Cooper's Clarksburg register. [volume] (Clarksburg, Va. [W. Va.]) 1851-1861, 1855-06-27
From The washington Union.
Senator Mason's etter on the History
oftho Fugittve-SlaveHL Law. 81,


oftho Fugittve-Slave-La Law s
We publish below an exceedingly sinlss
portant an interesting letter from Senator
Mason, Of Virginia, in regard to the hiss
tory of the fugitive-slave law. ut was
written III consequence Of an article which
recently appeared in our columns, copied
from the Detroit Free Press, in which the
part taken by Senator Mason upon the
passage, of that law was not stated as full
~ as tie real history Of the transaction
;rendered-necessary for the correct UNDER
Standing of ,hisp position. The letter is not
only valuable on account Of its setting
right an important matter of history, but
because it furnishes the strongest proof
that theslate proposition TO amend the
9 fuguiSe.s!ave. law would revive anew the
slavery agitation, The proposed amend
ment originated with a know. nothing
wing organ in the Southwest but, as far
rs we have observed, it has met with no
coun enance from any democratic journal.
1t was suggested as part of new
compromise on the slavery question, with
a the view of trying to relieve know.noth
ingism from its completely with abolition
ism. and in all probability, it may be the
subject of discussion in the grandnational
council OF know~uothings which assem-
bles in Philadel phia tO~day. The dem.
Ocratic party has no occasion to entertain
any propositions for compromise on the
subject of slavery. 1t claims to have
brought the federal government back to
the only compromise on this subject
which can be safely entertained-the com
promise Ofthe constitution. Its position is
unalterably taken upon the great principle
Of congressional non-intervention, and ups
on the doctrine as to the fugitive. slave
law-that " being designed to carry out
an express provision Ct the constitution, it
cannot, with fidelity thereto, be repealed
or SO changed as to destroy or impair its
efficacy" Senator Mason shows that, if
the amendment, now suggested had been
inserted in the bill, it would have been
less efficient, if not practically invalid,
and on that account would not have re-
ceiyed his vote, and probably those of
other southern senators. Our true poll
cy then is to abide faithfully by our pres
ent platform, resisting with. earnestness
call attempts at renewing, in Congress or
out of it. the agitation Of the slave Ques-
ton, under whatever shape or color the
attempt may C made" We commend
Senator Mnson's letter to the careful at.
tention Of our reaters:
TO the Editor oftte Union ....
In the semi-weekly Union of the 29th
May ult., in an editorial entitled "Amend-
ment of the fugitive-slavo law an arti-
Gle is quoted from the Detroit Free
Press, the object of which issto show, that
when that law was under consideration in
the Senate in 1850, an amendment, origi-
nally proposed by General Cass, and in
tended to secure to the fugitive jury trial
IN the state from qOAich he Red { should he
on rendition there, assert right to free
dom, had been rejected by the Senate
and the remarks OF the editor and some
subsequent remarks Of General Cass
made in the Senate in 1852. cited by the
editor, are intended to show, that had
this amendment been adopted, the law
whilst equally beneficial TO the South,
would have been far less Objectionable to
the North leaving the pregnant infer
ence that southern senators were uurea.
sonable and exacting in their opposition
to this amendment.
have no desire to provoke controver-
sy in this matter; but the strong Ian
guage of the editor of the Free Press in
PRODUCING the remarks Of General Cass
in the Senate IN 1859. and his failure to
give the full reply contained in the same
debate, make it right and due, as we'll to
the history" as to the subject, that
some notice should be taken Of it.
The Free Press:
"The history Of this matter was Incl
IDENTITY discussed in the Senate August
26.h, 1852, when General Cass remark
ed that he had often been reproached
with not having voted for the (ugitivc~
slave law and he said that his failure 10
vote for it, did not arise from any obiec-
ton to the most efficient provision for the
rendition of slaves, hut the fact that this
just and proper provision, for this jury
trial, was struck from the bill. lie said:
"Whcn the committee Of thirteen on
the compromise measucs began their la
bors, as the gentlemen here know. there
was proposition made for stringent
fugitive slave law. One was reported by
that committee which seemed to be &C
ceptabIe to great majority Of the peo-
pie. and it contained the main features Of
the law as it now is. with a provision
that if, when fugitive was taken, he
should assert he was not a slave. the
commissioner, after he made his decision
in favor of the master, should repeat the
question to the fugitive: Do you persist
i'll denying that you are a slave? and i'll
he said he was not Il slave, the pro-
vision was that the master or his agent
should give bond in $1,000, without Sc
curity, that, within given period after
return, the slave should be entitled to a
trial by jury in the county from which he
had escaped. Now, never could cons
ceive, and mortal man never could ex-
plain to me. why that should not have
been nut into thnAll