Vermont watchman and State journal. [volume] (Montpelier, Vt.) 1836-1883, 1859-06-10

The Federal Government is one of limited
powers and all powers not expressly granted
TO it., or necessary to carry into effect such as
are expressly granted to it by the terms of
the Constitution, are reserved to the States or
the people. Amendments, Art. 10.
mo person held to service or labor in one
State, under the laws thereof, escaping into
Z another shall, 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. 2.
This is the only clause of the Constitution
from which anybody prctcnds to derive, or in
which anybody pretends to find, grant Of
power to Congress to logislate on the subject
, of the rendition Of fugiuyes from labor |
can find in 1t no such grant. The first part
, Of it simply prohibits State legislation hostile
} TO the rendition offugitives from labor. Such
2 fugitive shall not be discharged lin conso-
quence Of any law or regulation" of the State
into which he shall escape, "but shall be de-
lvered up By whom; By Congress p
2 BY the Federal authorities, There are no
sici ,cords. and no such idea is limited at
! This is evident from an inspection Of the
Z whole Of the preceding portion Of this article.
! Arr 4. SIC !. Full faith and credit
: " shall be given in each State to the public
" acts, records and judicial proceedings of
" every other State. 1Hd the Congress mag
" By general lars prescribe the manner in ,ehjch
Z " such acts, records and proceedings shall be
"prored, and the effect tbercoE' Here, in the
first place. is a compact between the States
respectively AN agreement Of the several
States to and with each other, that the pub
lie acts, records 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 Congress;
think not. But the trainers of the Consttu
8 ton thought that Congress ought to have the
= power ITO prescribe the manner in which
" such acts records and proceedings should
81 be proved, and the effect thereof and
hence they gave the power in express terms.
When they intended grant Of power TO Con-
gress, and not a mere contract stipulation by,
= or injunction of duty upon, the States theysay
SO. and leave us no room for cayil on the sub
ject. But let us 90 on.
SEC. p The citizen of each state shall
be entitled to all privileges and immunities Of
citizens in the several States
"A person charged in any State with trca-
son. felony or other crime, who shall fee
from justice, and be found in another State,
shall. on demand of the Executive authority
, Of the State from which he fled be delivered
up, to be removed to the State having juris-
dicton of the crime.
That these clauses of section two are mere
articles of compact between the States, de-
pendcnt on the good faith of the States alone
for their fulflment. suppose no one will
/ dispute They do not confer upon Congress
any power whatsoever to enforce their obser-
vance Then follows the last clause of Sec
ton two. in respect to fugitiyes from labor or
service first quoted And this. like all the
other preceding clauses of this article, except
IKE first, is destitute of any grant of power.
or even allusion to Congress or the Federal
5 Government. Now. ifa grant of power TO
e Congress was here intended. why this silence
If the trainers of the Constitution intended
y grant of power to Congress in this clause,
' why did they not say so. as they did in the
, first section. in respect to public acts. re-
n cords and judicial proceedings :"
Il 1t seems to me that no rational answer can
r be given to this question. except bv denial
. of such intentions Elpressio minus erciusio
r aherius. is a legal maxim as old as the com
$ mon law. The express mention of one thing
d implies the exclusion of things not mention
. ed. 10 Is the dictate of reason and common
a sense. 1t is a maxim which applies alike in
j. the INTERPRETATION of contracts. statutes, and
- constitutions. Its application was never
d more obviously proper than to the question
o before us: and when applied. it seems to me
d to bring with it force little short of mathe-
Sc matical demonstration.
Is Thus farl have reasoned as if we were ignor-
: ant of the history of the Constitution. Buta
d glance at that history confirms the conclusions
is to which we arc brought by the ordinary
y rules of Interpretation, and makes "assuran-
% ce douHy sure"
The Articles of Confederation under which
II the struggle for independence was carried
e through, and for which the present Coustitu-
1t ton Of the United States is a substitute, con
n tanned nothing bit articles of compact The
d fulhllment of its obligations was dependent
n upon the faith of the States alone The Con-
gress could make acquisitions, but had no
d power to enforce them
Is Again Certain provisions of the ordinance
n of 1877, for the government of the territory
&c north west of the Ohio River, were in ex-
J. press terms declared to be ARTICLES of com
pact
II ,,.o..- 1.,. 6 IL. ,t...... A.. f.....l.