The Richmond palladium. [volume] (Richmond, Ind.) 1855-1875, 1859-06-30


STATE. Ind the toagress tzug b = eeger4
iqirs prescribe he nzanasr ie srIieL s'tct aets
recor.is, aHd procsedmgs shall Be procsd
nd ILs etFsct hereof"
Here, IA The first place. is a compact be
tween the States pactivelv-an agreement
o. The several States 10 and with each other
and tile public acts, records and iudjcia
proceedings" Of each shall "haye fu!i faiti
and credit" given 10 them all. Had thi,
section closed here, would any one claim that
it embraced any grant of legislative power
to Congress? think not But the tramer.
OF the Constitution thought that Congress.
ought to have the power TO prescribe the
manner IN which such acts. records and pro
ceedings should De proved. and the effect
thereof" and hence they have the power in
express terms. When they intended grant
OF power - Congress, and n9ta mere contract
stipulation by, or Injunction OF duty upon
the States, hscY sag 81. ani leave Us no room
for caFil on he SuUiaet. Bp. lrt Us 20 on
Sec. ,. The citizens ot each STATE shah
be entitled TO all privileges and immunities Of
citizens in the several States.
"a person charged in any State with
treason, felony, or crime, wha shall tlee from
Justice, and he found in another State. SHAH.
on demand Of the executive authority Of the
State, from which he fed. be delivered up
10 be removed to the Sac h8yjns iursGc-
tion OF the crime.
That these clauses Of section two are mere
articles of compact between the States, de-
pendent Ou the good faith of the States alone
for their fu!hllment I suppose no one will
dispute. They do not oonte. upon Congress
anv POWER whatsoever - eutnrce their OF
servance.
Then follows the last clause Of section tive,
IN aspect ta tIgtIyes from Eabor or service.
first quoted. Aud this, hz- all the other
preceding clauses OF this article. except the
first. Is destitute Of any grant ot power. g..
even alusjon to Congress or the federal gov
ernmeat. Now If grant II power to Con
gre,s wa here intended why this s5lence2
Ii the trainers Of the Constitution Intended a
grant ct power to Congress in this clause
why did they not say 50. As they did say IL
the first section IN relation to public acts, re-
cords and Judicial Proceedings"
1t seems to me that no rational answer can
be given to this question. except by denial
of such Intentions ErpreSylo ustus crclu-
sl0 aItcrtuS, is Il legal maxim as old as the
common law. The express mention of one
thug implies the exclusion of things not mem
toned. 1t is the dictate of reason and com
mon sense. 1t is maxim which applies
alike III the Interpretation OF contracts stat
ute~, and constitutions Its application was
never more obvious proper than to the ques
uon h~tnre "a; and when applied. II seems tn
me to bring wrb 1t a force little short Of
ma hematical demonstration.
Thus far. | la, reasoned "A. if it wexa 10
nortut OF the history of the constitution. Bug
glance At tAat history confirms the con
ciusjous TO which We are brought 10y the OIL
dnary rules Of interpretation. and make aS-
suranceS s'doubIy sure
The Articles OF Confederation. under
which the struggle for Independence was
eauied through. and tor which the present
Constitution ot the United States is sub
>ttaf=. contained aoth<ng but articles ct COM
pact. The luI6!lm-nt OF It's obligations va
dependent upon the iaith ol th= States alone
The Congress could make rcqujsitIous, bu
had no power to enforce them
Bgain: Certain provisions Of the Ordina II .e
Of 1877, for the government Of the territory
northwest OF the Ohio river. were IN express
terms. declared to be ARTICLES # conptct ~
/ Now every ona of these clauses OF the
fourth article of the Constitution above quot
ed were borrowed aud transferred. with but
slight verbal alterations, from the articles ct
confederation aud the ordinance of 1167-
the first three from the former and the last
from the latter-wIth this exception ouiv
that 10 the first Of these clauses was ided
4 grant Of power 10 Congress 20 prescribe the
manner ot proof and effect OF public acts. Re
cords AMI iudIcIal proceedings. Here then,
We have certain articles of compact--aimiJ
ted or declared - be such, and nothing more
-borcowei OF transferred from enc instru-
ment 10 another, with no intma-i5n ct any
change Ol their character as articles OF com
pact. except in a single instance. where the
, change i expressly declared. The inf, renee
seems u me To be irresistible. that. except 50
tar the change IS expressly declared, they
remained after the transfer, the same a they
were betorc--articses Of compact, and Doth-
ing else.
/ conclu le, therefore, that tie States are
bound iu fu.di.meut Of their plighred ia5sh
and through the medium oi tsc5r laws leg
i>l~tian aud tanetionares, 10 deliver up the
fugitive icom service or labor. on claim o.
the party To whom such service or labor may
be due uatcr the laws Of another Safe from
which the u-;.lve mas He'd. Ba, the teder.
government has nothing - 30 with tie sub
iect. and Interference Is Sheer UusLrpatigu G
power granted, but reserved.
Bat. i Is SAID, tie question ) settled, an
our argam=n tcomes to- late. I deav that
Is settled
The feLe-al legislature has usurpai
mower not granted by tie Constitution, an
the federal judiciary has through tie m-3i
um OF ressoaiass lame, hsltiag. contradictory
and o, .r-teecheI Implications. derived fror
unwarranteI assumptions and faIze history
san.i,ued the usurpatien. l deny tia
the decisions ct a usarping party in favor {
tine validity o. It's own assumptions. can SCI
tie anything. l: Is true taat Iae courts aa
legislatures ot severe. ot tae SAFES have de
cldrJ in The same way bas they have bee
l-.- o. 1. T.-- . --
fn7l ard independent in4Vry. The fac IL.
such iari,,s - H5rnh.easr. Walwar.b A.
. Webster thought on ,liS subject a. ;liul
shows kat the question Is not settled II
fact that uaisrj.y Of nv brethren. ana
understand .aenl, admit ttet II his were
nav question they woald Of with rue. A.
a they yield the strong leealn-S of tbeir av
Z miads u the force ot the -aie Il res al jss3ic
u Ea alone. pEaNes TIA. tha aaes.lan ]. uaa =