The national era. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1847-1860, 1855-06-21

Ihoh hor tnelr condlton. 1t relates to per
sons" But slaves are held as things, not as
persons Nothing can be "due" from slaves
Tor they "can make no contract Slaves are
not held to service and labor. according to the
slave code. They are only held as chattels. ,
They are not held "under the lars" of the
States, for there are no State laws enslavinp
them, or holding them to service. This was
understood by Senator Mason, of Virginia
when he objected to Mr.. Dayton's proposed
amendment to the Fugitive Slave Bill, providing
for jury trial This, in fact, he affirmed:
A trial by jury" said Mr.. Mason, "neces-
| sarily carries with it TRIAL OF THE
WHOLE RIGHT, AND A TRIAL OF THE
RIGHT TO SERVICE will be gone into, ac-
cording to the forms of the Court, in determi,,-
ing upon any other fact"
And why should not this be done? The
clause of the Constitution under which it is
pretended the Congress has power to enact
such statutes, says explicitly that the "per-
sons" to be delivered up" must be such as
| are held to labor in State, "under the IaicS
thereof Let us hear Mr.. Mason further:
Then. again, it is proposed as part of the
proof to be adduced at the hearing, after the
| fugitive has been recaptured, that evidence
shall be produced by the claimant that &drery
| is established an the State from lchich the f4gi-
| fire has a5ScOnded Now, this very thing, in a
| recent case in the city of New York, was re-
quired by one Of the Judges of that State,
| which case attracted the attention Of the au-
| thorities Of Maryland, and against which they
protested" &c. In that case, the State Judge
| went so far as TO say that the only mode of
proving it was by a reference TO the statute
book. Such proof is required BY the Senators
amendment; and if he means, by this, that
prOcf shall be brought that !Sldrery is estnb-
hal l,fE Il A w
10 comply aciM the requisitiOn, FOR NONE
SUCH CAN BE PRODUCED, apprehend
IN ANY OF THE SLAVE STATES. / am not aware
that there is single State in ,chich the inSti
tuition is established Jy POSITIVE LAW. On
former occasion, and on different topic, it was
my duty to attempt to show the Senate that no
such law was necessary for its establishment.
CERTAINLY NONE COULD BE FOUND,
and none was required in any of the States of
the Cnion."- Copied from tie Washington
Union.
We have here the direct and explicit admis-
siOn--nay, rather, the earnest declaration-of
Mr. Mason, that slaves NOT held to SER
vice and labor under the law" of any Of the
slave States. And this is tantamount to an
admission and declaration that this clause Of
the Constitution does not and cannot apply to
slaves and consequently that it contains no
" compromise" whatever on the subject of Sia-
very. II was equivalent to confession that
the bill he was urging upon the Senate was
without any foundation or authority in the clause
before us-the only one ever adduced in its
support.
The statement of Mr. Mason furthermore
confirms, in particular, the remark made near
the beginning Of this letter, land had illustrated
in former one,) that the privilege of the writ
of habeds corpus, secured in the Constitution,
is a provision adequate to secure the liberia
ton of all slaves" That writ secures trial
by jury; and jury trial, says Mr.. Mason, re-
quires that evidence be produced that Slavery
is established in the State from whence the flu
gitive has absconded and "none such can
be produced" The fugitive, of course would
have to be set free; and, therefore, the jury
trial, and the legal scrutiny before the Courts
must not be permitted ~
/ have another witness to bring upon the
stand. will prove by Mr.. Madison, who was
a member of the Federal Convention, that this
clause cannot apply to fugitive slaves, but only
to free persons The use of the word ser
RICE" instead of scrrtude," shows this, for
the Convention itself had thus defined their
own understanding and use of the two words:
ART. |, Sec. ,. On motion of Mr.. Randolph,
the word " serritude" was struck out, and the
word "serrice" unanimously inserted the
former being thought to express the condition
Of Sidres, and the latter the obligations of free
persons. Madison Papers, rol. 3, p. 1869.
So that, if sldres had been intended in the
clause before us, the word " Sercitude" would
have been used, instead OF "sercice" AS it
now stands, mo person held to SERVICE or
labor" it can only apply to "the obligations
OF free PERSONS such as apprentices, free Ia
borers, contractors, and persons owing debts
which they had agreed to pay in labor. " Ser
vice and labor" would be "due" from such.
And they would be "held to service and labor
under the laws OF the State
Another historical fact decides the question
of Intentions" Not one Of the original plans
OF Constitution mentioned the return of fugi-
tive slaves nor was it mentioned until within
twenty DAYS before the close of the Convention
The clause, when its insertion was first moved.
contained the word Stare and was strenu-
ously opposed on that account. The next day
it was offered again, with the offensive word
struck ont, and, al Its present form I" it was
adopted immediately, and without debate, and
unanimously proof positive that the Con-
vention refused to insert clause for the rem
dition of fugitive slaves And no one who
knows the Anti-Slavery sentiment of that Pc
| Rod believes that a Constitution with such
provision could have been adopted by the
people.
The real occasion of the clause, as it stands,
| is readily explained. The Convention was sit
ting in Philadelphia, where large numbers of
| immigrants, especially from Germany, were
being introduced. Many, or most of them, had
no money to pay their passage. They had con-
tracted to pay it in labor, and, on arrival, were
| advertised and sold at auction, THAT is, their
service and labor" were solo, for a limited
period, to the citizens and neghboring farmers
A .1~l,n al. e. 4.
| and selling" Of servants in former times, and
| among the Hebrews But numbers of these
German redemptioners," as they were called,
| ESCAPED into another State" and thus evaded
the payment Of the service and labor due" in
| the State of Pennsylvania, under the laws
| thereof: The frequency and extent of these dep
relations became a matter of serious complaint,
as is well known. 1t was not strange that con-
stitutional remedy was sought; nor that some
slavehoding member of the Convention, very
possibly from New York or New Jersey,l should
have thought it desirable to include "slores,' y
in the same clause. But the attempt was
promptly and successfully repulsed. No fugi.
tive Stare clause could receive, or did re-
ceive, the vote of that Convention, of whose
deliberations we have this record:
| Mr.. Madison thought it wrong to introduce
in the Constitution the idea that THERE
OOOLD pe property In man. - MADISON fu-
pers, rot 3, PIP. l,429-3O.
| This celebrated clause, therefore, whether
examined by the maxims of strict construc-
ton" the rule of the Supreme Court, the
| spirit of the Constitution" the letter of the
words, or the contemporaneous history.is proved
to be no warranty, much less a requsition, for
the rendition of fugitive " SLAVES" Such an
+" intention cannot be COLLECTED from the
words SO far from being expressed with ire