The national era. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1847-1860, 1855-08-09

PENNSYLVANIA AND ARkANSAs-'oDuE
KANE.
The commitment of Passmore Williamson,
by Judge Kane, for contempt OF Court, IS wor-
thy of the judicial tyrant who attempted to In
troduce into this country the law OF construct
i've treason. The act is unauthorized by any
law of Congress, a clear usurpation OF power,
a detestable violation of personal liberty. We
hope Mr.. Williamson will at once institute
suit for damages against the judicial despot.
Surely there must be some remedy against SO
vile an outrage.
But our purpose now is, not so much to de-
nounce this atrocious act, as to draw attention
to the gratuitous opinions, in regard to the ma
ture and claims of Slavery, volunteered by this
Pro-Slavery Judge, as follows:
al know of no statute of Pennsylvania which
affects to divest the rights of property OF
citizen of North Carolina, acquired and assert
ed under law of that State, because he has
found it needful or convenient to pass through
the territory of Pennsylvania.
az am not aware that any such statute, if
such one were shown, could be recognised as
valid, in Court of the United States"
The law of nations, the common law, the
Constitution of the United States, and the Con-
stitutions Of the free States, agree in this-that
Slavery is an exception to natural right, is
purely local in its status, and has no claim to
recognition beyond the territory of the Sover-
eighty that acknowledges and protects it.
The specific provision in the Federal Consti-
tuition, in regard to persons escaping from SER
vice or labor, proceeds on precisely this prin-
ciple.
The laws of Pennsylvania and New York,
formerly allowing shareholders to retain their
slaves during limited period within their re-
spective territories, proceeded on the same
principle-and those laws were repealed, in
the full persuasion that the principle would
then operate without limitation, so that slave
could not be held as such within them, either
in transitu or as a sojourner.
Judge Kane, in assuming that a positive
statute would be necessary to destroy the status
of Slavery IN transitu, rejects the doctrine of
its local character, assumes that it is a natural
condition, and that it has extraterritorial force.
Nay, more in assuming that such a statute,
if enacted by the Legislature of Pennsylvania,
would not be recognised as valid in Court of
the United States, he attempts to impose on
State Sovereignty limitation not imposed by
the Federal Constitution, and inconsistent with
the Democratic doctrine, that every State has
a right to determine its own institutions.
Observe, too, how insdiously he recognises
slaves, as property, in the same sense in which
the horse or OK is regarded as property. He
knows ono statute of Pennsylvania which af
fects to divest the rights cfproperty of citizen
of North Carolina, acquired and asserted un-
der the laws of that State" &c. Deriving his
powers under the Constitution of the United
States, and called upon to decide question of
personal rights arising within the State of
Pennsylvania, he was bound to look to the
laws and Constitution of that State, 80 far as
there was no conflict with the Federal Const-
tuition, and not to the :" laws of North Caro-
lima" North Carolina cannot determine the
status of any person found within the Sover-
eighty of Pennsylvania. Now, the Constitu-
ton of the United States regards slaves. as
persons, not property, and, while making pro-
vision for the reclamation Of escaped fugitives
from service or labor, makes none at all for the
cases of slaves claimed in one State, sojourn-
ing in or passing through the territory of an
other.
But, the Constitution of Pennsylvania ex.
pressly and emphatically prohibits Slavery with
in its territories-a prohibition, unlimited as to
time, or manner, except by the single clause of
the Federal Constitution just referred to. What
right then has Judge Kane, or any other Judge,
to add another limitation, and say that Slavery
may exist in Pennsylvania, during the time ne
cessary for master to carry his slaves through
its territory? If he can do this, he can author
ize Slavery in that State, just so long as it may
suit the masters convenience to soiourn at
Philadelphia, for the purpose of purchasing
goods, or at Bedford Springs, for the purpose
of recovering his health. Aye, this judicial
despot may set up North Carolina institutions
in Pennsylvania, and determine the relations
of persons within Pennsylvania sovereignty by
North Carolina laws.
1t is time to direct the attention of the Peo-
pie to the shameless course of The Federal Ju.
dietary in regard to Slavery. With rare excep-
tons, the Supreme Court and the lower Courts
seem to recognise Slavery as the Law, Free
dom as the exception. In their action in its
behalf, the Constitution of the United States is
ignored, the Common Law outraged, State
Sovereignty continually invaded. They seem
In fact to regard the Union as mainly intend.
ed to protect Slavery; and the States, from
which Slavery is excluded, are petty corpora
tons, always subordinate to the States in which
it exists.
We see not how this evil can be remedied.
but by making United States Judges elect,re
by the People, and by limiting their terms of
office to screen or ten years. The latter change.
of itself, would go far to cure the mischief.
Life tenure of office is an anomaly in a Democ.
racy, incompatible with its elemental idea, the
government cfthe People by the People. AS we
have undertaken to set the example of Demo-
cratic Government, let US have it without aristo-
cratic or class adulteration. Let the People gov.
ern, and let them breathe their life into every de-
partment of the Government. Let there be no
Supreme Court, with subordinate branches, in
dependent of the People, inaccessible to the
People, but all the more readily used as instru-
ments OF injustice and oppression, by whatever
Glass Interest or Interests may obtain social
and political power.
We cannot close this article without calling
upon our readers to notice the difference be-
tween the pro-slavery position of Pennsylva-
mia Judge, and the anti-slavery position of an
Arkansas Judge, as defined in the following