The national era. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1847-1860, 1855-05-10

cannot do. The writ OF habeaS corpus must
be suspended, before Slavery can be othe wise
than illegal and unconstitutional. Bud the
Constitution provides for no such suspe sion
as would enslave any one. The Federal Gov
eminent, in all that it has done to sn port
Slavery, has attempted no such suspension. ex-
cept in the case of fugitives, and it is lain
violation of the Constitution there.
The Federal Government, by this claai;e of
the Constitution, is solemnly bound to provide
Judges in all parts of the country, who, by the
habeas corpus and due process of law, shall
liberate all who are enslaved. The writ of
habeas corpus is utterly and forever insom-
patible with the claim of property in man.
Whether we construe the clause by the lead
letter rule of "strict construction" or taxi the
rule of the Supreme Court, or search ate the
"spirit and INTENT" in the light of conte npo-
raneous history, it all comes to the same ,ing.
The intention " of +" infringing rights" 9 ,ver-
throwing fundamental principles" and "dt cart
ing from the general system oflaws," by mi king
color or race q bar to the use of the hi beas
corpus, so far from having been "expr ssed
with irresistible clearness," has no semb snce
nor shadow of any such expression at all and
no man living can point to anything o the
kind, or attempt to do so. The power o the
clause to overthrow Slavery is as strong ss hui
man language can make it.
1t avails nothing to say-either with or with
out proof-that no such result was int tded.
1t tcds intended to secure personal iber for
some of "the people of the United States : and
since none of them were excluded, all of them
were Included. The question of "intentt ,ns
respects only what was intended to be don :, not
the results of doing it. No man can fo.esee
all the results of his doings. But that docs not
hinder nor disprove the fact of his intending to
I do what he did do. More than this: if o man
intends to do thing, and does it, it may b that
the results will be more than he intended and
Especially if the results are righteous he Anust
abide by them. Suppose five out of six bro shers
draw up a paper, intending to secure then, o,cn
rights of patrimony, and actually securing hem.
Suppose it turns out afterwards, that the aper
did more than was intended-that it Sc ured
the equal rights of the sirth brother also. Can
the FIVE brothers come into court, and afely
and successfully plead that they never int aded
to secure the rights of this brother? Il the
case before us, the "intention of cuttir off
the sixth brother, of darker hue, is disp owed
by the absence of any limitation or exec ,tion
in the document. Some would have it tn. the
founders of our Republic were knaves. b 1t no
one supposes them to have been fools.
ILL., UNREASONABLE SEARCHES AND SEIZURES.
"The right of the people to be secure IN their
persons, houses, papers, and effects, against
unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not
be violated, and no warrants shall issue b 1t on
probable cause, supported by oath or al rma-
ton, and particularly describing the placs s to
be searched, and the persons or things o be
seized" -Amendmen 4.
Here is another provision for personal secu-
rity. And this, too, comes in as an apend-
ment-a codicil-correcting or displacing.any-
thing inconsistent with it, that may have $een
found in the original documents vets re-
markable provision, in addition to the b beas
corpus, the educ process of law" and 81 seral
other provisions and prohibitions that re main
to be noticed.
The clause concerning "persons held SER
vice and labor" will be considered in its F oper
place. That clause is in the original j, stru-
ment. And if it were thought necessf y to
introduce an amendment" which shout for
ever prevent that clause from being cons rued
and used as it has been, we cannot but pc, eeive
that this amendment A" would have bee adj
mirably adapted to that purpose. do nj tsay
that it was thus intended. do not thinb that,
at that time there were twenty citizens q the
United States, if indeed there were any who
suspected that that clause was intendt 4, or
would be used, for the recovery of fu, itive
slaves. The "amendment," however, uas de-
signed, and is adapted, to prevent Just such
abuse as it describes. And the seizure If al
legged fugitives, under the enactments of 1893,
and especially of 1850, are, in fact, desc ,ibed
in the amendment with graphic acct racy,
and almost prophetic precision. The pei sons,
houses, and papers, of the people are subj scted
to unreasonable searches and seizures. The
warrants are issued in violation of this al aend-
ment, and without any reasonable or just Cause.
Persons" are torn from their houses, homes,
hresidcs, and families, and by "sumD airy"
process, dragged into Slavery. And, so ar as
the provisions of these unconstitutional acts
are concerned, Il repeat it,) no citizen, white
or colored, is secure from these seizures for
the enactments make no distinction of color.
White persons, as we'll as colored, are thus
seized and enslaved. The advertisements of
fugitives often describe them as white, Sc that
color, in matter of fact cannot be regarded a
defence; and in the case of those, of all hues,
who bec,me obnoxious to those inf nous
enactmens, by "hiding the outcasts," refusing
to "bewr iy him that VANDERBILT" feeding the
hungry, nd sheltering the houseless, IS the
religion q humanity and mercy requires them
to do, the .outrages expressly prohibited in this
amendment are perpetrated with RIGGS, and
reduced = system.
This is done in fragrant violation of another
provision OF the constitution:
"Cone ess shall make no law respecting an
establish ,ent Of religion, or prohibiting the
free erer, Sc Mereof"- /.
The rec exercise" of the religion Of the
Bible is frbidden by the Fugitive Slave,Bill.
But "tpe right of the people to be secure in
their persons" "against unreasonable Sei.s,rss,"
is nothing distinct from their right to be pro
tected from enslavement. fit does not Include
this, it cen secure other protection, for there
is no such protection for the slave. 1f Nis
clause Of the Constitution can protect any por-
ton of the people, it can protect all of them.
If it cannot protect all of them, it can Protect
none. The experiment going on, daily s fur
nishing evidence of this.
WILLIAM GOoDrsLL.
FOREIGN IMMIGRATION