually did not vote from beginning to end My
votes recorded the yeas and nays. But did not
vote for the bill its final passage for the simple
that would not yield that point
The foregoing remarks Of General Cass win be found in
the Appendix to the Congressional Globe LIST session 32d
Congress-" pages 1924, 1876. On the gage (lI25)
viii be found the reply not given by the "Detro Free
Press (The debate had arisen proposition offered
by Mr. Sumner Massachusetts for the repeal of the g
tive-slave aw.)
Mr. MASON said:
Mr. President do not Mt all to enter into dis
cusson to the repeal of the fugitive slave law. intend
only TO advert to what fell from the senator from Mich
gan and the from Alabama lest by possibility
hereafter there might be doubt mscostruction
about IT, The from Michigan has declared that he
refused to vote for the fugtvesave law because il did
contain provision which had been reported by the
committee of thirteen providing that the claimant Of
fugitive from labor should be required give bond that
he would allow the fugitive have a jury trial In the
CA a. lsa, avos,,ru nI