Worcester daily spy. [volume] (Worcester [Mass.]) 1850-1888, 1859-02-21
THE SUPPRESSION OF KIDNAPPING.

sets have petitioned the Legislature to enact
law. that no person. claimed as slave, under
the laws of any of the States of this Union,
shall be delivered up by any officer or court
within the Commonwealth. 1t has never been
very difficult to obtain legislation providing
against delivering up fugtives from service or
labor eidout sufficient evidence and we have
even gone so far as to attach slight penalties to
various classes of officers and professional
men, who should issue warrants or appear
against persons claimed under the Slave law of
of 1850 The famous personal liberty law of
ls55-the best statute of the kind we ever
had-contemplated no more than this. The
only person we believe, who has suffered on
account of its provisions, was Judge Loring;
and he has gone to his reward. The present
petitions, ask for more positive and stringent
legislation for the protection of personal liber-
tv, BY the enactment of law, which shall
make it penal to deliver up any person to bond
age. who has violated no contract and is
guilty of no crime.
The strongest argument in favor of such
legislation, is, that it would commend itself to
Tile COUSccUc6 anu llle HSdIt VI tnS SOhhiOl-
wealth. The citizen cannot be found, who
would voluntarily aid in returning fugitive,
whom he knew to be slave. The spirit which
would actuate any man, in betraying to
commissioner, or to pursuers, slave, who
had sought protection, would encounter uni
versal adherence. And it would be difficult
to find the household in Massachusetts, where
the hunted bondman would not find hiding
place and protection. The instinct of charity
is universal and will develope itself, whatever
the statutes may say about it. Let us not add
hypocrisy to treason, if it is treason. Let us
not attempt to conceal what we consider inn
pulses of humanity under ambiguous and in
sincere phraseology, or under general statutes
which we intend to violate, in all the specific
cases likely to occur under them.
The strongest argument against such legis-
lation, is, that it would be unconstitutional
Does not the Constitution provide for the re-
turn of fugitives from service or labor? Does
not the Supreme Court say that refers to
slaves Does not Congress establish that
every body shall be body guard to the owners
of plantations, and catch their negroes if they
run away If we admit the infability of
these tribunals, and the unquestionable depen-
dence of private judgement upon them-and
under no other circumstances, the constitution
al argument would be sound. But unfortu-
nately for those who use the argument, infalli-
bility is not claimed, and the divine right of
private judgement is not disputed. If the
rules of the English language will allow
construction of the Constitution that shall har-
monte with the unalterable convictions of the
people of this Commonwealth, they are bound
by sacred obligations to apply them in public
as well as in private conduct And if we ac-
cept the Constitution as a consistent and homo
geneous instrument, intended in its parts to
carry into the practice of the country the theory
which underlies all free governments, and our
own above all others, no other construction
can be given to it. That famous clause of the
Constitution-so often quoted, and so often
abused-on which the advocates of kidnap-
ping by statute are accustomed to rest their
defence, would, if applied to slaves, make the
Constitution an absurdity and lie. What
would become of that justice which it aimed
to establish, and of those blessings of liberty
which it was designed to secure, if those who
deny the equality of right to justice and to
liberty among men, could torture any part of
to their use But fortunately there is no
obscure phraseoogy. Neither in the sight of
God, nor by the letter of the law, can man
owe service or labor, without compensation,
and his own consent. Certainly one who has
been stolen and held to service under system
of force does not owe any thing to the thief or
to the receiver. And it is a matter of history
that the trainers fthe Constitution desgnedlyre
fused to recognize, by so much as single word,
that this gigantic system of force and fraud ex-
listed at ALL and left it to live, if at ALL at its own
risk, or to die, as it seemed likely to die, by the
slow processes of decay. The decisions of
the Supreme Court were an after-thought-
made when the slave power had determined to
fortify itself by persistent ACKNOWLEDGEMENT.
The subsequent acts of Congress were steps in
the pathway of that ACKNOWLEDGEMENT. They
could not in any event bind the conscience of
any man. They are inconsistent with the
constitutional obligations of every one who
sincerely and conscientiously believes the
constitution is an anti-savery instrument
expression of the theory of free Government
for the security, the protection and the welfare
of free citizens.
For these and many other reasons, we think
the petitioners have made just request
Whatever is moral, humane and constitutional,
il is proper to defend by statute. 1t is at once
moral, humane and constitutional to secure the
blessings of liberty to all persons within our
jurisdiction who have not forfeited them by
crime.