Dayton daily empire. [volume] (Dayton [Ohio]) 1850-1865, 1859-06-13

the facts Of the case, and All the evidences OF
the day, that The Consultation. no moro thar
the ordinance, could have been formed With
out the fugitive slave recovery clause con-
tanned In IL A right to recover savea is
not only auihorigod BY The Constitution,
but IL is a right without which there would
have been no Constitution and also no anti
slavery ordinance
One Of the early acts Of Congress, ns carly
as February, lT03, was a statute 10 carry
into eject the clause in the Consultation foF
tho reclamation Of fugitivos from justice,
and fugitivos from labor and that statute
made by the men who made the Constitu-
tion, may bo assumed 10 be the meaning Of
the Constitution, as interpreted by men who
had right to know iis meaning That act
consisted Of four sections, al brief and
clear, and the first two Of which exclusively
applied TO fugitiycs from labor embracing
apprentices as well as slaves, and applying
the same rights and remodios in each case,
and Of these two the third alone contains
the whole provision for reolaiming the lngi
tive--the fourth merely containing penalties
for tho obstruction of that right The third
section, then, is the only one essential to
the object Of this chapter, and it is in these
words
THAT when a person held TO labor in any
OF the United States or in either Of the ter
ritories or the north west, or south Of Ohio
under the laws thereof, shall esonpc into any
other Of said States or Territories the pcr-
son 10 whom such labor is due, bis agent or
attorney is hereby empowered to seize and
arrest such fugitive from labor, and to take
him or her before any judge Of the Circuit
or district Courts Of the United States resi-
ding or being within the State, or befoIe any
magistrate Of a county, city or town oorpor~
ate wherein such seizure or arrest shall
be made, or upon proof to the satisfaction Of
such judge or magistrate, either by oral tcs'
timony, or affidavit taken before and certi
fed by magistrate Of any such State or
territory that the person 50 seized and ar
rested doth under the laws Of the State or
territory from which he or sho fed owe ser.
vice 10 the person claiming him or her, il
shall be the duty OF such judge or magis-
trate to give a certificate thereof to such
claimant, his agent OF attorney, which shall
be sufficient warrant for removing the said
fugitive from labor to the State or territory
from which he or she fed
This act was passed on the recommenda-
ton Of PRESIDENT WASHINGTON in conse,
quenoe Of case having arisen between
Pennsylvania and Virginia, which showed
the want of an act Of Congress TO carry the
clause in the Constitution into effect 1t
may be held to be fair Interpretation Of
the Constitution that by it the party claim
ing the service Of the fugitive in any State
or territory, had the right to seize mis- slave
wherein he saw him, and 10 carry him be
fore judicial authority OF tho State and
upon affidavit, or oral testimony, showing
his right, lie was 10 receive q certificate TO
that effect by virtue (which he might car
ry him back to the State from which he had
hed. This act thus fully recogn zcd the
right Of the plaintiff to seize his slave by
mere virtue Of ownership, and then to carry
him out Of the State upon certificate,
and without a trial, was passed as good as
unanimC isly by the second Congress which
sat under the Constitution-the proceedings
OF the Senate showing no division, and in
the House only seven voting against the bill,
there being no seperate vote on the two
parts of it, and two of these seven from
slave States, Virginia and Maryland. 1t
docs not appear to what part these seven OBJ
jeated, whether the fugitive slave sections,
or those which applied to iugitves from JUS
tice. Such unanimity in its passage by
those who helped to make the Constitution
was high evidence in its favor the conduct
Of the States and both judiciaries; State and
FEDERAL, were to the sumo effect The act
was continually enforced, and the court deci,
ded that this right Of the owner to seize his
slave was just as large in the free States to
which he had flcd, us in the slave States from
which he had run away-that he might
seize by night as well as by day, of Sundays
as well as other days; and also in house
| nInVldnn M Of tba
mitted
The law of 1850 was substantially the
same as the law of 1898. The voices o
Clay, Webster, and every great whig leader
were raised in its favor, and the Democracy
were almost unitedly for it
Yet in the face of the law of 1898, ad,
vised by Washington, and almost uuani
mously passed by the second Congress; il
face of the steady and continued practice
the country since its very formation; in face
Of the decisions of the Supreme Court o
the United States and of every respectabl,
State Court before which the question ba.
ever been raised; in the very teeth of the
; law of our own State, as lately laid down
: by Republican Judges, Swan, ScoTT and
PEoK, and in direct opposition to the old
platforms of every party, but the pitirul fac,
ton of abolitionists known as the Liberty
Guard the professors Of Oberlin, the learn
cd negro Langston, and the fanatics Gid
:. dings and his free love and abolition COM
peers of the Reserve have triumphed and
have given law to the Republican party.
1t remains to be seen if the people o.
Ohio are to be led by the nose by few fire
brand demngogues, or whether conservatism
law and faith among States shall be presery
} ed The issue is an important one, and w
have to decide it.
aarWe sincerely hoped, that Mr. Camp
| hall Al e.