Green-Mountain freeman. [volume] (Montpelier, Vt.) 1844-1884, 1855-03-22

apprentices persons sentenced to- hard labor &c. LII
cannot, by any fair construction, mean slaves the
people, who voted to adopt that article, had conceived
that 1t meant slaves, the article would never have peeh
adopted Again, second if contrary to all reasonable
supposition, deception was intended, we still know the
people voted upon that article constituting it according
to its natural and obvious meaning, without searching
for any occult meaning not expressed.
Again we alledge, without dwelling upon 1t here,
that that article cannot mean slaves The words slave
or slavery is not mentioned in that article, or In the
whole Constitution, which purports to be adopted to Sc
cure the blessings Of hbery that is, to secure the
people against all slavery and slave is held by any
law, to service or labor but is held by brute force And
slave can owe nothing. He is not capable of making
a contract by which he would be in debt. But upon
the last clause word may be necessary He shall be
delivered up to the claimant Who shall deliver him
up! Surely the people, or Government, where he re-
sides, and whose laws protect him while there, and
who have right to say, by their laws who may act as
agents for the Government in delivering him up, and
afford him jury trial, to decide whether any change
against him, as reason for his being delivered up is
true not No right given to any person to take
him till delivered up \ That article gives no right
to Congress to legislate upon the subject It only
contains contract the part of each State that
they will deliver up that is, make proper legal prov
sons for the delivering up and enforce those provisions
as they do their other State laws. Should it be asked
what is the remedy if they should not do it? The
pledge and honor of the State should be considered se-
curity enough. If that should fail, like South Caro-.
lima in the of their mprisonng the citizens of
Massachusetts, then it would be without remedy-like
that It might be considered defect in the Con-
sttuton But such defect gives power to Congress,
nor to the Judges of the Supreme Court. That the
business thus belonged to the States, and not to Con-
gress, the opinion of the Hon Daniel Webster, as
he expressed it in of his speeches in The Senate.
The State of Pennsylvania had adopted this view of
the Constitution and had passed law making provi-
sion for the removal of all persons liable to be removed
out of the State and yielding part Of the preentiuns
under that clause of the Constitution, named slaves in
particular, and fixing penalty for kidnapping Prigg
had gone into Pennsylvania found his slave there, and
without court judge law, any warrant Or precept
whatever, had seized his slave and carried him off out
of the State into perpetual slavery in direct violation
of said statute of Pennsylvania, by which he became
liable to indictment in Pennsylvania and liable to- the
penalties in said statute and was indicted and neaac-
cordngly He brought his writ of error, and carried
the up to the Supreme Court of the United States
That Court reversed the judgment of the Pennsylvania
State Court While that case pending before the
Supreme Court, and stood continued mention made
in some Of the newspapers, that the Court sufficient
y agreed to decide the case but were not sufficiently
agreed upon all points in thecase, and they choose to
decide them ALL so to settle the law in full, upon
the slave power under that classe of the Constitution
They decided seven points When they decided that the
statute of Pennsylvania, on which the Indictment was
founded was void the case did not require any other
point to be decided
If the Court intended this decision to put the uues-
ton out of the reach of further litigation they might as
well propose and adept into the Constitution of the Uni
ted States article contrary to any now in it, ia
king, without any vote of the people, an important power
from the State Courts, and giving to the United States
Courts nay more, taking from the State Legislatures
and giving it to Congress, Their decision covered the
whole ground They decided that the State of Penn
sylvana had right to pass that statute and that the
statute void. One clause of the Constitution is,
mo person shall be deprived of e liberty, OR proper
ty, without due process of law" The Supreme Court
wholly dsregarded this article of the Constitution and
decided that Prgg had righto take his slave without
due process Of law, without any process whatever or
warrant whatever, and against the said statute of Penn
sylvana, and carry him out of the State into slavery
Their decision takes alli power from the States, and
the State Courts, to do what the States have agreed
do, by adopting that article of the Constitution Let
from the Constitution the two clauses above
rected and insert in lieu of them the clause thus formed
by the said decision reported in Peters. Here it
acty 1t is all contained in said decision and nothing
is omitted that would vary the sense at all
& No slave escaping from his owner into State which
does not tolerate Slavery, shall be discharged from his
Slavery by any law regulation of such State and any
such law regulation is absolutely vod such State hay
ing no right to make such law regulation and the
owner of such slave may come into such State, and
without the aid of any Court Magistrate, and without
any warrant, process in law whatever, and without
the aid of any Marshal may seize his slave, and carry
him from such State into Slavery
This is exactly the clause of the Constitution which
the Supreme Court would, by their decision force upon
the people, without giving the people any opportunity to
vote concerning it. There can be no need Of telling the
people that if such clause had been in the original
Constitution, the people would have rejected it with con-
tempt Just so, if the people had supposed there was
any danger that the Supreme Court would have put that
construction upon the Constitution submitted to them
The Constitution refers to the common law, both i'm