The national era. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1847-1860, 1856-02-14
SLAVERY IN PENNSYLVANIA.

We yesterday published the Report of the
minority of the Judiciary Committee in the
Pennsylvania Assembly, on the question of al
lowing slaves to be carried through the State
We now give the Report of the majority of that
Committee, who hold that such right of
transit already exists:
1.-The Committee on Judiciary, to whom was
referred the petition of Col Joseph Paxton, of
Cattawissa, praying for the enactment of a law
securing to the citizens Of saveholding States
of this Union the right of transit through this
State with their slave property, respectfully
report, that they have had the subject under
consideration, and have come to the conclusion
that the right of transit through Pennsyvania
with their slaves, is already secured to the citi-
zens OF the slaveholding States BY the law of
nations and the Federal Constitution and that
no statute of the State affects to disturb that
right. Before the adoption of the Constitution
of 1887, slaves we're held and recognised as
property in all the States of the Confederation
save one. Each State was sovereign and in
dependent Republic; and that comfy which is
recognised by the law of nations as existing
between friendly powers, extended to and pre-
vailed among the several States, and the right
of transit with their then undisputed property
was not cOntravened.
upon the adoption of the Constitution,
property in slaves was positively recognised,
and especially protected by the provision for
the rendition of fugitives from labor. Slaves
were recognised as legitimate property at that
time, not only by the Federal Constitution, but
by the laws Of the several States of the Union,
including Pennsylvania.
" Having adopted the Constitution, and thus
plighted her honor to the faithful observance
OF all its covenants, she will not now dishonor
herself by denying her bond or violating any of
lou &c
right of peaceable and orderly transit to both
persons and property, and that right is ratified
and confirmed by the Constitution, more espe-
cially in the clause which reserves to Congress
the exclusive right to regulate commerce among
the States. This reserved right is construed
by the Courts to include intercourse and the
transportation of property, and most clearly
excluded the right of individual States to pro-
hibit intercourse and the TRANSPORTATION of
property The question Of property of course
refers to the locus in quo of the alleged owner.
The Constitution declares that the citizen of
each State shall be entitled to all privileges and
lmmunlties of citizens in the several States
And will any Pennsylvania deny his own right
to pass with his property over and along the
public highways Of Virginia? And if he will
not, why are not the rights of the citizens of
the two States reciprocal?
Your Committee deny that PENNSYLVANIA
has passed an unconstitutional law, interdicting
a peaceable and friendly intercourse between
the citizens of the several sister States of this
Union, and refusing to permit their property to
accompany their persons. The act of the
Pennsylvania Legislature of LIST March, 1880,
as explained by the act of 29th March, 1888,
recognises the prior right of persons, with their
domestic slaves, to pass and sojourn in this
State for six months and does not attempt to
disturb that right, but declares all slaves to be
free who are retained by inhabitants, residents
and intended residents. Thus we have clear
distinction made and kept up between the
rights, in the respect of passers through, soiourn
ers, and inhabitants, residents and intended
residents.
Then comes the act of the Sd March, lS47.
which repeats so much of the act of 1850 as
authorizes the masters or owners of slaves to
bring and retain such slaves within this Com.
monwealth, for the period of six months, in in.
voluntary servitude, or for any, period of time
whatsoever We believe thatsihis act hugs the
wind closely, and sails between the rock of the
Constitution on one hand, and the whirlpool of
its open reputation on the other. 1t does not
purport to take away from their masters the
domestic slaves attending upon their persons rs
they pass through this State. 1t does not pro-
hibit the bringing of them within it. 1t only
forbids the bringing and retaining of them here.
If may affect the slaves of sojourners, but it
cannot reach persons or slaves in transit, be-
cause they are not both brought and retained
within this Commonwealth. An act of Assem-
bly, will not be construed to be unconstitutional
by implications, nor when constitutional con-
struction can be fairly given to it.
This Commonwealth has properly abolished
Slavery within her own bounds, but beyond
them she has no jurisdiction over it. Our South.
ern brethren are protected in their property by
a stronger bulwark than an act of the Pennsyi.
vania Legislature, and your Committee cannot
consent to disgrace our Commonwealth in the
eyes OF the civilized world, by assuming to give
that which she has neither the power nor the
inclination to take away.
Your Committee therefore recommend the
adoption of the following resolution:
"Resolced, That the Committee be discharged
from the further consideration of the subject"
A