New Orleans daily crescent. [volume] ([New Orleans, La.]) 1851-1866, 1856-12-03
The Fugstiye Slave Law OF 1893.

Colonel Benton is engaged in preparing for the press
an abridgment Of the debates of Congress. The
condensation of the transactions of the early Consti
tutona Congresses possess great interest. Speaking
OF this work, the National Inteigencer says: "What
reader who has not made political history study
but will be surprised that the following brief para
graphs comprise the proceedings of the House Of
Representatives in 1893 on subject-the rendition
ofiugyes from servicehat in later times has caus-
ed such curious dissensons :"
MONDAY, Jan. 2l.-The bill sent from the Senate
entitled An act respecting fugtiyes from JUSTICE and
persons escaping from the service Of their masters
was read twice and committed.
MONDAY, Feb. 1.-The House resolved itself into n
Committee of the whole House on the bill sent from
the Senate, entitled AN act respecting fugityes from
justice and persons escaping from the service of their
masters and, after some time spent therein, the
chairman reported that the committee had had the
said biIl under consideration, aud made an amend
lnent thereto, which was read and agreed to by the
House.
Tuesday, Feb. 5.-The House proceeded to consid-
er the bill sent from the Senate, entitled An act re-
slecting tugtives from justice and persons escaping
from the service of their masters which lay on the
table Whereupon the said bill, together with the
amendment agreed to yesterday, was read the third
TIME and on the question whether the same do pass
II was resolved in the affirmative Yeas IS, nays Z.
To this simple record the author of the AER1DG
A!->l dPptuus lht loIloNll5 HISTORICAL note:
The bill came down from the Senate, where de.
bates were not published, and seems to have passed
the House without debate, almost without division
there being but seven votes against it, and two of
these (Messrs. Mercer and Parker) from slave States
Nor does it appear to what part of the bill they OBJ
Jected, whether to the part in relation to ueityes
IRON justice Or to those who fled from service for
both classes were comprehended in the same BILL 1t
was passed On passage from President Washington
founded on communication from the Governor of
nlfl J,lI-,l lla+,,N
had taken refuge in Virginia. and because it was ne
cessary to have an act Of Congress to give effect to
the rendition clause in the Constitution.
There was but little necessity in those times nor
for long after for an act of Congress to authorize the
recovery OF fugitive slaves. The laws of the free
States, and still more the force OF public opinion were
the owners best safeguards. Public opinion was
against the abduction of slaves and if any one was
sednced from his master, it was done furtiyey and
secretly. without show or force and as auy other
moral offence would be committed State laws favored
the owner, and TO greater extent than the act of
Congress did or could In Pennsylvania there was an
act (t was passed in 1850 and only repealed in lS4
discriminating between tine traveller and sojourner and
the permanent resident, allowing the former to re-
main six months in the State before his slaves would
become subject to the emancipation and in the case
of Government Federal officer, allowing as much
more time as his duties required him to remain. New
ork had the same act, only VARYING in time, which
was nine months While these two acts we're in
force, and supported by public opinion the traveller
and s2jourer safe with his slaves in those States,
and the same in the other free States There was no
trouble about fugitive slaves in those times. The act
OF l793 did not grow out Of any such trouble but out
Of the case OF fugitive from Justice 1t was the case
which brought the subject before Congress and in
the act that was passed the case of fugitives from
justice was first provided for the first and second sec
tons OF the act being given to that branch of the
subject, and the third and fourth to the other; all
brief and plain, and executable without expense or
fuss. In the case of slave, the owner was allowed
to seize him wherever he saw him, by day or by
night Sundays Or week days just if lie was in his
own State, and a penalty OF $500 attached to any
person who resisted obstructed him in this seizure
The only authority he wanted was after the seizure
and to justify the carrying back and for that purpose
the affidavit of the owner or his agent was sufficient
Ihls act was perfect except in relying State Off
GERS well as Federal officers to execute it, these
State officers not being subject to the Federal law
and being forbidden to act after slavery became
subject Of political agitation.