The Kenosha telegraph and tribune. [volume] (Kenosha, Wis.) 1859-1860, 1860-03-22
The Constitution and the Fugi-
tive Slave Act

f1H"NO kACbs
The Kenoaha Democrat fast week makes lib.
eyal quotations from the Constitution, in the at
tempt to prove the Fugitive law constitutional.
AS only one of the clauses quoted is ever relied
upon for authority to enact such law. IL Is only
necessary to get at the meaning Of that because
If congress has no constitutional authority to
make such law as was framed in 1850, then
all the other constitutional provisions cited by
theDem0erat have no applicability to the subject
The provision Of the constitution which the
friends Of the Fugitive slave act rely upon for au
thority is the following =
No person held to service or labor in one state.
under the laws threof escaping into another
SHALL in consequence of any law or regulati1,y
therein, be discharged from such service or lab
but shall be delivered up on claim of the marty
TO whom such service or labor may be due y
In the first place let it be remembered that the
Constitution says nothing about slavery the
words staoe and slaoery were scrupulouslv avoid
ed by the trainers of the Constitution. If it, be
said that persons held to service or labor ma,
mean slaves, so it may mean apprentices or 9th.
er persons held to service. The provision above
quoted can certainly not mean property, for tina,
would be an absurdity. Property cannot besaia
to o'ee or be indebted. But it is sometimes said
if the above clause does not mean slaves why
was it put into the Constitution If there was
rot slave in the Union, the provision concern
ing @persons held to service or abor'' would not
be obsolete; it would be a necessary provision in
respect TO free white persons. ,d-y .ea
The provision of the constitution under CON
sideration, cannot mean slares except by a forced
and unwarrantable construction. The trainers OF
the Fugitive Slave act, although basing their
authority for such an act on this provision. were
compelled to describe the fugitive nor as a slave
but as "a person held to service and the claim.
ant, not as an owner, but as the "party," to
whom the service or labor is due. The Fugitive
Slave act therefore, is framed on the absurd as
sumption, that persons held to servicen means
slaves. On this assumption, persons of any col
or or any nation, going into an other state, and
leaving behind them obligations of service or
labor undischarged, might be treated as slaves
under the Constitution; why not An English
man or ScOtchman has no more immunities
under this provision of the Constitution than an
African H.sI s.. .
But is there no obligation imposed by this
provision of the Constitution, to provide in some
way for delivering up persons, upon whom there
is claim of service due"7 Most certainly
there is. Has not Congress enacted law for
this purpose 1t has, but the provisions of that
law are clearly IN violation of the Constitution ;:
IL iS n nc IF fho ;rbk
that instrument it denies the right of trial by
jury-a right recognized as sacred in all consti
tutional governments; it denies the writ of ha-
beas corpus, another specific guaranty of the
Constitution; it clothes officers unknown to the
Constitution, with judicial powers to determine
the tights of persons, without the proper forms
of law. t..
To arrest the usurpation attempted by the Flu
gitive Slave act on the rights of persons, the
Supreme Court of this State acting under the
obligation of an oath, to support the Constitu-
tion mot to be governed by the opinions of other
trbunals) have declared the Fugitive Slave act
unconstitutional, and therefore proce edings un.
der it void. The judges Of our Supreme Court
have done just what Gen. jackson declared
duty; to construe the Constitution as they un-
derstood it. Our State Court has done what
Jefferson would have advised, as car, be abund-
dainty shown from the sentiments he has left on
record. Our State Court has declared a law un-
CONSTITUTIONAL which is admitted to be so, by the
candidate whom the Democratic party is now at
tempting to elect to the post of Chief Justice -
Here then, we have party-styling itself Dem
ocratic, denouncing the Republicans for adher-
ing TO the rights of the State, and the constitu-
tional rights of the people; complaining of Re-
publicans for not respecting law which the can
didate for Chief Justice, put forward by the Dem
ocratic party admits to be unconstitu tiona!