The Kenosha telegraph and tribune. [volume] (Kenosha, Wis.) 1859-1860, 1859-06-16
Where is the Authority?

The powers of Congress are limited and con
sist only Of such grants as are enumerated in
the constitution all powers which are not spe.
cifca ly delegated by that instrument are reser.
we'd entirely to the States The authority of
Congress to enact fugitive slave law, is no.
where to be found in the constitution. The on
~ clause in the constitution relied upon TO sup.
port the fugitive slave act is the following =
" No person held to service in one State escaping
into another, shall in consequence of any law or
regulation therein, be discharged from such
service or labour; but shall be delivered up on
the claim Of the party to whom such service or
labour may be due" This provision of the con-
stitution confers no specific power on Congress
but relates chiefly to the duties of the States
There is doubtless an obligation on the part of
State to deliver up persons provided they ODe
service; but how can a slave owe service A
slave according to the definition of the statutes
in the slave states, can own nothing, acquire
nothing, possess nothing. Therefore how can
he ore, or be indebted to any one Before a
person is delivered up on the claim of a party
would it not be well to allow jury to determine
whether such person does actually O,ce any,
thingY Suppose the person claimed has rem
dered service for many a year, and has never
received any compensation whatever, would il
not be absurd to say he owes the individual
who has withheld his wages }? Is it not COM
, mon sense; should it not rightfully be law,
thatl jury be allowed to determine in sucb
cases Iflaw has any foundation in Justice
and has any respect for the rights of persons.
there certainly should be an appropriate tribu-
nal for determining the indebtedness Of parties
before allowing any such summary proceedings
as the fugitive slave act authorizes.
But there is another difficulty which is in
conflict with the fugitive slave act that act
processes to authorize the giving up of persons
o'o'Hg service. Tho bred Scott decision de-
clares slaves to be property-and not persons :"
That clause in the constitution in which the fu
gitive slave act pretends to find a warrant, de
clares it to be persons who are to be surrender
cd up Therefore slave, not being person
by the decision of the bred Scott court, the fu-
gitive slave act does not reach the case, for IL
only speaks of persons. Unfortunately for the
apoogist, of slavery, the word slaUe is not
found in the constitution, and were the inter.
probation OF that instrument submitted to tribu
nal of enlightened jurists, wholly disinterested
in the Government of the United States. thew
would most certainly determine, that the consti-
tuition of this country, furnishes no warrant for
chat:el slavery.
But the unconstitutionality of the fugitive
. slave act, does not rest simply on the ground
that the constitution confers no power on Con-
gress for its enactment it is nullity because IL
conflicts with the plain and express provisions
of the constitution. 1t denies the right of trial
by jury, and the benefit of the writ of habeas
corpus; it creates judicial functionaries in the
shape of commissioners, = and invests them nth
the power of determining the liberty or slavery
ofpersons, against the express provisions of
the constitution. 1t is frequently asked by pro-
slavery Journals if the constitution saws moth.
ing about slavery, then by what authority can
Congress keep it out of a territory, or leeislate
on the subject at all 2. Liberty and slavery.
right and wrong. are not placed on an equality
by the constitution. the preamble of the consti-
tuition expressly declares the object of the in
strument to be, to " establish ipSt;oo rro,.o.o
the general welfare and secure the uess;,o. Of
liberty" In the catalogue of powers particul0r,
y granted all that are necessary to secpre tboo
ends OF government are enumerated. but mot ons
10 granted TO do wrong-to make slave.