Anti-slavery bugle. [volume] (New-Lisbon, Ohio) 1845-1861, 1859-06-25

cause they have been indicted and convicted under
an act Of Congress upon subject matter in ref
erence to which Congress has, under the Constitu
ton Of the United States, no legislative power
whatever.
/, As to the correctness of this proposition, there
does not rest on my mind the shadow or simmer
of doubt.
The federal government is one Of limited DOW.
ers; and all powers not expressly granted to it,
or necessary to carry into effect such as are ex-
pressly granted to it by tho terms of the Constitu
ton, are reserved to the states or the people.
Amendments Art. TO-
"No person held to service or labor in one State,
Under the laws thereof escaping into another, ehall
in consequence Of any law or regulation therein,
be discharged from such service or labor but shall
be delivered up on claim of the party to whom
such service or labor may be DUE" Art. 4,
Sec. g
This is the only clause Of the Constitution from
which any body pretends to divine, or in which
any body pretends to find grant of power to Con-
gress to legisae the subject of the rendition of
fugitives from labor. l can find in it no such
grant. The first part of it simply prohibits State
legislation hostile to the rendition offugitives from
labor. Such fugitives shall not be discharged "in
consequence of any law regulation" of the State
into which he shall escape "But shall be deliv-
cred up" By whom? By CongressY By the
Federal authorities There are no such ,oords ;
and no such idea is hinted at. This is evident
from inspe cton of the whole of the preceding
portion of this article.
Art H. Sec. l. "Full faith and credit shall be
given in each State to the public acts records, and
judicial proceedings of every other State. And
tile Congress may by general la,rs prescribe the
manner in ohich such acts, records, and proceed
ings shall be prOred, and the effect thereof" "lerc,
in the first place. is compact between the States
respectively-an agreement of the several States
to and with each other, that the public acts, rec
ords, and judicial proceedings" of each shall have
"full faith and credit" given to them in all. Had
this section closed here, would any one claim that
it embraced any grant of legislative power to Con-
gress l think not. But the trainers Of the con-
stitution thought that Congress ought to have the
power"to prescribe the manner in which such acts,
records, and proceedings should be proved, and
the effect thereof" and hence they gave the power
in express terms. When they intended grant Of
power to Congress, and not a mere contract stipu-
ation by, or injunction of duty upon the States,
Mey say so, and leave us no room for cavl on the
subject. But let US 60 on
Sec. 2. "The citizens of each State shall be
entitled to oil privileges and immunities of cti-
zeus in the several States"
"a person charged in any State with treason,
felony or other crime, who shall flee from justice,
and be found in another State, shsll on demand
Of the executive authority of the State from
which he fled. be delivered up, to TO removed
to the State having jurisdiction of the crime"
That these clauses of section two ore mere ar
ticles of compact between the States, dependent
on the good faith of the States alone for their full
fllmeut, suppose no one will dispute. They do
not confer upon Congress any power whatever to
enforce their observance Then follows the last
clause of section two, in respect to fugtives from
labor or service, first quoted. And this, like all
the other preceding clauses of this article, except
the frst is destitute of any grant of power, or ev-
en- allusion to Congress or the federal government.
Now, if grant of power to Congress here
intended, why this silence =? Ifthe trainers of the
constitution intend grant Of power to Congress
in this clause, why did they not say so, as they
did say in the first section, in respect to public
acts records, and judicial proceedings ?"
1t seems to me that no rational answer can be
given to this question, except by denial of such
intentions. Erpressio unius erciusio aHerius, is
legal maxim as old as the common law. The ex-
press mention of one thing implies the exclusion
of things not mentioned. 1t is the dictate of reas
on and common sense. 1t is maxim which ap-
plies alike in the Interpretation of contracts, stat
utes, and constitutions. Its application never
more obviously proper than to the question before
us; and when applied, it SCENE to me to bring with
it force little short of mathematical demonstra-
tion.
Thus far I have reasoned as if we were igno-
rant of the history of the Constitution. But a
glance at that history confirms tho conclusions to
which we are brought by the ordinary rules of in
terpretaton and makes assurances dOubly sure"
The Articles of Confederation under which the
struggle for independence was carried through,
and for which the presentConstituton of theUnit
States is substitute, contained nothing but arti-
cles of compact. The ful6lment of its obligations
was dependent upon the faith of the States alone.
The Congress could make requisitions, but had no
power to enforce them.
Again Certain provisions Of the ordinance Of
1887, for the government of the territory north.
west of the Ohio river. we're in express terms de-
cared to be "artcles of compact" b ,.y
Now, every one of the clauses of the fourth ar
ticle of the Constitution above quoted were bor-
rowed and transferred, with but slight verbal al
terations, from the articles of confederation and
the ordinance of l787-the first three from the
former, and the last from the latter-wth this ex-
ception only, that to the first of these clauses was
added grant Of power to Congress to prescribe
the manner of proof and effect of public acts, re-
cords, and judicial proceedings. Here, then, we
have certain articles of compact--admitted or de-
clared to be such, and nothing more--borrowed
and transferred from one instrument to another,
with no intimation of any change of their charac
ter as articles of compact, except in single in.