The national era. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1847-1860, 1855-03-08


whole truth on that point. believe hat DO
not know a human being who maintain or sup
poses that the Government of the Unit States
has lawful authority or right to abolish Slavery
in the States of this Union. CertainEf, in my
own opinion, that Government has no sach pow
er or right But, sir, am man, none the less
because | am citizen and Senator or the
United States And, although have 40 power
20 exercise in slaveholding State, very freely
saw. that if were q member of such Q commune
~. should recommend to and urge upon my
feilow-citixens there, with patience which could
endure until the necessary reform could saieiy
be obtained some measure of Emancipation, I'M
mediate or prospective, with compensation for
damages, through the action of the State Legs
lature upon the ascertained consent OF the REQ
ple add, further, to meet the requirements OF
those who suppose that a proposition OF gradual
Emancipation to the slaveholding States is either
timely now, or soon will be so, that whale l re-
tain a place in the National Councils, afy slave
holding State willing to adopt the humatie policy
which has been already adopted by my own State
and by other States, shall have my vote for any
aid. either in lands or money, from the Federal
Government which the condition of the public
Treasurn and of the National domain will allow,
in furt 9rance of an object in which not only the
slaveholding States are interested, but which
concerns the whole Union, and even Human Ma
ture itself.
Mr.. President, l have made my way at last,
through the intricate mazes OF this discussion, to
the actual question before the Senate the Dill
before US is in these words
"If a suit be commenced or pending in any
{ State court, against any officer Of the United
States or other person, for or on account OF any
act done under any law of the United States, or
under color thereof, or for or on account of any
right authority, claim, title, set up by such
officer or other person, under any law OF the
United States, and the defendant shall, at the
first term Of such State court after the passage
of this act, or at the first term OF such State
court after such suit shall be commenced, file a
{ petition for the removal of the cause for trial
into the next circuit court to be held in the dis
trct where the suit is pending, or, if there be
circuit court in such district then to the district
court invested with the powers of a circuit court
next to be held IN said district, and offer good
and sufficient surety for his entering in such
court, on the first day of its session, copies of
{ said process against him. and also for his there
appearing and entering special bail in the cause
if special bail was originally requisite therein, it
shall then be the duty of the State court to
accept the surety, and proceed no further in the
cause; and any bail that may have been taken
shall be discharged, and the said copies being
entered as aforesaid in such court of the United
States the cause shall there proceed in the same
manner as if it had been brought there by orig
inal process; and any attachment Of the goods
or estate of the defendant by the original pro-
cess shall hold the goods or estate so attached
{ to answer the final judgment, in the same man
ner a. by the laws of such State they would
have been holden to answer such final judgment,
had it been rendered by the court in which the
suit commenced; and the party removing the
cause shall not be allowed to plead or give evil
{ NJ othar dofapra than that U
under a law of the United States, as aforesaid"
What is proposed here is an innovation-a
new thing thing unknown in the laws of the
country, since the States came into Federal
Union. That new thing is, that a person, civilly
prosecuted in State Court, and justifying under
authority color of a law of the United States,
may GUST the State of its jurisdiction, and remove
the cause into Court of the United States. The
first question which arises is, How does the thing
stand now7 How has it hitherto stood2 What
are the powers Of the State Courts, and what are
their duties? What the rights of parties
in the State Courts The Constitution Of the
United States binds together in Federal Union
thirty -one States which, while they remain equal
and qualified sovereignties, at the Same time con-
stitute, in the aggregate, another qualified sove-
reignty. In so much as the chief business of gov
eminent is to protect the rights Of its citizens or
subjects, and as the performance of that duty is,
under free Governments, assigned to Courts of
Justice, and in so much as the citizen is stimuli
taneously the subject of State Government and
of the Federal Government the State Courts and
the United States Courts exercise concurrently
or co-ordinately the power of trying civil actions
which are brought against persons acting as Of
fcers of the Federal Government. The public
officers of the United States are, we all know,
numerous, and Of many classes-civil, military,
and naval. They are engaged in executing laws
relating to the army, the navy, the customs, the
public lands, the post Office, the judiciary, and
foreign relations. These agents may be called
upon to answer by any person who is aggr'eved,
either in the proper Federal Court or in a Court
of the State where the grievance happened. A
case which will illustrate the subject now Occurs
to me. Two or three years ago, successfully
maintained in the Supreme Court of the United
States an action on the case, which had been
brought in Justices Court of the State Of New
York, by a woman, against postmaster, who
had refused to deliver to her a newspaper, on
which the postage which could be rightfully de-
manded was one cent. The Postmaster pleaded
before the Justice, and before the Supreme Court
of the State, and before the Court of Appeals OF
the State, that none but Federal Court could
assume Jurisdiction in the case. When his plea
was finally overrued in the Court OF last resort
in the State, he appealed from that decision to
the Supreme Court Of the United States. That
Court affirmed the decision of the State Court
and thus defined the law to be, that United States
officers are amenable to civil actions in the State
tribunals. The law now remains as it was then
eIpounded and 80 it has always stood since the
establishment of the Constitution itself. 1t is
wise and bene6cent, because it surrounds the
citizen with double safeguard against e1torton,
oppression, and every form of injustice committed
by the authority or in the name of the great GEN.
trail Executive Power.
The second question is, What is the nature
and extent of the change which you propose to
make by the bill which is under consideration
That question il answered in word. Whenever
the rights Of citizen are invaded in any State
within the Union, by person holding CON-
mission, whether civil or military, from the Pres
ident of the United States, he shall hencefortl
have only a single safeguard, instead of thai
double panoply which has hitherto shielded him
and he must either forego redress, or seek it in
tribunal Of the United States, in which justice is
administered by Judges appointed by the Presi-
dent and the Senate, and irremovable, except or
impeachment by the House of Representatives
and, therefore, responsible in the least possible
degree to that wholesome Public Opinion which
is the guardian of public liberty. Every post
master and his deputy, every marshal and his
deputy, every mail-contractor, every stage-driver
every tide-waiter, every lieutenant every ensign
and even every midshipman, will be Independent
of State authority and, when prosecuted before 8
Magistrate or Court, in the immediate vicinage
where his offence is committed, win defy the
party aggrieved, and remove the action COM
menccd against him into Federal tribunal
whose terms are rarely held, and then in remote
and practically inaccessible places. One-half Of
the power residing in the States is thus to be
wrested from them at a single blow, and they
will henoeforth stand shattered monuments o.
earlier greatness
No such change as this was anticipated by the
trainers of our Federal and State Constitutions
They established the Federal Constitution chiefly
for the protection Of the whole country agains
foreign dangers They gave to it a stronger EI